thegreekdog wrote:Dukasaur wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:I don't think you could have failed to respond to saxi's argument any harder than you did here.
It is both painful and hysterical to watch someone devolve when he tries so hard to not admit he is wrong.
I assume you agree with him, then, that the Nation of Islam is not Islamic just because it's not in line the the mainstream sects.
I'd love to hear your reasoning.
I trust you'll bring something more substantive to the table than saxi's smoke and mirrors.
I recommend you go back to the beginning of this thread, specifically wherein you talk about the irony of a black rights/power group adopting Islam because it's "an Arab religion" and Arab's oppress blacks and then read Saxi's response. Everything else you've typed in this thread is a feeble attempt to justify your first post because you won't admit that you're wrong.
Let me ask a different question - Do you find it ironic that blacks have adopted white Christian names and Christian religions when white Christians oppressed them as recently as 1865 or 1965 (or perhaps yesterday)?
Whites who happened to be members of Christian churches may have oppressed blacks, but the churches themselves for the most part were opposed to slavery. (Yes, I know that not ALL churches were opposed to slavery, but on balance far more preachers opposed it than supported it.) The Abolitionist movement was "partly fueled by the religious fervor of the Second Great Awakening, which prompted many people to advocate for emancipation on religious grounds" and from start to finish had strong religious overtones. "By stressing the moral imperative to end sinful practices and each person’s responsibility to uphold God’s will in society, preachers like Lyman Beecher, Nathaniel Taylor, and Charles G. Finney in what came to be called the Second Great Awakening led massive religious revivals in the 1820s that gave a major impetus to the later emergence of abolitionism as well as to such other reforming crusades as temperance, pacifism, and women’s rights."
http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/abolitionist-movementIn the 1960s Civil Rights movement Christian churches were again front-and-centre in the fight for civil liberties for blacks.
Today, Christian churches are still fighting, now on new battlegrounds in Asia and Africa, against the institution of slavery in all its forms.
So the short answer is "no" I do not find it ironic. I can see why blacks feel an attraction to Christianity.
Christianity as far back as its dim origins in the days of the Roman Empire was seen as a force for the emancipation of slaves. Yes, persons who coincidentally were Christians did run the slave trade, but they were mainly of the mercantile class, and presumably not very devout. Whenever one comes across a mention of clergymen with respect to slavery, they are almost always (and yes, I'll grant there are exceptions, which is why I stress
almost always) seen as either opposing the institution, or at the very least advocating more humane treatment of the slaves.