In an article in today's Telegraph
Richard Dawkins' family's slave owning past has been 'exposed'. I say
family, but that suggests a close link. The actual descendent
concerned was born in the 17th Century, dying over 250 years ago. He was
Dawkins' great, great great great great grandfather. Were it not for
the fact that one of his approximate 540 living descendants is Richard
Dawkins this 'story' would not be in the news.
Which begs the question. Why is it in
the paper? Someone obviously thinks Dawkins is somehow tainted
because of his ancestry. What kind of sick morality blames someone
for their distant ancestor's actions? Here is one.
Deuteronomy 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
Exodus 34:7 ... visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation
It must be an important Christian message as you find
similar in
While slavery may be 7 generations back
down Dawkins' line it is nevertheless still prevalent today. Last
week we heard of the case of a young woman kept as a slave and beaten
in Manchester.
I find it interesting that the bible a book held up as a
moral guide does not speak out against slavery. The opposite in fact. Luke tells a tale of
Jesus instructing how to treat slaves.
12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes
So if your slave does not do what you
tell him give him a damn good thrashing. If however he hasn't done
it because you haven't told him what you want, just give him a few cracks of the whip.
I wonder why those like Cameron calling for
the UK to recognize Christian morals and values were not outraged that this poor couple are being persecuted for following Jesus' moral guide? Are these not the Christian values they are talking about?
No comments:
Post a Comment