<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=JohnJones</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=JohnJones"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/JohnJones"/>
	<updated>2026-10-01T07:27:05Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Separation_of_church_and_state&amp;diff=62538</id>
		<title>Separation of church and state</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Separation_of_church_and_state&amp;diff=62538"/>
		<updated>2007-03-24T13:29:27Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JohnJones: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Separation of church and state''' is a very loose interpretation of part of the [[Establishment Clause]] of the [[United States Constitution]]. The section in question reads &amp;quot;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof....&amp;quot;.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenti 1st Amendment of the US Constitution]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; This phrase is interpreted by [[judicial activism|activist judges]] to mean that all issues regarding the [[Government]] and those regarding the [[Church]] be kept seperate. However, strict-constructionists insist that the constitution must be interpreted verbatim. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Thomas Jefferson]] first coined the phrase in 1801.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html Religion and the Federal Government], ''LOC.gov''&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, in his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/dba_jefferson.html Letter from Thomas Jefferson to the DBA]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Treaty of Tripoli]], drafted during Washington's presidency and ratified by John Adams, states that &amp;quot;The government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11.] Ratified in 1796 and again in 1797.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Many proponents of a Christian America point out that the treaty was superseded by the [[Treaty of Peace and Amity]] in 1805 (although the superseding of the treaty does not change John Adams' secular view of the United States). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JohnJones</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Stonehenge&amp;diff=62532</id>
		<title>Stonehenge</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Stonehenge&amp;diff=62532"/>
		<updated>2007-03-24T13:20:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JohnJones: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Stonehenge is a megalithic monument located in southern [[England]]. The first evidence of construction secular scientists date to around 8000 BC, making Stonehenge the oldest known construction in the world, but it was added to over many thousands of years thereafter, with most of the present structure dating to 3000 BC. The word comes from the Anglo-Saxon ''stone'', meaning 'stone', and ''henge'', meaning 'hinge', because the distinctive upright pylons with their crosspieces were thought to resemble a door or gate. The tallest of these, known as the 'sarsen', is nearly 100 feet high.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Stonehenge is aligned to the sunrise at the summer solstice, or longest day of the year, around June 21. On that day the sun shines through the sarsen stone and hits something called the heel stone which lights up like a mirror, as it is made of polished quartz.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In the First World War the British government decided to demolish Stonehenge in order to make room for a longer runway for the nearby airforce base. After a great deal of public protest, it was instead decided to divert the runway. Stonehenge currently receives over a million visitors a week during the summer season, and some of the stones are already showing signs of imminent collapse due to wear and tear. Furthermore, the [[Druidry|Druids]] insist on holding there ceremonies there as they have done for thousands of years. When the government tried to stop them in the mid 1980s, the Druids took them to court and won.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JohnJones</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Slavery&amp;diff=62530</id>
		<title>Talk:Slavery</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Slavery&amp;diff=62530"/>
		<updated>2007-03-24T13:14:01Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JohnJones: /* Arguments for Slavery */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Why is there no reference to Biblical slavery apart from the captivity of the Jews in Egypt?  I know that the enslavement of others by the Jews is controversial (in that the Bible doesn't seem to &amp;quot;condemn&amp;quot; the practice, but I'm sure there are good reasons why either I'm wrong in that or for God's overlooking the practice.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In any event, it is a debate I often have with moral relativists and I was hoping to find something about it here in my own (Christan) people.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: I agree completely.  I have posted several Biblical references. [[User:CEinhorn|CEinhorn]] 01:55, 13 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;ancient Egypt, where Hebrews were slaves.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There's absolutely no historical evidence for this outside of Exodus.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*The book of Philemon is a record of Paul sending a slave back to his master &amp;quot;no longer as a slave but more than a slave-- a beloved brother.&amp;quot; (Philemon 1: 16) --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 23:54, 21 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Abomination ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can't anyone fix this page? --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 18:17, 20 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Is this a joke? ==&lt;br /&gt;
I mean. Nothing is cited. And the whole thing is a big, fallacious argument in favor of slavery. - [[User:Moriarty]]&lt;br /&gt;
*Did you not see my note, about your post? If you think you are up to it, fix it!  That is what a Wiki is for. --~ [[User:TK|SysopTK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 21:01, 20 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
I started by deleting the parts about slaves having free housing, food and health care.  As an administrator you might want to delete things like that a little quicker because they make this website look alot like some of the white supremist sites.  Hopefully, not what you want.&lt;br /&gt;
-Gasmonkey&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Recent Removal of Bible passages ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
MountainDew, could you please explain the justification for deleting the quotes from the Bible regarding slavery that were recently added by Spoon.[[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 06:48, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The presence of verses in the bible which appear to support slavery in the most direct interpretation is an embarassment to Christianity, but ignoring them is dishonest and will not make them disappear. I think we should keep them, but see if we can find some anti-slavery NT quotes too. - BornAgainBrit&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*And you feel, either of you, that biblical quotes are so important in an encyclopedia, explaining slavery to contemporary users, how?  Contrary to what you seem to think, this is not the Bible Encyclopedia, but the Conservapedia.  MountainDew is a Sysop here, like myself, and is charged with editing and keeping entries on track, and fair. Maybe you guys should spend at least some time researching the slave trade, and maybe contemporary slavery practices, like the White Slave Trade, and that would be most helpful to this page.  :-)  --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 15:46, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:: My question for MountainDew was because he ''only'' removed the Bible passages which appeared to justify the slave trade and kept in only those passages which appeared to condemn it.  If he had removed all of the passages I would not have had a problem.  You said yourself that the job of a SYSOP is to be fair, that edit was not.  For me the Bible has nothing to do with my opinions on the slave trade (in case I need to say it - it is repugnant to me), but exactly because he is a SYSOP I assumed that they Bible entries were wanted here.[[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 16:15, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Well, ''unlike some users'', we are concerned with the article as a whole, not just matters of religion. Since the Bible does not support slavery, but merely recognizes conditions as they were at the time, it would be unfair to use the Bible to justify any form of salvery.  What was that bit about rendering unto Caeser? --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 17:25, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:: As I tried to imply, I do not see a reason for there to be ''any'' Bible passages in this article.  But if there are any, then they should show how it was from both sides of the argument, i.e. the article should be fair - look at [[User_talk:MountainDew#Spoon|this]] exchange regarding [[User:Spoon]]'s posts - cherry-picking what you want or don't want should not be an option and I wanted to question [[User:MountainDew]]'s employing of this tactic. I'd remove all passages but I assume that they'd be reverted. I agree with you that the Bible cannot be read with a 21st century morality.  My vote is for the creation of a new article on &amp;quot;Slavery in the Bible&amp;quot; if anyone wants one. [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 17:44, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
*I see where you are coming from, however I am loath to keep making pages just for religious zealots (and their anti-religion counterparts), for every article in the Conservapedia.  Since 99% of the humans on this planet are not in favor of slavery, I don't see a need to &amp;quot;balance&amp;quot; such things. Slavery is against the wishes of God, and most all of his children, to put it in a religious parlance. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 18:00, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::Fair point, well made. Can we remove the Bible passages from the article? [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 18:04, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*I think we can remove anything that represents the Bible and/or God is in favor of Slavery, and leave the Biblical support against slavery.  As I said, there really isn't a legitimate argument in favor of slavery, so no need to have a &amp;quot;balance&amp;quot;. And if someone is in favor of it, they need to find another site.  --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 18:10, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#Balance or not, those arguments are amoung the most liked by anti-christian debaters. Im sure you have seen how much they love to point to one verse or another of the OT and declare 'God is a brutal oppressor!' You can ignore them on the grounds that noone today agrees with them, but they still remain right there, printed in every copy of the old testament. And they ''were'' used in support of slavery, once. Really, what type of Christian chooses to just ignore a verse because it is unpopular? The appropriate response is not to remove these quotes, but to write an argument that Christianity does not support slavery. Optionally, moving them to a 'slavery in the bible' page may be a good idea too. - Suricou&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Slavery, what it is, and it's history, is not a biblical discussion! This is not the Religiouspedia. It is the Conservapedia, one where, '''when it is appropriate''', will not discount religious or conservative thought.  There isn't a valid argument in favor of slavery that I can think of, so the point of including thoughts that are pro-slavery here would be what? --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 18:44, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::But if it's not a Biblical discussion, why are you so against either removing the section on &amp;quot;slavery in the Bible&amp;quot; or adding to it those references which seem to support the notion of slavery? [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 19:10, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*(Faints dead away) Why am I against? Aaarrrrgh! --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 20:17, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::Please answer my question.  You said that slavery is not a Biblical issue (and I wholeheartedly agree) yet you support having ''some'' references to slavery in the Bible in this article? Those are two contradictory positions. That is my problem and that is what I am asking you to explain.  Put it another way:  If you are going to have the facts about &amp;quot;Slavery in the Bible&amp;quot; in this article, then have ''all'' of the facts. [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 20:26, 22 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*You don't understand that some of us are actually working, and I was in a meeting.  Now, I am done.  Your mistake is thinking there are contradictory positions, or that for purposes of this article, there needs to be. I submit there isn't a valid intellectual or moral argument in favor of slavery, therefore one doesn't need to present arguments from the Bible that might seem to endorse it, since all Biblical Scholars I have read have said it doesn't. Therefore biblical quotes that make it clear slavery isn't &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; can and should be included.  Am I being clear enough?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::I didn't understand why your previous response didn't answer my question, not that you didn't respond.  Basically the passages from the Bible has no place in here unless you put in ''all'' the passages from the Bible. But enough. I'm done arguing about this.[[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 07:33, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*You just don't want to get the response is all.  A closed mind isn't pretty.  If one is free from having to present &amp;quot;another side&amp;quot;, as there isn't a logical or moral argument in favor of slavery, then we don't have to present all quotes from the Bible, especially those that laymen misunderstand, and biblical scholars assure us don't mean what most think they do.  --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 08:38, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::It is not about the position vis a vis the morality or otherwise of slavery.  That is most definitely not in question.  It's a bigger problem, and what I've been driving at all along.  If we don't need the Bible to help our argument against slavery (and i'm pretty sure we don't) then there is no place for &amp;quot;Slavery in the Bible&amp;quot; to be part of this article. '''But''' if you '''are''' going to have bible passages then you are duty bound to present '''all''' of the sources if this is going to be a complete, accurate section (which I still maintain has no place in this article).  It's about academic rigour - you can't just cite things you like from a document and ignore things you don't.  This is '''very much''' independent of the argument for or against slavery (as I've stated earlier, there is no argument), it's a matter of principle. &amp;quot;The whole Truth and nothing but the Truth&amp;quot; eh? [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 14:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Oh, okay, I've got it.  Only when using scripture must one apply academic rigor.  And of course encyclopedias in the UK would include *ALL* passages, and never edit for length, lol. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 18:10, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Stop being facetious. When using '''any''' source we must apply rigour.  Also, if you're going to misinterpret what I said as an attack and then attack in return, at least get your facts straight. [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 05:51, 24 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Arguments for Slavery==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I've certainly seen evidence that ancient slavery was qualitatively different from American slavery, not least because a) slaves could readily achieve manumission b) slavery was not racially specific c) slavery was accepted practice, and without controversy.  However, the fact that the Bible addresses (and regulates) slavery is an example of God's wisdom and propriety, because He forbids bad or evil slave-owner activity.  Furthermore, confusing ancient slavery and the contemporary consensus on slavery is not accurate, and doesn't represent the Truth well.  Finally, ancient slavery was much more like indentured servitude (which is not an inherently evil practice, and might be seen as similar to outsourcing or sweat shopping) and shouldn't be confused with the percieved excesses of Confederate American practice.  [http://www.socialistworker.org/2002-2/431/431_08_Racism.shtml]  For these reasons, I think the Biblical Record on this issue should be embraced.  There is no shame in God's Truth, only freedom.  [[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] 18:16, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
:: My read is that the Bible provides support for slavery, either in ancient or &amp;quot;modern&amp;quot; contexts.  Whether or not that's a good thing, is a separate matter.  [[User:JohnJones|JohnJones]] 09:14, 24 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
*I think there is some confusion as to what Slavery was in the US South, then.  The Slave Trade of the 1700's was racially specific only by the fact that the traders found a bountiful supply of people in Africa to take. It wasn't that they set out to capture only Black people, they were opportunists.  Arguing who was &amp;quot;better&amp;quot; to their slaves isn't exactly admirable. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 19:04, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::[[User:DunsScotus|DunsScotus]] spake thus: '''&amp;quot;There is no shame in God's Truth, only freedom.&amp;quot;''' Unless, of course, one is a slave. --[[User:Cracker|Cracker]]&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 19:21, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
:::I am joking here. Paul readily identifies himself as Jesus' slave more than oncest. I believe there is no shame in that. Forgive me if my comment above made light of your observation or opinion. --[[User:Cracker|Cracker]]&amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 19:24, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
*Even about dire subjects and times, it is good to keep a sense of humor (humour). :p  --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] &amp;lt;sup&amp;gt;[[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]]&amp;lt;/sup&amp;gt; 20:10, 23 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Completely. I actually thought DunsScotus was serious (albeit scary and serious) before I read that. That's totally cheered me up. [[User:Airdish|Airdish]] 05:52, 24 March 2007 (EDT)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JohnJones</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Slavery&amp;diff=62527</id>
		<title>Slavery</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Slavery&amp;diff=62527"/>
		<updated>2007-03-24T13:11:38Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;JohnJones: /* Slavery in the Bible */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Slavery is ownership of one person by another.  The master controls and commands the slave, either through ownership of the slave like property, or by right to command him.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Ancient History ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Slavery has existed at least since ancient [[Greece]] and ancient [[Egypt]], where, according to the Bible, Hebrews were slaves (although no other historical accounts mention Hebrew slaves in Egypt).  The primary slave market in ancient Greece was on an island in the Aegean sea known as &amp;quot;Delos&amp;quot;.  From there slaves were traded and used throughout the Greek city-states.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Often prisoners-of-wars in ancient history were used as slaves, particularly during the [[Roman Empire]].  [[Christianity]] helped lessen the harshness by which Romans treated slaves, however later Christian nations like Spain, England, and the Netherlands would continue in the use of slaves.  Slavery was also pervasive among [[Arabs]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Recent History==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In 1455, a &amp;quot;papal bull&amp;quot; (formal letter by the [[pope]]) justified a &amp;quot;right&amp;quot; of Christian nations to enslave any non-Christian in the name of exploration.  The [[Spain|Spanish]] had already been enslaving [[South America|South American]] natives on a limited basis, but with the rise of sugar plantations the need for a larger slave force arose.  Millions of [[Africa|African]] slaves were brought by the Spanish and [[Portugal|Portuguese]] to [[Mexico]], [[Peru]], the [[Caribbean]] and [[Brazil]].  The growth of [[sugar]]—which had first been introduced to [[Europe]] when the [[Muslims]] ruled Spain—was exploding in popularity throughout the entire western world.  Soon [[France]], the Netherlands and Great Britain were also establishing profitable sugar plantations in the new world.  The plantation system began in Brazil, where rich white plantation owners were the highest rung in the social hierarchy and black slaves were at the bottom.  Obviously life on a sugar plantation was very hard work for a slave.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Slavery was widespread within Africa itself, and the richest in Africa were not those owning the most land, but those who owned the most slaves.  In the Sahara Desert, slaves worked in caravans and were used in gold and salt mining.  Slaves were usually prisoners of war from other areas of Africa, or debtors, or enemies or the king, but many women outside of those three categories were also enslaved in African societies.  Polygamy—the practice of having more than one wife—was common in Africa, as was the existence of harems, from which African women were often sold to join Arabian or Middle Eastern harems.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The trading of slaves with other countries was encouraged in Africa, and was considered an important component of the African economy.  Slave trade across the Atlantic (the Trans-Atlantic slave trade) became a booming business for Europeans and Africans alike, by which African rulers sold their people to Europeans for goods such as iron, alcohol, tobacco and most importantly, guns.  Trans-Atlantic trade led to the degrading use of &amp;quot;chattel&amp;quot; slaves, whereby the slaves were treated purely as property of the owner.  The slaves served as sailors, skilled craftsmen or farmers.  The journey across the Atlantic, known as the Middle Passage, led to the death of 10-20% of the African slaves.  But an even higher percentage lost their lives in the journey from their homes in Africa to the African coast, where they were to board the slave ships. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Trans-Atlantic slave trade was one component in a system of routes known as the &amp;quot;Triangular Trade&amp;quot; between South America, New England, and the West Coast of Africa.  The three main items that were exchanged were sugar, rum and slaves.  European goods, mainly guns, were used to buy slaves from Africa.  The slaves were then shipped to the Americas.  Then, from America, sugar, rum and tobacco were brought back to Europe, completing the &amp;quot;triangle&amp;quot; of trade. Slavery is one of the less noble aspects of American history.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==End of Slavery==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The end of slavery in Europe was not to come until the beginning of the 1800s, when abolitionists such as William Wilberforce and John Wesley began speaking out against the evils of the system. Although the United States banned slave trade in the early 1800s, slavery itself was not abolished until decades later in 1865 when the government passed the [[13th Amendment]], and in South America when it was ended in Brazil in 1888.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Slavery in the Bible ==&lt;br /&gt;
Slavery is also referenced, controlled and regulated in the Bible. Some English translations use the term 'slave' while others use 'servant,' but the meanings are equivalent. For example:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.&amp;quot; -- Genesis 17:12-13, showing that slaves were considered subject to the Old Covenant.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall  bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.&amp;quot; -- Exodus 21:2-6. Hebrews may be slaves for a maximum of seven years, then must be freed. Any children produced during the period of slavery shall however remain the property of his owner.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.&amp;quot; -- Leviticus 25:44-46 (Leviticus 25 contains more detailed rules regarding who may or may not be enslaved)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;And all the people that were left of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, which were not of the children of Israel, Their children that were left after them in the land, whom the children of Israel also were not able utterly to destroy, upon those did Solomon levy a tribute of bondservice (slavery) unto this day. But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no bondmen: but they were men of war, and his servants, and his princes, and his captains, and rulers of his chariots, and his horsemen.&amp;quot; -- I Kings 9:20-22&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. Art thou called being a servant (slave)? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.&amp;quot; -- I Corintians 7:20-21&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.&amp;quot; -- 1 Peter 2:18&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* &amp;quot;Let as many servants (slaves) as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.&amp;quot; -- I Timothy 6:1-2&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* The book of Philemon is a record of Paul sending a slave back to his master &amp;quot;no longer as a slave but more than a slave-- a beloved brother.&amp;quot; (Philemon 1: 16)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Slavery permitted in the Bible==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Old Testament alone, prior to New Testament considerations, broadly prohibits the permanent enslavement of the native inhabitants of Israel but permits the enslavement of immigrants and the occupants of other countries (e.g. the enslavement of Africans). Depending on the precise circumstances, ethnicity, nationality and any enslaved relatives of a slave, some must be freed after a specified time, while others remain slaves for life. Though physical violence to slaves is permitted, murder is not.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:History]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Economics]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Sociology]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>JohnJones</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>