Many have asked, “if god is all loving, how did he allow slavery?” God allowed slavery by putting men on this earth of different skin tones…and then preceded by giving them the genius thought of enslaving black people. That is how god allowed the slavery of black people. As you see from my sarcasm, the question is asked as if god had a plan (I mean, if god wanted something to happen for sure, it would be part of his official MUST DO plan). Yet, if this was in god’s plan; then it is white people and Arabs and Jewish people who are the slaves of black people since god put them here on earth as part of his plan to do something in relation to black people. Again, as you see, we are not god’s “how” in relation to “his” plan to enslave black people. As if god said to himself, “And I shall put there a man of lighter complexion and one of olive complexion…yep, the same color as the color of the olive in my martini—well, kinda the same color… and one of a brown complexion…and they shall be working hard as slaves in order to make this black man their slave thereby helping me achieve equality in relation to slavery of people towards each other…Why else is this world spinning around?!” Clearly, we are not here to serve god’s plan of us being slaves to make black people slaves where he is just here to make sure that it runs well. Am sure that god is happy today thinking, “Am glad I exist to make sure their crap turns out well!” (he did not use to curse…but by now he probably does). Let us apply the “all loving” part correctly: It is due to god being all loving that white people and Arabs and Jewish people were not–and still are not–excused in enslaving black people. God gave them no reason to enslave them—he did not deprive them of his love. Instead of asking, “if god is all loving then why did he allow slavery to happen?” let us ask, “if god is all loving, then why didn’t people act in relation to that love towards others?” It is due to the fact that we are not god that this “all loving” trait is not applied in perfect form in action done by human beings. YET: THIS “ALL LOVING” IS SOMETHING THAT GIVES US A REASON TO BE LOVING TOWARDS OTHERS. Did people have love to show towards black people? And why did they apply it only towards each other? If people had zero ability to care and love, then I would ask, “why did god allow that? and what kind of god would allow that and expect us to be good towards each other?”
In addition, let us not forget that those who enslaved black people were not truly their god. For each is given his/her own self : a self that no one can care about more that its own. Whether it is a mild control or a full blown slavery: After god, there is no greater “all loving” than a person is to his/her own self. To say, “if god is all loving, then why did he allow slavery to happen?” is to take “slavery” as a matter-of-fact correct way of measuring things and then to take “love” and ask, “Someone else hated me…They ruled over me…why did they not love me while they ruled over me?!” And the answer is: it is to be expected that the people who ruled over you in a slavery fashion would hate you–and how can an all loving god allow that?! Because this is not within the terms of god that it happened. Slavery happened outside of god’s terms. In accordance to god’s terms, slavery is the removal of a person’s right to love his/herself and that is a wrong since no self is given a self to hate. No self is given a self to hate: This is shown by the fact that the definition of a self is a thing that LIKES the thing itself (self of he is like he..and the self of she is like she…same as a table is like a table..and a chair is like a chair…a chair is not like a spoon ) AND a self that hates itself (opposes itself) is not a self. Hence, since god gave us a self, he gave us a self to like not a self to serve against itself. And in accordance to god’s terms, if slavery is okay, there would be no people to serve in it. (Meaning: the idea of a self is against slavery. God gave us a self in relation to “slavery being wrong by default of existence”. Slavery does not sustain the existence of a person. And god sustains existence. To have a self in this world is within god’s terms. To enslave others Is against having a self. Hence, Slavery happened outside of god’s terms).
“Why did god allow slavery?” I was not aware that people were enslaved in order for us to answer that question. DID PEOPLE ENSLAVE OTHERS IN ORDER TO ANSWER THAT “WHY”?——IS THIS HOW “Why?” IS ANSWERED?! No, not even Hawaii is answered that way! THAT IS NOT HOW “WHY DID GOD ALLOW SLAVERY?” IS ANSWERED! People did not enslave other people in order to answer that question and I am assuming that people did not enslave black people in order to understand why god would allow slavery. Hence, that is an invalid question which was asked after the answer was inappropriately applied and after god was dismissed from first being asked that question. You do not destroy a load of people and then say, “I wonder why god allowed it?! hmmm I wonder why?!” That is not a correct position of inquiry. Therefore we can make one conclusion: slavery showed us the limitation–as it has crossed the line of humanity–of harmful behavior as being something that we can use to continue to find out more about god and who he is. Harm is not the way we know god–because questions can reach the point of being invalid. I mean, let us ask it again and again right after slavery was over, “why would god allow such a thing?”: it is not like people had no say so in it… I mean people did not have a say so…but that was the enslaved side not the other side… Well, if people had no say so in slavery (by definition, at least) then why would GOD allow it to happen? As if the no-say-so applied to both sides.
“Why did god allow slavery if he is all loving?” There are no reasons that qualify as an answer to that question since that question is a reason why people should not have enslaved others. The reason why people should not have been enslaved is because people will wonder, “if god is all loving, why would he allow slavery to happen?” That is a reason why we should not have enslaved others–this is not a question; although it has a question mark at the end–it is a reason not to do something . Meaning: if I was to dive in the ocean without diving gear, I would be harmed and I would die. To ask, “why did god not give us gills and fins so that I may dive under the ocean?” does not have a reason since that question is rhetorical and should be rhetorical—not only that, but the answer to that question is: God is not okay with me diving in the ocean in that manner and it is proven to be so because I would be harmed if I was to do that! In relation to the slavery question: Clearly, even god himself was not good enough of a reason! That question above is a reason for not having that question as valid in reality and there are no reasons to answer that question in the reality under which it was made valid. MEANING: Since the truth is that slavery should have NEVER happened, that question should NOT have ever existed in reality! And due to it existing in reality, it is reality that made it valid and not reason! The only reason is that it happened in reality and there are no other reasons! Get it? We should have asked, “if god is all loving, would he be okay with us enslaving other people?” And the answer would be, “no”. But to enslave people and then ask that question is to show that the question was never considered as important and to then try to use that–not as a reason (the why someone should do something or not)–but to try to reason why not in relation to god himself. It is as if we are trying to ask, “should we enslave black people?” for the first time ever! What would be the difference between us trying to ask this question for the first time and us asking it after that act was done? The question is always the same in factors whether we ask before hands or afterwards which shows that it should have never been done! TODAY, THE ANSWER WILL BE THE SAME AS IT WAS YESTERDAY AND AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AND WILL ALWAYS EVER BE!!! If we really want to ask that question in regards to slavery (as if slavery deserves to be regarded), then we should ask, “why is god not all loving?” since slavery would serve evidence of it. But if slavery cannot be used to serve as evidence that black people are not human beings, how can it be used to serve as evidence that god is not loving? In regards to slavery, the question should have been asked in regards to slavery: “Is slavery a loving act?” and “How much would god mind us enslaving these people?” and “how much do I value god’s love?” To substitute god for slavery, as to question his genuinety instead of the right in slavery, is what people did when they enslaved others: they chose to enslave others instead of keeping and protecting god’s love towards one’s self when it comes to all people.
If god is all loving, then why did he allow slavery to happen on this earth? And I ask, what did god NOT allow to happen on this earth for you to ask that question? He did not allow an olive tree to grow in the middle of the ocean. He did not allow us to breathe under water. He did not allow us to poop from our mouths. Did god allow slavery as if it is a bodily function that we cannot help but do? Did he allow it as if we went across the ocean despite ourselves to shackle some people without us being able to resist it until we got them to come to our homes where they automatically just labored and served without even noticing it and then what-do-you-know: “omg, why did that happen?!” God allowed us to breathe and he allowed us to eat and he allowed to chose what to eat. And then god allowed us to interact with each other and then he allowed US to interact with each other the way WE like. He did not impose one to feeling as if it does not matter how others treat him and then allowed the other one to choose how he likes to be treated. It is quiet unbelievable however how one person can choose to do that to another person. And where was god when that happened? Where was the thought that said, “This is a bad idea!” and where were the people who sat and pondered over that thought and came to the conclusion that enslaving others is okay?! Let us stop being the fools who condone the foolish…let us stop adding mystery and significance to pity. Let us stop magnifying the reasons behind why one person has found it okay to do that to another. No, not enough: let us not add to the formula as if to wonder–past the thoughts that are possible within humanity–for a reason why that was okay as if we are so above doing it on our own. Let us look to see why GOD is the problem and why it is not us who is the problem. Show me who gives a crap today for that to be such a far fetched thing? People rape, kill, abuse, rob, dismantle, bomb, and destroy others and they have reached thousands of feet under the ocean to subject it to that same treatment as if they are the lord almighty and they are on a hunt for suicide. Let us stop asking that question in relation to god since we are to be blamed first. Since when do we believe the person who shows up to court and says, “god told me to kill that person”? And since when do we believe the person who blows himself up and says, “god told me to do it”? And who here will ask, “why did god allow the terrorist to blow himself up?” Or maybe we are speaking about a whole other function of god that we need him to carry. We are speaking about INTERVENTION in such manner that if a person was about to go and blow himself up he would die on the way of him doing it: why doesn’t god do that instead of allowing him to go through with the attack? And I will answer: If the suicide bomber was to go through with the attack, does he not lose his own life too? Hence, the question becomes: why does god not value the life of the bomber LESS than he values our life where god should be able to look at him and think, “how unworthy are you of hurting others although I have not seen the harm that others have inflected you with to be something you do not deserve! Many were allowed to harm you , dear suicide bomber, but you may not even harm one!” Why? Did the bomber never get hurt by anyone else? And did he only get hurt by one person in his entire life or many? Did god allow them to hurt him? And why did god not kill them before they even tried to harm that future-suicide-bomber so that he may not have grown up to think about bombing himself?! Why did god not remove all the factors that lead one to do such thing? Where does the line of reasoning end and where does it start in relation to who gets to harm who?! Where does god intervene? At the first wrong and incorrect thought that crosses our minds? The thought that will bring another problem and then another one until people kill each other? Should the first wrong thought and the person who has it be always attacked by god in order to stop future mayhem? And who will dare to even think if that was the case? Who will dare to venture into a single thought if one was to be punished for having one bad one? Our minds become a weapon against us. God intervenes in a manner that upkeeps and not in a manner that destroys. To not harm comes with a great great reward (if you find that to be rewarding): god is on your side!
If god is all loving, why did he allow people to enslave each other? That which is wrong can be stopped in a day. If we were to enslave black people all over again…and if we were to do it for the next 10 years, then we can stop anytime we choose to stop and it will take that same minute for us to stop it. One of the significant factors of slavery is how voluntary it was in relation to the people who chose to enslave others. Hence, “to stop anytime you choose” is an evidence that the people who enslaved others did it in a voluntary manner. Why didn’t god stop people from enslaving others? He did! And god did his part in that situation by making it easy NOT to enslave other people AND by making it easy to STOP that practice whenever people decided to do what is right by god. For if I wanted to swim underwater without diving gear, that would be so difficult! This shows me that god did not intend for me to swim under water in that fashion. AND this shows that god tried to STOP me from swimming under water in that fashion. To force people to slavery was not an easy thing to do: people were shackled, murdered, punished, and harmed. In relation to the interaction that one person has with another, god wanted slavery to STOP and he made it easy for us to stop slavery any time we decided to do the right thing. Imagine: if people were enslaved for 100 days, it would take one day to free them. If people were enslaved for a 1000 days, it would take one day to free them. If people were enslaved for 1000 YEARS it would take one day to free them. Did god allow slavery or did he allow us not to enslave people and to keep them free?!
If god is all loving, then why did he allow slavery to happen? And to that I ask: what did you do today? What choices did you make in your day? How did you choose them? And how much did you consider god in the choices you made? Did he stop you from harming others (if you harmed anyone), and why not? Would you have liked him to stop you? And why or why not? AND FINALLY: Why is god allowing us to continue to mistreat black people today? And why have we not fixed the result of slavery and why have we not made black people’s lives better? Where is god? And why are we getting in his way?!