Do slaves really count as neighbors?
Do slaves really count as people?
Even if they do, it makes sense to love your property and treat it well.
Of course. But you have to consider - wouldn't you be loving them more if they were free and had their own will? If someone truly wants to be a slave, then they should be allowed to be enslaved, provided it doesn't cause other problems, of course.
For Matthew 7:12, the golden rule, here's an equivalent conclusion: "If I owed money, I'd like for the debt to be erased. Therefore I should erase everyone's debts to me. My bank will do well."
I'm not exactly sure where you're going with this...? Did you mean you should erase your debts to everyone else, as in refuse to repay them? Because if so, yep. If someone asks me for something, I give (as opposed to loan) it to them if I possibly can, on the basis that that's how I'd wish to be treated. If everyone acted like that, we'd have a lot fewer problems in the world.
Slavery and indentured servitude weren't about hatred, they were about contractual labor. They also broke certain human rights, but people in Jesus's time didn't know that. *And Jesus didn't tell them*
So if they didn't know it was bad, why was it bad? I mean, if you can't tell something's a problem, even by listening to the people it's apparently a problem for, it seems unlikely that it's a problem.
These followers of Jesus not only praise obedient slaves, they award honor to slave owners. Just look at that Ephesians quote!
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Not seeing it. Could you elaborate a bit?
This goes beyond just being influenced by the morality of the time (which Jesus openly defied in many ways, but *never* condemned slavery). This is saying to be the most loyal, reverent slaves possible. To disrespect your master is to blaspheme God (1 Timothy). Honor them even if they're cruel (1 Peter). Be obedient to them and Christ *equally* (Ephesians).
Of course. "Love your enemy, and pray for those who curse you." There is no room for hatred in Christianity. Not even to someone who owns you and you have every reason to hate.
The Jews took slaves all the time. Jesus, a Jew, said a lot of things but he never says to end that practice. "Love each other" just doesn't count. Your interpretation contradicts the above passages, and relies on a modern understanding of slavery being evil. Nobody back then would interpret it the way you have. Slave owning wasn't about hatred, it was a common financial arrangement. *Now* we know that it's wrong, but people back then didn't.
Well, yes. Slavery is only forbidden by the whole love thing if it's problematic, which the way you're describing it it
isn't.
Active warfare, not particularly, but sustained campaigns of violence? Yes. The US's treatment of native americans is pretty much a glaring example of that. Quite a lot of the mistreatment and murder of those populations were, at least in part, explicitly to induce conversion. There were other aspects to it as well, of course, but that was definitely one of them.
From what I understand, similar campaigns have been... not exactly unknown throughout history. The conversion aspect usually comes after the initial conquest, though, sure, for what that's worth.
* Arx files this away.
Something to think about. Thanks, and to Descan.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has ever been a civilization with such universal slave ownership that it would be suspicious not to own slaves. From my understanding it's an upper class thing usually, and middle class families might have a few. You might not be able to keep a high social status in some civilizations without slaves, but keeping slaves so you can stay rich goes a little beyond just cowardice.
Regardless of that, I still don't buy the "only if it's inconvenient" thing. If the Bible contained instructions on how to properly skin someone alive, that would be an implicit approval of flaying people. It would be silly to interpret this hypothetical passage as rules for when it's inconvenient to not skin a guy alive - the only reason you'd do that would be if you were actively trying to minimize things that make the Bible look bad.
You're probably right. Does my assorted rambling in an attempt to answer Rolan above sort of answer this?
Edit: typing with freezing cold hands is hard. If you see a slash or a greater-than symbol somewhere it's a typo for a question mark.
It's getting a little late here, and I have an early start tomorrow. I may suddenly disappear until the sixth or seventh, sorry.
Poll
71 (27.7%)
Author
Topic: Railgun and Spirituality Discussion (Read 681371 times)