(zapped by Zid - AGAIN!!! ) naner naner boo boo
Would the world be a better place without Atheism/Religious-ism?
Slavery was lawful and slaves were regarded as property. Even if a slave was treated as part of the family, they were still property. That in itself is inhumane.
Jesus spoke out against many things regarding how the laws were being kept. He went around teaching, that's what he did. He predominantely spoke about love and spoke out against the jewish system yet never mentioned that owning another human being is not showing love. Slavery is a HUGE issue. The silence in the NT is what allowed slavery to continue for so long and led to the suffering of so many people.
"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis, President, Confederate States of America
"the right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." Rev. R. Furman, D.D., a Baptist pastor from South Carolina.
"I give my daughter, Joyce Falkner , present wife of John Falkner, of the county of Fayette and State of Virginia, a negro girl by name of Gemima otherwise called Mima. I give her to the above Joyce together with said Mima's increase forever and for the only use of the said Joyce , to will and dispose of as to her seemeth fit, hereby revoking all other claims of right or title to the said Gemima aliasMima of her increase forever." The 1791 will of Toliver Craig, disposing of his assets (and children of his assets) in the event of his death.
An all powerful god would easily have already seen the immorality in slavery and what would be the result of silence on this matter to allow his followers to continue to believe that owning another person is okay and of no real importance. And the fact that it is justified is sickening. He was supposedly teaching people how to be kind and loving to others yet left out a monumentally important thing.
This is one reason why religious beliefs (especially those based on ancient texts) are dangerous and down right stupid. These ancient texts and the characters in them, were written by people ingorant of the world around them and were part of a culture that by todays standards, parts of would be considered immoral.
Our lives begin to end when we are silent about things that matter because when we become silent, our lives are not ours anyomore. We allow them to be controlled.
Those who would sacrifice freedom for temporary security deserve neither. -- Ben Franklin
Wiser words than anything these ancient texts spew out.
Oo, it worked. Thanks Zid.
Psst. Could you please "zap" that huge previous post?? Thanks!!
And I'll get rid of mny modified version of your post, to prevent confusion...
Whoops. Too late now. Your 1-column post has gone past the 30-minute mark; no more editing for you!!
(No soup for YOU!)
ZeusRocks, I've found out how to deal with those obnoxious, uncooperative "quote" boxes. Care to follow me into the "Technical Support" section, where I'm going to start a topic on it???
Zid - again...
Probably to late to comment here but I'll do it anyway. I just got back to this thread this morning and read everything I've missed and I just wanted to say I really enjoyed reading everyones opinions. I learn a lot by listening to you folks. I did want to make one comment on slavery in the Bible. I think it is fairly obvious that Jesus wouldn't have been in favor of slavery. I'm sure there are a lot of things that Jesus wasn't in favor of that aren't recorded in the Bible. On the other hand I believe that even though the New Tetestament statements aren't condoning slavery but more giving advise on how to live within the system the fact that it wasn't condemned in an outright manor has lead to problems. I'm sure slave owning Christians in the South in the pre civil war days found comfort in quoting scriptures like "you slaves be obedient to your masters".
Also, just as there was no 'divorce' in the beginning, (As Jesus corrected this when asked about it, saying Moses game them that law because there hearts were hard) there were also no 'slaves' in the beginning. The laws concerning slavery seem to have come about after the world had already embraced the entire concept.
The clear scriptures (from the Law Covenant) say that a non-Israelite could be considered property and willed to offspring.
Your focus on the "legaleze" of your word "literally" in your comment falls short. The scripture is all about "literally" owning
the person's body the same as a piece of property. Of course they didn't own the person's mind or spirit. But I am not
here to debate such a statement.
You err in this thinking, dear OTWO (peace to you!), as to all who put their faith in its false "truth." There are all KINDS of things the "scriptures" SUPPOSEDLY said... but did not. Rather, they were the work of the "false stylus" of the "secretaries." I have posted here MANY times... that it is looking to what's written "in the Bible" that has gotten man where he is... and that not ALL of it is what the Most Holy One of Israel gave to Israel.
That very FACT, is one of the reasons my Lord said, "I came to bear witness to the TRUTH." What truth? The truth of the LAW. Therefore, he said to those LISTENING, "You HEARD it was SAID... but I say..." Some, then, accused him of transgressing the Law because he didn't "do" what the Law "said." That was because... the LAW NEVER SAID IT. It is what those who wished to enslave OTHERS said it said... and wrote into it.
The Most Holy of Israel is not only a God of love... but IS love. How then can things like she-bears killing little children for calling an old man a name be TRUE? It CANNOT. LOVE... would NEGATE that truth. How then can it be TRUE for one man to LAWFULLY own another? It CANNOT... because love would NEGATE that truth.
Christ is recorded to have said that HE... did NOTHING of his OWN initiative... but just as he learned from the Father... and SAW the Father doing. If, then, you want to know the TRUTH... about God, about the Law... YOU MUST LOOK TO THE ONE WHO IS THE IMAGE OF GOD... and WHO FULFILLED THE LAW. You CANNOT look to a book... because the book is not always accurate.
Not every "inspired expression" originates with God, dear one. Heck, you don't even believe ANY do. Some believe, then, in the words that one should "test" the inspired expression. How does one do that? The FIRST way is how my Lord has shown him: ASK him. Because he IS the truth and will tell you the truth... regardless of what is "written." As I shared with you above, HE said:
"Everything I tell you is written, but not everything that is written is what I will tell you."
Israel and its scribed wrote a whole LOT into the Law that was not intended by the Most Holy One of Israel... for their OWN means. Thus, my Lord said, "WOE to you... SCRIBES!" Why in the world should the scribes receive such a condemnation? What did THEY do? What do scribes DO?
I find it so strange that you misspoke despite your admission that you previously "wanted to understand (and you can appreciate why),
how a God of LOVE could allow one man to own another" and you "had to take the matter to [your] Lord to know."
I didn't misspeak, dear OTWO, truly. I get it that you are attached to what is written... but I have LONG said that the Bible is NOT God's Word and that it is that Word that I go to for the truth.
You actually coincidentally spoke to JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH (your lord) previously about this exact subject that I would later bring
up and you actually recorded what JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH told you about how it really wasn't unloving of the Israelites to "own"
slaves as property, yet you misspoke. All you had to do was say that you misspoke.
I am an African American woman... and so slavery has been an issue all my life. Do you TRULY think that, once my Lord starting speaking to me that I would never ask how such a thing could be sanctioned by God? Do you TRULY think that no one has ever posed that question to me before? Truly? Someone did. A couple people, actually, and I had to go back in my personal email to find what I shared with them that my Lord shared with ME... in case they are here, as well. They would know what I stated then... and whether it was the same as now.
I am reminded of a Watchtower article that says they are not false prophets when applying Deut. 18:22 to their predictions:
Never did they say, 'These are the words of Jehovah.'" Awake! 1993 Mar. 22 p.4
Very convenient for them. But I neither misspoke or lied to you. I shared exactly what I received on the matter from my Lord, the Holy One of Israel, JAHESHUA MISHAJAH. That it is written in the Bible does not mean it was in the Law. LOVE... is the Law's fulfillment. And such a thing... as well as a whole lot of OTHER things... were never in the Law... or intended by God... but added by man... to serve HIS purpose against his fellowman. Slavery as we know it, was just one thing... and the one I knew at the time of this discussion. "Adultery" was another which, supposedly, the Law supposedly required stoning for. And it is "written" in your Bible. However, when they brought a woman caught in the act of adultery to my Lord, he didn't say, "The Law doesn't say that," because they certainly would have stoned HIM... because there it was written. Nor did he say "Well, it wasn't there originally but your scribes added it." Because they would have stoned him for that, too.
Rather, he SHOWED that it was not in the Law... and what WAS in the Law: he did NOT stone the woman, indeed, he didn't even judge or condemn her. He... forgave and RELEASED her. To keep THEM from stoning her, however, as their "law" said they were to do... he gave THEM an out: whichever one of them was without sin should do it. Did the Law, as written, SAY that anyone stoning an adulterer had to be without sin themselves? It did not and does not. Which is why a whole lot of folks, although existing in sin themselves, sit in judgment of others.
Now, we can look to the Bible and what's written there for God's law... or we can look to Christ. I choose the latter, even where and when it diametrically opposes what is written in the Bible.
So if you forgot to say "Simon says..." or "This was my thoughts, not those of the Holy Spirit" or whatever, just say you misspoke.
Sorry, can't do it. That would a lie, not only as to what I said, but from whom I received it. I am not ashamed of him... or that something he gives me is diametrically opposed to something written in the Bible.
Feel free to dig your hole deeper if you must deny misspeaking and go ahead and have the last word. I will not debate over what
you meant or what the Bible meant here or what insider information wasn't available to me from JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH.
It's like debating with Bill Clinton when he is caught lying and argues over the meaning of the word "is."
I get how that's your position. I wish, though, that you would go to him and ask for yourself. You can, you know, just as I do and have. It would take a little faith on your part, true, but you can ask for that, too, if you're lacking. In closing, though, I leave you with the thought that I haven't done anything different than others in entirely dismissing one account in the Bible (the account in Ezekiel) as impossible, while holding fast to another (the account in Leviticus). We are not that different... in that neither believe the Bible to be the word of God... or accept everything that is written in it as truth. Some say Ezekiel laying on his side for 390 days is impossible; yet, it could very well be possible. I, on the other hand, say that for a God to love to sanction ownership of one man by another... for anything other than to pay off a debt... is impossible. The two are diametrically opposed... and so cannot be. My Lord has verified that for me... and I have absolutely no problem accepting that... and sharing it with others.
I bid you peace!
A slave of Christ,
SA, who says "ball's in your court"... because I don't need to have the last word, here, but if it turns out that way, so be it...
Would the world be a better place without Atheism/Religious-ism?
Western culture is based on illusion. We have created an artificial world in place of nature which we have embraced as if it were real.
Religion is just one of many illusions that humans seem to depend on in order to give their lives meaning. On the whole, animals are actually more rational.
SA, who says "ball's in your court"... because I don't need to have the last word,
Don't need it. You are doing fine.