dheddle
Posts: 545
Joined: Sep. 2007
|
| Quote (FrankH @ Nov. 02 2009,15:33) | | Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 02 2009,15:25) | | Quote (FrankH @ Nov. 02 2009,15:15) | | Quote (FloydLee @ Nov. 02 2009,15:09) | | Quote | | And, not that I am especially happy about agreeing with FL, and not that I even know that I am because I will not be bothered to go back and read the previous posts, but just for a point of argument, the New Testament does not, at all, condone slavery. |
Hmm. Now to move on. :) |
Of course Floyd but please note, the NT does not Condemn Slavery either. |
Yes it does. The second greatest commandment for the Christian, and the first when it comes to how humans are to behave toward one another, is to love our neighbor as ourself. Slavery is manifestly incompatible with Jesus' primary instruction for human relations. |
Color it however you want. I disagree it condemns slavery. Slave traders, yes. Jesus also said that he was to reinforce the Laws of Moses, not repeal them.
Seems to me that the NT told the Slave Master to "Love" their slaves.
But then again, I also think that any literal reading of the NT and OT if they ever two parts for some god, shows a bi-polar god. |
Actually he never said that. And in effect he replaced them all (Moses' laws) with a fuller revelation of the law. Moses' law against adultery got replaced, in a direct statement, by Jesus' law against lust. Moses' law against murder, in a direct statement, by Jesus' law against hate. Moses' law on divorce was effectively replaced with: never. Laws on tithing were replaced by: give what you can joyfully, or don't even bother. Moses' pattern "Don't do this or that" was in fact entirely abandoned, replaced by Jesus' tougher laws concerned what you think rather than what you do or don't do.
The law that maintains each jot and tittle is Jesus' law, not Moses'. Following the pattern, the OT is a type or shadow of the NT. If you take the time to study Jesus' law, as his teaching on what is sin, which is quite different from the Mosaic law, and if you understand Paul's proper emphasis on the true gospel as opposed to an imaginary social gospel--then you can grasp why there is no explicit condemnation of slavery. If you are interested, I have a small post on this subject here.
It is not a bi-polar God, but one who demonstrated through the Jews that even the most privileged nation will not be able to save itself through obedience. That a savior was necessary or all are lost.
--------------
Mysticism is a rational enterprise. Religion is not. The mystic has recognized something about the nature of consciousness prior to thought, and this recognition is susceptible to rational discussion. The mystic has reason for what he believes, and these reasons are empirical. --Sam Harris
|
