In the following God is depicted as drawing a clear distinction between Hebrew indentured servitude and non-Hebrew chattel slavery:
Leviticus 25
39 “ ‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. 40They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee.41Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. 42 Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God.
Why do some disingenuously pretend that this distinction was not drawn? God was exceedingly clear in making this distinction.
This thread is about God condoning chattel slavery. It is not about indentured servitude.
Why not simply assert that the depiction of God condoning chattel slavery by the Jews was wrong since it is antithetical to the teachings of Jesus?
Originally posted by @philokalia about FMFI disagree.
Not rigorous; not intellectual; not engaging the topic or the reality of the world.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @philokalia"Historical understanding" is not a problem. I am looking at the human condition through a moral prism. People used to own slaves. People thought it was morally sound to do so. This is what "historical understanding" tells us. This is not in dispute. I would maybe have been a slave owner in the past. I don't pretend otherwise. But in the matter of enslavement and the buying and selling human beings as chattel, they were dark chapters in the history of the human condition.
He wants to criticize history for not corresponding to his reality.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaAnd what exactly are the realities of the 'morality' situation among people "living in a developing country" like the one I live in? Do pray tell.
These are just the realities that we face.
None of these are "moral choices."
Nobody chose that poverty and want and despair exist.
It's just that we make choices in light of the reality around us.
You are a man living in a developing country.
Why are you so dull when it comes to these topics?
Originally posted by @philokaliaAnd yet when I asked you to discuss "realities" regarding tyranny and post-tyranny in this way...
But do note FMF didn't really want anything to do with my line of discussion. The second that he can't just sit back and view history from a modern perspective, a massive error as noted by Fustel de Coulanges, he doesn't want to talk about history anymore.
He doesn't really want to talk about difficult topics of ethics.
He wants to talk about easy topics of ethics.
if you don't really believe in freedom, per se, and you don't really believe in human rights, per se, how do you think a post-colonial, post-military dictatorship developing country like the one I live in should move forward and promote social justice in the wake of what it has been through and in the face of the huge challenges that exist?
...you simply ran away from the question, ran away from the thread you asked me to start on it, and ran away from this forum altogether in so far as this question was concerned.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @fmfYou tell me.
And what exactly are the realities of the 'morality' situation among people "living in a developing country" like the one I live in? Do pray tell.
I have no idea as to the specifics.
But I know that you offer no solutions without considering them deeply, because that is how you have to solve any problem: engaging the reality of it.
You are not engaging the reality of those periods of time so you do no toffer solutions.
As you indicated, you want to ignore that topic and just talk about how there is "no moral justification" in the most abstract sense of it, as if we are talking about justifying something like eating meat, in a situation divorced of circumstance.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @fmfI answered it extensively in the debate section and it was a hit post, lots of remarks, etc. You could have gone to comment there but chose not to.
And yet when I asked you to discuss "realities" regarding tyranny and post-tyranny in this way...
[b]if you don't really believe in freedom, per se, and you don't really believe in human rights, per se, how do you think a post-colonial, post-military dictatorship developing country like the one I live in should move forward and promote social justice in the ...[text shortened]... o start on it, and ran away from this forum altogether in so far as this question was concerned.
I will not create a new post for that in the "spirituality" section because it is not a "spirituality" topic.
It is a general debate topic of a political nature.
Originally posted by @philokaliaYou didn't need to start a new thread. I started one but you ran away. Here it is Thread 175779. I wanted your Christian perspective. Never mind. You ran away. So be it.
I will not create a new post for that in the "spirituality" section because it is not a "spirituality" topic.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaThen what point did you think you were making by mentioning that I live in a developing country and that I am somehow "dumb" about the "realities" here? What point were you trying to make?
You tell me.
I have no idea as to the specifics.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaI don't have any problem whatsoever with a historical understanding of the circumstances and the justifications used during those dark days of the human condition. I'd have probably subscribed to the economic arguments in favour of woning human beings.
You are not engaging the reality of those periods of time so you do no toffer solutions.
As you indicated, you want to ignore that topic and just talk about how there is "no moral justification" in the most abstract sense of it, as if we are talking about justifying something like eating meat, in a situation divorced of circumstance.
Originally posted by @philokaliaIt's already here: Thread 175779. Answer the question through your spiritual and religious prism, please.
If you would like me to start a non-spiritual thread in the "Spirituality" forum to discuss politics, you can ask me.
Originally posted by @philokaliaOne could argue that slavery is the solution to the needs of agribusiness in Indonesia in terms of increasing its profits and attracting investment.
But I know that you offer no solutions without considering them deeply, because that is how you have to solve any problem: engaging the reality of it.
If one didn't believe in a society with "rights" and "freedoms", for example, like you don't, and if one was inclined to think along the lines of duties and practical consequences rather than rights, like you do, and if one refused to accept that every person in the society has to be treated with the assumption that their citizenship is valuable and wanted, like you refuse to, one could probably quite easily [at least according to your mindmap] make a pro-slavery argument for Indonesia in 2018.
Tax revenue generated could be invested in education in an effort to raise the average IQ of the people here.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009Yes. Mother Earth, and we live in her Book.
There’s only one true and living God.
22 Mar 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterBump for sonship
Why don’t you post a few more links to books which help us “understand the god of the OT” or whatever it was you said?
So you think slaverly is morally acceptable
You think burning people alive for ETERNITY is morally acceptable
How about burying a woman up to her neck and having men stand around her and throw rocks at her until her skull caves and she dies...
Is that also morally acceptable?