-Caveat Lector-
My real point about the Abraham passages is: They seem to be inconsistent
(in both cases "Abraham's descendants"). I understand what the Nazarene
was getting at by way of explanation to the descendants of Abraham. They
seemed a little unsure.
The first passage (Matt) deals with public displays of churchiness ...
'slavery' to what others' (peers') opinions of any one's abilities to
demonstrate 'holiness' for said 'peers'. This may be seen in the current
context of being a 'slave' to fashion or keeping up with the Jones' -- in
any event worrying about those things for which the reward(s) are derived
from mere mortals rather than from the divine. I, for one, am more
impressed (coincidient with the passage) with those who maintain an inner
sense (innocence?) about their faith rather than those trying to hammer
THEIR interpretation of same into everyone else. One size does not fit
all.
I think the whole issue (slavery) can be summed up by pointing out that
what happened in the South or in the Middle East during their respective
times must be taken in context of THE TIMES. Used to be littering (to use
an example from a different extreme) was okay. Times changed. Used to be
going out in the woods and cutting a winter's worth of firewood was okay.
Times changed. However, when speaking with those for whom these kinds of
things may have been okay, their impressions are based on the context of
THEIR times. Fast forward back to today.
When we look at the past with a 1999 lens, there are all sorts of things
that look average. Or better. Or worse. "The good ol' days." Beyond the
truths contained in ANY religious treatise/test/whathaveyou, the benefits
of having lived in a more idyllic time, I view such things as products of
their times and must therefore look at who was doing what with whom for
what reason and so forth. Because the Europeans may have had compelling
reasons for adopting a Middle Eastern faith system, those reasons should be
examined and thereby applied to what their perceptions were, rightness or
wrongness of their actions -- what they, themselves did -- are something I
can't do a thing about. A modern day person's acceptance of said faith
system should be much different than a person of antiquity's (tradition vs
inquisition, e.g.). Similarly, what passed for human bondage in one
Southern state may have been different in another, or from locus of
commerce to locus of commerce. What ensued as far as resolution of the
problem itself would, in like fashion, be equally unacceptable in today's
world. Can anyone conceive of being asked to go to war to solve a social
issue in the U.S. -- today? Is Kathy Lee mustering troops to go free the
sweat shop denizens? Does anyone recall the times the police and the Guard
and others have been called out to put down if not prevent uprisings -- in
our time? I can and Neil Young made a mint off a song therefrom.
I have to apologise. I wasn't there for all of history. All I know is in
my 1950's vintage mind, social/belief systems may have served someone's
purpose and apparently ceased to around the early to mid-1800s -- in a big,
civil, warring way. I also wasn't there in the Middle East when the Bible
stories were being played out for future (30-60 years or more later)
recording. What they were up to (in both eras) and what my forebears were
up to were two entirely different "up tos". They may have worked well for
those in the "good ol' days" and there may be some lessons to be learned by
present generations -- in context.
I am interested in what's going on NOW. History plays a part in
determining how people's perception of the world have progressed or even
regressed. Sometimes anachronistic works play a part and those elements
are worth knowing. Sometimes a Mr. Blackwell analysis plays a part because
it reflects peoples' likes and dislikes, agreements and disagreements.
Anyway, who or what is in focus. What are the forces being exerted? Why?
How?
Interesting thing about the Matt passage: RIGHT after I posted it, I sat
down to watch (read: endure) O'Reilly on Fox last night. His guest was a
biblical scholar. Guess what passage he was using as his point of
departure for analysing Clinton's contrition? This is why information is
important, intrinsically important. Not because I'm going to convince
anyone to become a Celtic Buddhist or make them a validator of that belief
system or its texts. But because the information may relate to something
happening now and explain how the dots are connected. The dots are there
-- in 3d; all one needs to do is read Proust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
A<>E<>R
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
----------
: From: Hawk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: Re: [CTRL] Slave Documentation - H.H.
: Date: Thursday, January 14, 1999 12:46 AM
:
: -Caveat Lector-
:
: Alamaine Ratliff wrote:
:
: > -Caveat Lector-
: >
: > Okay, I'll bite. Biblical documentation (courtesy NIV) at
: >
: > Matt 6 (esp 6:5) {long, I won't reproduce -- especially because of the
: > written word}
:
: Don't see any connection to slavery.
:
: > John 8:31ff: "To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you
hold
: > to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the
truth,
: > and the truth will set you free." They answered him, "We are Abraham's
: > descendants and have never been slaves on anyone. How can you say we
shall
: > be set free?"
:
: Apparently these fellows had never been slaves, and said so.. They also
apparently
: "missed the point," that Jesus wasn't talking about literal/physical
slavery..
: which you also seem to have missed.
:
: > Acts 7:6ff: "G*d spoke to him {Abraham} in this way: 'Your descendants
: > will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved
and
: > mistreated four hundred years. But I will punish the nation they serve
as
: > slaves,' G*d said, 'and afterward they will come out of that country
and
: > worship me in this place.' Then he gave Abraham the convenant of
: > circumcision. And Abraham became the father of Isaac and circumcised
him
: > eight days after his birth. Later Isaac became the father of Jacob,
and
: > Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs."
: >
: > I stumbled onto the above after looking through my Strong's Exhaustive
: > Concordance of the Bible. There's not a bunch on "slave" or "slavery"
but
: > more on "bondage" which translates back to "slavery" in the NIV. The
: > Matthew part was what I originally intended to offer but the rest just
came
: > along.
:
: But, the passage you quoted said nothing about it being "evil" or "wrong"
for the
: Hebrews to be held in bondage. It merely said that they WOULD be, and
that Egypt
: WOULD be punished, which it was... But the punishment was not because the
Hebrews
: were slaves there, rather because Pharoah did not release them when God
told him
: to... It was his (1) unreasonable harshness to the Hebrew slaves, and (2)
his
: refusal to let them go when directed -- Read it in context and this
becomes
: clear. There was a time (read the part about Joseph) when God BLESSED
Egypt
: because of Pharaoh's relationship (master over slave) with Joseph.
:
: > I really lean more toward Celtic Buddhism so these forays into Xtian
: > theological texts is rather illuminating.
:
: That's good... Since some of these folks are offended by biblical texts,
I would
: be very glad to discuss the above passages, or any others, with you...
Could be my
: "take" on them is 100% wrong... but maybe I am not wrong at all. You be
the
: judge, after having an opportunity to study the passages using proper
: hermaneutical procedures. In looking through your concordance, don't
look for
: "slave" but rather "servant" which IS a slave unless it says "hired"
servant.
:
: Hawk
:
: DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
: ==========
: CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting
propagandic
: screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid
matters
: and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and
outright
: frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor
effects
: spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
: gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to
readers;
: be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
: nazi's need not apply.
:
: Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
: ========================================================================
: Archives Available at:
: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
:
: http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
: ========================================================================
: To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
: To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
: Om
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
