The Inquisitions

[aspen]

No, slavery is not a sin. Your attempt to twist didn't work. Show me in the Bible where slavery is a sin.

Slavery is not reducing a person to an object. And it has nothing to do with loving your neighbor or loving the slave. Sounds good though. Gives the warm fuzzies to all.

Stranger

Buying a person is objectifying a person. Do you want to argue about the sun lighting the night and the darkness of daytime too?

 

[Stranger]

Buying a person is objectifying a person. Do you want to argue about the sun lighting the night and the darkness of daytime too?

Not so. If an institution of slavery exists, the slave is still a person. He is just a person who is a slave.

No, what I want, is for you to show me where the Bible says slavery is wrong. Since you made the stupid statement that slavery is always wrong.

Stranger

 

[aspen]

The entire message of the NT condemns slavery. Jesus’s ministry, which included people who were not recognized by society, condemns slavery. Claiming that The Bible supports slavery is like claiming it supports tyranny, hating your parents, and committing suicide.

You cannot love a person you own.

 

[Stranger]

The entire message of the NT condemns slavery. Jesus’s ministry, which included people who were not recognized by society, condemns slavery. Claiming that The Bible supports slavery is like claiming it supports tyranny, hating your parents, and committing suicide.

You cannot love a person you own.

Nice speech. Sounds real good. Yet, no substance. Again, prove that the Bible says slavery is wrong. Up to now, it is just you that is saying it, and trying to use the Bible against it, when it isn't.

You have equated slavery with evil. Not the Bible. And not God. You want to equate it with evil because it benefits your black and minority racism. Makes hay. Politically correct. And you can attack those hateful white southernors and be applauded by all. You are so good.

Another lie of yours. Does God own you? Think about it.

Stranger

 

[FHII]

Stranger... Aspen... Perhaps you both should take a step back and consider some definitions and point of views on both sides.

We are talking Biblical slavery vs. What happened in 1621-1865 in the United States. Slavery in the Bible wasn't racial. Slavery in the U.S. was. There are other differences to consider as well. Slavery in America was slavery against their will. While I can't say it wasn't always so in the Bible, generally speaking it was. For the most part it was indentured servivitude.

There were certain rules in the Bible that did not apply to slavery in the world in the 1600-1800's. The year of jubilee for example.

Have a look at the article below. If we are going to discuss this, we should note some differences. And by all means lets let cooler heads prevail.

Slavery or Indentured Servitude (Exodus 21:1-11)

 

[aspen]

Nice speech. Sounds real good. Yet, no substance. Again, prove that the Bible says slavery is wrong. Up to now, it is just you that is saying it, and trying to use the Bible against it, when it isn't.

You have equated slavery with evil. Not the Bible. And not God. You want to equate it with evil because it benefits your black and minority racism. Makes hay. Politically correct. And you can attack those hateful white southernors and be applauded by all. You are so good.

Another lie of yours. Does God own you? Think about it.

Stranger

It is easy to demand a literal directive from scripture - LDS demand the same regarding the Trinity; abortion falls into the same category. You are hiding behind legalism, Stranger.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Does God own you?

Good question, Stranger.

If I may add a thought. It is not a question, just an observation. Without slavery how would we fully comprehend [bought and paid for] or the importance of [Master]? Man's definition of slavery comes with oppression. Marriage in its corrupt form can be the same way: ownership and oppression. While Jesus Christ(Our Lord) laid down His life for His bride...our Lord laid down His life for those He purchased with a great price. How could we comprehend without the presences of slavery to demonstrate this? We forget: God is good always. Even in terms of "slave".

 

[amadeus]

this is like saying, when we were out in the world, "I just hang out with them but I don't do what they do. well why hang out out with them then?.

apparently one must like what they do.

Peace in Christ Yeshua.

In the world, there too often are no realistic or reasonably suitable alternatives. What does a 6 year do when he is being bullied at school if no one is paying attention to or believing any complaints he might venture to make?

Living for God, if we are, will give us a different perspective, but what can we do directly to fix it? One prayer at the time and, as the need is in our ballpark, one effort at the time. Trust in God is worthwhile, but we should know that not every problem in every person is going to get fixed. This is unfortunately the nature of the beast which causes the problems.

 

[Stranger]

Good question, Stranger.

If I may add a thought. It is not a question, just an observation. Without slavery how would we fully comprehend [bought and paid for] or the importance of [Master]? Man's definition of slavery comes with oppression. Marriage in its corrupt form can be the same way: ownership and oppression. While Jesus Christ(Our Lord) laid down His life for His bride...our Lord laid down His life for those He purchased with a great price. How could we comprehend without the presences of slavery to demonstrate this? We forget: God is good always. Even in terms of "slave".

Exactly right. Slavery is the definition of the condition of the human race whether saved or fallen. We are slaves to God or satan. I am a slave to God, bought and paid for as you and Scripture say.

 

[Stranger]

It is easy to demand a literal directive from scripture - LDS demand the same regarding the Trinity; abortion falls into the same category. You are hiding behind legalism, Stranger.

It's easy to ignore a question that you know the answer proves you wrong. Whose hiding? Are you a slave to God? Are you bought and paid for? Of course not. You're a miniority. You're too proud to be a slave. You deserve it. God is lucky to have you...right?...nausea. Again, prove in the Bible that slavery is wrong.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Stranger... Aspen... Perhaps you both should take a step back and consider some definitions and point of views on both sides.

We are talking Biblical slavery vs. What happened in 1621-1865 in the United States. Slavery in the Bible wasn't racial. Slavery in the U.S. was. There are other differences to consider as well. Slavery in America was slavery against their will. While I can't say it wasn't always so in the Bible, generally speaking it was. For the most part it was indentured servivitude.

There were certain rules in the Bible that did not apply to slavery in the world in the 1600-1800's. The year of jubilee for example.

Have a look at the article below. If we are going to discuss this, we should note some differences. And by all means lets let cooler heads prevail.

Slavery or Indentured Servitude (Exodus 21:1-11)

This is not so. See (Lev. 25:35-46). Race played a role with Israel also. Those outside Israel were perpetual slaves.

Stranger

 

[tabletalk]

why the subject? the catholic church was all there was for civilization from the fall of Rome to actually the renaissance and the times where thinking was back into societies and monarchies were established. hence the catholic church ran the holy roman empire, managing civil and criminal jurisdictions. so heresy and heretics were within their rights to execute the laws in place until nations began the separation of jurisdictions like England did in King James' day.

and since the church was a political entity, of significant power and influence through out Europe, it had its issues with corruption. the catholic church in the times you speak of wasn't just a religious organization. its how the Gospel message survived in the world through such times like the dark ages. the Lord made sure the church had such power until it didn't need it any more.

also, Israel had what kind of law in cases of blasphemy? which would be of a similar nature. so is that religious or civil/criminal issues for political powers to execute?

You said: "...the Lord made sure the church had such power until it didn't need it any more." "...so heresy and heretics were within their rights to execute the laws in place until nations began the separation of jurisdictions like England did in King James' day."

I think the Catholic Church gave itself the power to "execute the laws in place". The Church of God is under the New Covenant, and as far as I can tell, is under no command to torture and kill people.

 

[DPMartin]

You said: "...the Lord made sure the church had such power until it didn't need it any more." "...so heresy and heretics were within their rights to execute the laws in place until nations began the separation of jurisdictions like England did in King James' day."

I think the Catholic Church gave itself the power to "execute the laws in place". The Church of God is under the New Covenant, and as far as I can tell, is under no command to torture and kill people.

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.


hence no one gets power without God's approval. and the if you notice when the enemy of God's people Israel get power over them its usually because the Lord had reason for it. also note that the text is written by a man who was ordained by God and persecuted by Jews and Rome. so accusing those with power to be cruel is pointless man is cruel and ruthless no matter what he does because that is the nature of man. if you had no influence of the Lord in your life you'd be the same. without the Lord we are all animals by nature.


so any power in the world is given and or granted by God.


anyway, when there is a vacuum of power in the world just like a wild dog pack the next most powerful takes the reign. which is simply what happened in the case of Rome's dwindling of power. so criminal and civil prosecution was something they administered.

 

[bbyrd009]

Exactly right. Slavery is the definition of the condition of the human race whether saved or fallen. We are slaves to God or satan. I am a slave to God, bought and paid for as you and Scripture say.

 

[bbyrd009]

Stranger... Aspen... Perhaps you both should take a step back and consider some definitions and point of views on both sides.

We are talking Biblical slavery vs. What happened in 1621-1865 in the United States. Slavery in the Bible wasn't racial. Slavery in the U.S. was. There are other differences to consider as well. Slavery in America was slavery against their will. While I can't say it wasn't always so in the Bible, generally speaking it was. For the most part it was indentured servivitude.

There were certain rules in the Bible that did not apply to slavery in the world in the 1600-1800's. The year of jubilee for example.

Have a look at the article below. If we are going to discuss this, we should note some differences. And by all means lets let cooler heads prevail.

Slavery or Indentured Servitude (Exodus 21:1-11)

some PBS show last night about the Spanish in Florida obliquely brought out the stark differences in the way slaves were treated by Spain v England also, dunno if anyone saw that? Slaves on Spanish soil could own property, sue their "masters" in court, etc, completely unlike Stranger's wet dream i guess

It is easy to demand a literal directive from scripture - LDS demand the same regarding the Trinity; abortion falls into the same category. You are hiding behind legalism, Stranger.

lawyers seek facts and proof of course, it's the Hegelian way after all

 

[bbyrd009]

and since the church was a political entity

is a political entity, right

 

[tabletalk]

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.


hence no one gets power without God's approval. and the if you notice when the enemy of God's people Israel get power over them its usually because the Lord had reason for it. also note that the text is written by a man who was ordained by God and persecuted by Jews and Rome. so accusing those with power to be cruel is pointless man is cruel and ruthless no matter what he does because that is the nature of man. if you had no influence of the Lord in your life you'd be the same. without the Lord we are all animals by nature.


so any power in the world is given and or granted by God.


anyway, when there is a vacuum of power in the world just like a wild dog pack the next most powerful takes the reign. which is simply what happened in the case of Rome's dwindling of power. so criminal and civil prosecution was something they administered.

The Romans 13 verse, in the NKJV, uses "governing authorities" and "taxes" . The verses are talking about the governing authorities, not the church authorities.. my opinion, of course.

The body of Christ (the Church) is in the world, but not of the world.
The governments are worldly, and the Church is to be distinct from that.

 

[DPMartin]

The Romans 13 verse, in the NKJV, uses "governing authorities" and "taxes" . The verses are talking about the governing authorities, not the church authorities.. my opinion, of course.

The body of Christ (the Church) is in the world, but not of the world.
The governments are worldly, and the Church is to be distinct from that.

see your opinion, that's not the truth though is it? the roman catholic church was a authority in the world, it was the church or religion of the state (roman empire) hence having influential and political power in the world that other powers in the world had to respect fear and or deal with.

get real, your expectation of human nature is not realistic if you expect the organization known as the catholic church to not be corrupted. its the same for any thing in the hands of man, once they treat it as something that is their own.

 

[tabletalk]

see your opinion, that's not the truth though is it? the roman catholic church was a authority in the world, it was the church or religion of the state (roman empire) hence having influential and political power in the world that other powers in the world had to respect fear and or deal with.

get real, your expectation of human nature is not realistic if you expect the organization known as the catholic church to not be corrupted. its the same for any thing in the hands of man, once they treat it as something that is their own.

I didn't say, or even imply, that I "expect the organization known as the catholic church to not be corrupted".
The Catholic Church "treat (ed) it (the government) as something that is their own."

"...that's not the truth though is it?"
The truth is this (about the governing authorities): from 1Peter 2: 13. "Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14. or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. 15. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men—"

The government should be distinct from the Church of God.

 

[BreadOfLife]

see your opinion, that's not the truth though is it? the roman catholic church was a authority in the world, it was the church or religion of the state (roman empire) hence having influential and political power in the world that other powers in the world had to respect fear and or deal with.

get real, your expectation of human nature is not realistic if you expect the organization known as the catholic church to not be corrupted. its the same for any thing in the hands of man, once they treat it as something that is their own.

Wrong. The Church cannot be corrupted. Men within the Church can be - and this is what happened many times in history.
The Church is the fullness of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23), which He identifies His very SELF with (Acts 9:4-5). Christ is not corrupt and neither can His Church be.

As for your use of "Roman" Catholic Church - it's also wrong. Where is no such thing. There is only "The Catholic Church."
"Roman" or "Latin" simply refers to the largest RITE of the Catholic Church. There are about 19 others, including the Byzantine, Alexandrian, Melkite, Coptic, Maronite, etc.