The type of slavery you are referring to, that was carried out in the US, was punishable by death.
As for women voting, I don’t believe voting was much practiced anywhere in Biblical times. Any oppression of women is not Biblical either.
Again, the thread is about MISREPRESENT ED scripture…
No, of course not. But you can see where I came into the conversation on this thread.
Well it would help if you understood your scriptures.
My grandparents introduced me to genealogy when I was ten. Reading family stories, family letters, and early records of early communities I have always been incensed by history books representing women as somehow downtrodden, with no power, no businesses and no rights. They totally ignore the strength and the accomplishments of the average women. I knew all of my female ancestors would come back and bonk me upside the head if I ever bought into the line that they allowed themselves to be dominated by mere male ancestors.
In my family there were women who traveled–on their own–through the wilderness and across the ocean several times. Women who did set up their own businesses (while raising a family), were executors of wills, etc. We need to regard our ancestresses, not with pity, but with great respect. I am absolutely sick of people endeavoring to treat and disregard their work and their contributions. And men, with their mea culpas, are the worse!
1 Like
Please, could you narrow down the Book, Chapter, and Verse you are discussing, as I haven’t a clue.
(All I know is that you want to discuss slavery. And the role of women.)
The Bible always held women in high esteem. It was the Romans who originally used misinterpreted passages to oppress women. They were mortified in Greece when they discovered that women were the primary land owners and financiers of all things Greek.
The other part that is seldom mentioned is that the males who held what are now known as ‘blue collar jobs’ were just as “opressed” in the so-called “Patriarchal” societies. This victimization of everyone from ancient times to the present must stop.
We live in a changing world, changing societies. The “movements” should be given the same regard as moving furniture. The movement to those with property voting, to all men voting, to all females voting are all natural steps as things change. They are not “proof” that women were victimized and put-down. Those who think that the men with property voted without discussing their vote with the women living with them, have another think coming.
Right. It’s a good thing you brought up Nancy Pelosi
An off topic joke get with the topic yo
Yes, but it did start me thinking about Romans 13.
Obedience in Authority (Romans 13:1-7)
Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God.
Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves.
For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
As much as I do like Jeff Sessions, I think he misused this passage himself a year or two ago. It is also interesting that it is always the party in power who trots out this passage, never the party who is not currently in power.
It might work to discuss what this passage does not mean?
Glad to hear it. You seemed a little fuzzy in the slavery passages. Maybe you are good elsewhere.
Yet you haven’t named a slavery passage, so we could discuss this one from the letter to Philemon from Paul, about the slave Onesimus: (Philemon v. 15-17)
Perhaps this is why he (Onesimus) was away from you for a while, that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a brother, beloved especially to me, but even more so to you, as a man and in the Lord. So if you regard me as a partner, welcome him as you would me.
This pursues Paul’s earlier writings that in Christ there is no slave, no freeman, no rich, no poor, but all one…
But we could also do other verses of your own choice as well.
I think I will pass because I believe you act in bad faith when discussing the Bible. I mean, it is nearly impossible to discuss verses with you when you excuse the words of God as written by man who added his perceptions or it becomes mere story telling.
Last time I discussed biblical slavery the Christians were defending permanent slavery and the right to beat their slaves.
Frankly, it was depressing.
1 Like
You could not be more wrong, but I will not argue.
Were Christians discussing this in the context of the time, or from a twenty-first century perspective?
Yes. With all men created in the image and likeness of God, and the teaching that no one may take what is God’s, many of us Christians cared enough to research how slavery evolved. One of the first things we learned is that Biblical slavery was much different from the slavery practiced in the United States. Therefore one approach to discussing slavery in the Bible (thousands of years ago) is to distinguish the differences between ancient slavery and slavery practiced a few hundred years ago.
As I recall, there are at least three degrees of slavery addressed in the Old Testament. One I found interesting is that slavery was the way of the world back then, and one part of the Old Testament is seen as addressing a reality society could not seem to work its way out of.
We can see this work out in the abortion issue today. First, women could choose. Next we see limits trying to halt abortions from occurring after the first trimester.
Slavery and abortion are two of the most heinous, cruel things people can do to other human beings. Yet, with both, we see lawmakers having to enact laws that regulate instead of prevent such acts from occurring. Another case of the more things change, the more they remain the same.
So permanent slavery was moral back then? God dictated rules on how to permanently enslave people and their progeny.
