Tec keeps saying that Christ did not support slavery, therefore her god did not, and she does not.
I am saying that his words did not support enslaving another person against their will. Two and more thousand years ago, slavery could keep someone alive (food and shelter); and it was a means that people used to pay off their debts (like indentured servitude). The Israelites were not allowed to keep a slave of their brothers past so many years, and they had to send them away with means at the end of those years. The Israelites had to offer refuge to a slave who ran to them and asked for that refuge as well. So it served a purpose in those times. Better might have been to simply offer shelter without enslavement (as love would, as the golden rule would), or to forgive a debt (as Christ taught we should do if one asks of us - thereby ending this particular reason for slavery/servitude to begin with)
But as I stated earlier, Christ did not come to speak specifically against slavery (of humans by humans at least). That was a human construct that was a social norm of their culture and time, accepted by all. (Though His teachings did teach against enslavement to those who were listening and who understood... more gradually sure, but learned in the heart so that one does not go back quite so easily as one who only listens to a rule... AND without the bloodshed of a rebellion or civil war for instance; and had any of the British/West in the more recent past been listening to Him rather than hearing only what they wanted to hear, they would not have gone and captured, enslaved as they did. Their 'slaves' had not come to their land and attacked them. The British are the ones who did that. Those slaves also did not need to work off debt, since they had owed nothing to the invaders of their land. So the British were specifically not hearing Christ or His teachings. They were acting on what they wanted - those in power at least - and they would have twisted anything to justify this to themselves because it is what they wanted.)
Christ did correct matters of the law that had been misunderstood, and matters that He was specifically asked about. He spoke to all as equals with one another. Though He taught that those who follow Him are to serve. Not be served. Major social changes are either gradual, or bloody. At least that is what i think history has shown us.
ANYTHING can be justified by the "Law of Love".
Yes, because anything can be twisted and abused to whatever someone wants to justify. We're going to come up short, because we have all manner of bias/prejudice that keep us from seeing each situation clearly. But looking at Christ and listening to Him (at least for me) helps ME to understand what love is, so that i am not just judging it on my own. Love does not prevent us from sinning or doing others wrong. But love can cover over a multitude of sins.
Christ's love also does this for US.
The "believers" are making sure of it.
People get banned for what they, themselves, do. Mistakes have probably happened, because this forum is run by human beings, but no one has to be gone permanently if that is the case.
mP - First, heaven and earth DO pass away; second, Christ did not state that the law of moses was perfect. He did in fact state that some laws were given by Moses (not in accordance to what God wanted) because of the hard-heartedness of the people, themselves.
His nonsense about women being too stupid to learn in Timothy,
Nowhere does he say this. I don't think you should tell me to back up my points with scripture if you are not going to do so yourself ;)
Jesus said and did a lot of bad things like treat women badly and was racist.
You and i have had this conversation before. He did not treat women badly; on the contrary, and he was not a racist. He came in fulfillment of a promise, remember? I thought we had semi-agreed upon this during our last conversation.
Why didnt Jesus speak out against these fraudulant laws and passages ?
Why not just speak as to the truth instead? People are supposed to listen to Him. If one continues to look backward, then one is not coming to Christ for life and truth. He did also correct much of the misunderstandings in the law, by teaching truth about it in word and deed.
denouncing it would have proved to be fatal to a small religious group just starting to promote their teachings.
Quite probably, and good point.
Quite probably it would also have become the focus of Christ... and that was not His focus. As stated, it is a symptom (like many others), and not the root. His words and teachings do cover enslaving one's fellow man, as well as all sorts of other wrongs that we do to one another.
But His focus was upon that which is within. The spirit, God, Truth... and the free gift of life, given through Christ, who saves us from death and sin.
You could, interestingly, make the same arguments over the new testament totally failing to denounce war.
Probably on more things than that even. Including things we do right now that will be seen as atrocious in another hundred years time. Simply because we can't hear or see better yet (or don't want to).
NC, I think few Christians are waiting around to die. Some, sure, but not all and not most.
Peace,
tammy
