Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

I'll say it again...

2000 years ago, "slavery" was just another job description; it was what low-information voters did for a living in those days. In other words, anybody who has ever voted for Bork Obunga would have been a slave in Jesus' times.

The question is, why would any of you guys want Jesus to have abolished slavery and put all of those unfortunates out of work??

Quote:

Refer to my last post for how to get over the fear.

It was for little lads. There is no way of getting over the fear which animals are not susceptible to.

Quote:

The question is, why would any of you guys want Jesus to have abolished slavery and put all of those unfortunates out of work??

They don't want Jesus to have abolished slavery because they would have had nothing to charge Him with had He done so. The idea would never have entered His head. Love thy neighbour is sufficient.

Apisa is just playing on the emotive aspects of American slavery to try to prove that Christian moral precepts shouldn't apply. Not to him at least. And to prove that he is a more compassionate person than the rest of us and morally superior to Jesus.

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

The same reason, probably, he never condemned us for thrashing about in this never ending thread.

Dreadful thread thrashers are we.

Your whole position is grounded in sex.

When I first spotted the thread I knew from the title that it was someone trying to excuse his infractions of the Christian code of moral decency, good taste and manners. NJ not being the world's hot spot of such idiocy.

My terrier instinct kicked in.

My favourite intellectual sport. I think I can fetch this stick back until my fingers are too weak to tap a key. Wagging my tail like a Bunny Girl who has spotted a juicy target.

A number of words flashed across my brain whenever a gent. in a pub started making a big deal out of being a non-believer.

I can't make all non-believers look silly but I can any who are likely to come in the sort of pubs I go in.

Your mind is wrapped in sex. Get over it. The question had nothing to do with sex...except in your mind.

Sounded more like a toy poodle with pink ribbons!

Quote:

Your mind is wrapped in sex. Get over it. The question had nothing to do with sex...except in your mind.

The question would never have been asked in the first place but for sex. All the other aspects of the Christian moral code are covered by the law. Sex is the only territory left. It's in your mind.

We can't have Jesus condemning adultery and not condemning slavery now can we?

Well--we can actually. Adultery might be more dangerous to a society than slavery from an evolutionary point of view. Leaving out all the Christian pious, compassionate bullshit I mean. Which the evolutionary point of view needs to do.

A dim view of adultery has been taken by every society I have ever heard of.

A dim view of the institution of slavery in Jesus's time can only be taken by us if we redact out the obvious fact that we don't know anything about it except that the same word is used for whatever it was then, after being translated a few times, as is used for the American experience of the institution to which the same word is applied.

And not everybody takes a dim view of the latter application.

Sometime in the early 18th century a law came into force here which said that as soon as a slave set foot in England he was a free man. About 60 years before the Constitution was ratified. 100 years before slavery was abolished in the US. Maybe 5 generations of people. A lot. How many slaves, whatever that means, were there in Jesus's orbit?

I've read a few books about the society Jesus lived in and I don't recall a single mention of slavery in any of them. Talcott Parsons wrote a very scholarly work on the region at that time and he didn't even mention Jesus.

It's all about sex and discrediting the Church and with it its whole system of moral teaching not covered by the law. For purely personal reasons.

Get Nancy down to the altar and make an honest woman of her.

Why didn't the Founders condemn the slavery we do know about; as did they? It seems possible to me that the separation of Church and State doctrine was due to the Church being opposed to slavery in the American form.

Sex is the origin of your attempts, pathetic as they are, to undermine the Church.

Many decades in pubs finding out the history of insistent non-believers. Not one exception in many decades of amiable socialising. I didn't put private dicks on their trail. It emerged in general conversation sometimes after a long period. I was in no hurry. I knew what was going on.

Sex is the origin of your attempts,

I think, however, that a word from "god" about the evils of slavery would have been appropriate.

And "slavery" WAS NEVER just another job description. It was a classification of individual who could be bought, sold...and separated from family at the whim of another.

Too many folks think they are special and the rules just don't apply to them.