The Slave Trade of the 16-18th Century built on the Slave Triangle was indeed most evil, and a great deal of the wealth of a number of European Nations including England was seriously enlarged by it, and a good deal of the development of South and North America was achieved by implementing it. The irony that the Statue of Liberty is one of the USA's great national symbols in spite of that is not lost. Can I say that this is more evil than the slavery that enabled the building of the Pyramids, or that which accompanied the Roman Empire, or is seen today in sex trafficking? I don't know that I can make that judgment.
Now you want to tell me that Western Civilisation was set up by God. I might go so far as to think that statement is a product of a cultural elitism that defies both knowledge or belief. To describe Western Civilisation as a universal good that lasts for a millennia is beyond cultural elitism and is manifestly ridiculous.
But wait . . . there's more
You now assert that God embraces the principles of Aphorism (the ends justify the means), invoking principles laid out by Niccolò Machiavelli in The Prince. Such a view is manifestly inadequate. I draw your attention to the discussion between God and Abraham regarding the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah.
I don't believe that genocide is of God, anymore than I believe that homicide is of God.
No. No, you can't make that judgement, LOL. Odd how you criticize the USA and England yet Australia practiced slavery apparently until the 70's. That is during your life time.
Slavery in Australia - Wikipedia.
Wait, I also have more.
To say that the slavery you speak of is worse than sex trafficking is a terrible, terrible thing to suggest. Brother, you do realize that often the victims are children. My job involves oversight of sex offenders. I have a mother that made a sex slave of her 8 year old daughter. The child's job was to provide oral sex. That seems worse to me. Much worse. If I am a slave and I am given a choice, do the 8 year old's job all day or cut sugar cane all day, give me the machete. But, maybe that's just me.
Your "land rites for gay whales" joke made me laugh. But this that you say here made me quickly lose my smile. You are either ill informed, or just attempting to use slavery as your strong punch in the argument.
And concerning your comments about genocide and homicide... I hear you brother. Yet, we have the Canaanites situation as well as Job and that wager between God and the Devil. God wins the bet, but Job's 7 sons, 3 daughters, countless servants, and countless animals all die. Explain that one. Our thinking and Theology is trapped in human time and space. We think God sees something exactly as we see it but it may not true.
Westerners today, especially Australians apparently, have such a limited understanding of slavery because of our context. If you want to break the mold of such limited understanding, study the Mamluk:
Mamluk - Wikipedia
They were slave warriors. Some gained prestige and power, even rising to the rank of sultan. Basically they are slaves trained and forced to kill. A terrible thing. Even worse than making a man work on a plantation under the crack of a whip. Both are difficult to fathom. But, being a killer slave is certainly worse than being a worker slave.
Forced war is worse than forced work. Oh, and they were forced to convert to Islam... so to top it all off they go to hell, just in case all the murdering was not enough to get them there.
The circumstances of slavery matter. I suppose it would be desirable to be a slave in the courts of pharaoh during times of famine. To remain a slave in the long term though does not seem desirable. Yet, concerning the Mamluk, history shows that even the freed slave often preferred to remain Mamluk.
Paul being a slave to Christ is a good context. Christ washing the feet of his disciples like a slave is a good context.
Slave to sin. Bad. Slave to Christ. Good.
More liberal types like to create and use trigger words to win arguments or shut down speech. They create certain “no go” zones or weaponize words for political gain or to win an argument, like the "anti - patriarchy team" did to
@Eloy Craft here, LOL.
But the truth is that it is humans that sin, not institutions.
Those things said, to compare patriarchy with slavery is merely a device to attempt to win at argument. It is an attempt to create a high road - but is a cheap plastic one.
God uses the patriarchal context to reveal Himself to us and no amount of watering-down washes that away. Trinity. “Our Father”. “Abba”. Christ. Joseph. Mary. Kingship of Christ. Marriage Supper of the Lamb. Heaven with all it's marvelous and holy hierarchy. No, patriarchy itself is no sin, no more than motherhood is sin… though there are some terrible and sinful mothers that treat their children in horrific ways, as I merely touched on before.
Because some of our Anglican priests have molested children, committed adultery, and/or blessed gay pride unions, should we now say that priesthood is a sin. No. It is the human that sins, not the institutions.
When Christ returns and makes things new, sinful people and thereby sinful institutions will be no more.
Again, tearing down patriarchy and establishing egalitarianism is not some path of light to the Divine. If it were, the prophets, Christ, Mary, Paul, Peter, and John would have
plainly said so… and you would not need all this text and translation twisting to promote it. But, it’s not. It’s mostly political, to say the least.
After visiting CF now, I can see myself maybe becoming Catholic or Eastern Orthodox. I appreciate Mary now more than ever before. The things the Pope says that I find disagreeable suddenly do not seem so bad after all, LOL.