Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This uncited definition is too one dimensional
It's a matter of your presuppositions
You are superposing this image over the word. I think master/slave relationships are far broader and complex than what you are limiting it to, certainly outside of a modern vacuum. The mistreatment of people is unjust but that doesn't mean every slave has been mistreated. You seem to be commenting on American salvery practices and if so you have my vote, American salavery was unjust. Part of the problem is like Reductio ad Hitlerum. The word is prejudged without actually trying to understand the system it is within. Seems that's that the only depth that's discussed here.I'm really sorry but your justifying the ownership of Human Beings. Slavery was a system here in America where Human Beings were capital. It was a system where people were abducted from their homes and families were put into forced labor in a far away land to the financial benefit of their owners. They were bought and sold and traded away not unlike with what we do with cars today. Children were separated from parents when sold and women were used as sexual slaves. I don't care how you spin it, which you are doing, Human ownership of other Human Beings in any form is wrong. There are NO just systems in Human ownership. Period!
Human Beings owning other Human Beings. No matter how much a person tries to wiggle out of it with some sort of just slavery system, slavery is always, always wrong under any circumstance. There's nothing to try understand beyond that point. End of story. That anyone finds room and value in any so called "just slavery system" is beyond wrong. I think you can tell by my tone that the whole idea of Human Beings owning other Human Beings, and someone find room to do so is very troubling for me.You are superposing this image over the word. I think master/slave relationships are far broader and complex than what you are limiting it to, certainly outside of a modern vacuum. The mistreatment of people is unjust but that doesn't mean every slave has been mistreated. You seem to be commenting on American salvery practices and if so you have my vote, American salavery was unjust. Part of the problem is like Reductio ad Hitlerum. The word is prejudged without actually trying to understand the system it is within. Seems that's that the only depth that's discussed here.
You are boxing me into a specific idea of slavery. I am against the mistreatment of people and I think slavery practices are incompatible with modern societies. You seem to want to label me something im not. Much (if not all) of ancient world used various forms of salvery (including "slave races") and this certainly is not a biblical invention.Are you OK with slavery?
[looks up thread]
I guess maybe you are. It would seem that Mr. Phred is adamantly opposed to slavery in all of its form, presumably on moral grounds. He was clearly stating a moral opinion that seems different from yours.
You are boxing me into a specific idea of slavery. I am against the mistreatment of people and I think slavery practices are incompatible with modern societies. You seem to want to label me something im not. Much (if not all) of ancient world used various forms of salvery (including "slave races") and this certainly is not a biblical invention.
Ownership "rules" have a different mindsets in ancient cultures. There is a head of the household and under that household is perceived as the property of the head. These are things, animals, slaves, children, wives and all under the household. This "property" label however doesn't mean people are mistreated but in a healthy perspective it means all in the household is under the care of the head. Patreon/client systems this is normal as the "master" offers something those under them can not get for themselves like food, shelter, and protection, in return they offer their services. Much of the world still operates like this it's just not under a master/slave label. It seems this conversation is being dictated by judgment of labels not actions.Human Beings owning other Human Beings. No matter how much a person tries to wiggle out of it with some sort of just slavery system, slavery is always, always wrong under any circumstance. There's nothing to try understand beyond that point. End of story. That anyone finds room and value in any so called "just slavery system" is beyond wrong. I think you can tell by my tone that the whole idea of Human Beings owning other Human Beings, and someone find room to do so is very troubling for me.
Why are you defending slavery?Ownership "rules" have a different mindsets in ancient cultures. There is a head of the household and under that household is perceived as the property of the head. These are things, animals, slaves, children, wives and all under the household. This "property" label however doesn't mean people are mistreated but in a healthy perspective it means all in the household is under the care of the head. Patreon/client systems this is normal as the "master" offers something those under them can not get for themselves like food, shelter, and protection, in return they offer their services. Much if the world still operates like this it's just not under a master/slave label. It seems this conversation is being dictated by judgment of labels not actions.
I am defending the protection and care of people within a heiarchy. I'll stop using labels people can't get past.Why are you defending slavery?
You are doing it again, defending slavery. Quite horrible stance imo.I am defending the protection and care of people within a heiarchy. I'll stop using labels people can't get past.
No.Are you OK with slavery?
How about just the protection and care of people as Human Beings.I am defending the protection and care of people within a heiarchy.
Can you provide a definition of "slave (noun)" which does not include ownership of one human being by another?This uncited definition is too one dimensional
Is it Biblical?Why are you defending slavery?
Just so you know:I think you can tell by my tone that the whole idea of Human Beings owning other Human Beings, and someone find room to do so is very troubling for me.
Well, parts of the bible do support slavery.Is it Biblical?
True. However, in Romans he introduces himself as a δοῦλος Χριστοῦ. Please tell us, what did those words mean at the time Paul was writing? What, exactly, was a δοῦλος?Paul never called himself a slave.
You found his letter to the Romans!? was it lying next to the Shroud of Turin?True. However, in Romans he introduces himself as a δοῦλος Χριστοῦ. Please tell us, what did those words mean at the time Paul was writing? What, exactly, was a δοῦλος?
It really was a simple question which you don't need to dance around - at the time Paul was writing, what did "doulos" mean?You found his letter to the Romans!? was it lying next to the Shroud of Turin?
I'll set the KJB aside and run your words through Google translate and see what comes out; but before I do, I'm going to guess it says "slave."
But I could be wrong -- we'll see.
Okay ... Google comes up with nothing.
However, DeepL Translator: The world's most accurate translator, comes up with:
What's your question?
- Christ's servant
- slave of Christ
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?