@Philokalia said
One of the more controversial aspects of the Bible is that it permits slavery in the Old Testament very explicitly, and it tells servants/slaves to be kind to their masters (and vice versa).
I have generally concluded that the Bible thinks of this as a concession, just as how Christ explained that divorce was initially ...[text shortened]... ands of the Church, is towards the abolition of slavery, serfdom, etc., and other statuses.
@philokaliasaid So, the prevailing attitude towards masters being kind to their slaves, as it is stated in the Bible, is oriented towards the philosophy that the slaves themselves should be freed out of the kindness of the masters, as it has been interpreted by the church fathers and Saints who have supported these efforts.
So whether slavery was a moral atrocity or whether it was morally sound was simply a matter for the interpretation of "the church fathers and Saints"? Is that all you have on this?
@fmfsaid Where does the Bible talk about this "trajectory... towards the abolition of slavery"?
Philokalia, I'd actually prefer a straightforward answer to this. I am not asking about "the prevailing attitude" towards slavery amongst some church leaders and how slavery in Christendom was able to persist for the better part of 2,000 years after Jesus lived. I am specifically asking you where in the scriptures does it talk about a "trajectory... towards the abolition of slavery"? Which verses?
@philokaliasaid I am an Orthodox Christian and I can say that this is a personal insult and a travesty.
OK, so to get back to this. You feel "personally insulted" by something that happened to a cathedral in the C15th - because the building had belonged to a Christian denomination that you joined recently, more than 500 years after the events happened. I hear what you are saying. The question is this: do you also feel "personally insulted" by the fact there was STILL slavery in your country in the C17th and C18th and even as recently as in the C19th?
This is slavery and your somewhat weaselling attempts to conflate biblical “concessions” to it and therefore to infer a sort of morality by coincidence to it.
It would be pleasing to see you come out and address the points being surgically put to you by FMF and in doing so unequivocally condemn the slavery of black people in our near history.
@fmfsaid So whether slavery was a moral atrocity or whether it was morally sound was simply a matter for the interpretation of "the church fathers and Saints"? Is that all you have on this?
Without any context, many things seem like "moral atrocities."
@fmfsaid Philokalia, I'd actually prefer a straightforward answer to this. I am not asking about "the prevailing attitude" towards slavery amongst some church leaders and how slavery in Christendom was able to persist for the better part of 2,000 years after Jesus lived. I am specifically asking you where in the scriptures does it talk about a "trajectory... towards the abolition of slavery"? Which verses?
Do you intend to have the word trajectory included in this?
@divegeestersaid This is slavery and your somewhat weaselling attempts to conflate biblical “concessions” to it and therefore to infer a sort of morality by coincidence to it.
It would be pleasing to see you come out and address the points being surgically put to you by FMF and in doing so unequivocally condemn the slavery of black people in our near history.
That’s the issue
What point, exactly?
You guys are talking about a couple of unrelated things -- one of which is the basis for your moral outrage, and the other is how it is handled in the Bible and by Church authorities a long time ago.
There's no single point being clearly discussed that you have indicated I should reply to.
@philokaliasaid Do you intend to have the word trajectory included in this?
No. But quibbling about the word like this is just a dodge. What I am getting at with regards to your appeal to "church fathers and Saints" and the historical reality of slavery is pretty obvious. You are either being evasive for some reason or this rather straightforward issue is just going - whoosh - over your head.
You guys are talking about a couple of unrelated things -- one of which is the basis for your moral outrage, and the other is how it is handled in the Bible and by Church authorities a long time ago.
There's no single point being clearly discussed that you have indicated I should reply to.
You said that after you converted to christianity you were outraged by what had happened to the Hagia Sophia; the question which has been put to you a few times is asking if you were similarly outraged by the enslavement of black people by your own ancestors.
You’ve been dodging the question since it was first asked, even to the point of getting the first post asking it removed.
@fmfsaid No. But quibbling about the word like this is just a dodge. What I am getting at with regards to your appeal to "church fathers and Saints" and the historical reality of slavery is pretty obvious. You are either being evasive for some reason or this rather straightforward issue is just going - whoosh - over your head.
So, why not put a question directly to me, in a clear context, so I can make a comment on it, and then I can elaborate to provide clarification.
@divegeestersaid You said that after you converted to christianity you were outraged by what had happened to the Hagia Sophia; the question which has been put to you a few times is asking if you were similarly outraged by the enslavement of black people by your own ancestors.
You’ve been dodging the question since it was first asked, even to the point of getting the first post asking it removed.
The Hagia Sophia
11 Sep '20 07:39
Back to Top