The Bible And Social Justice

[Nick the Nevermet]

 

I make odd associations. And if one's life style is a result of birth and not choice then perhaps a little humility is appropriate.

 

Many who are not Conservative or Fundamentalist are being painted with a broad, pejorative, and categorical brush.

 

Oh, certainly. There are countless reasons for humility, and nobody should think their worldview is the single correct one.

 

It's just that I like odd associations, and as a result I like to read them when others make them.

[glintofpewter]

Nick,

 

 

Take Care,

 

Dutch

[Juanster]

Juanster,

 

You make no distinction between indentured servants and slaves. But, there was a huge difference: White indentured servants were not property owned by another person. White indentured servants were considered fully human, not subhuman like black slaves (3/5 according to the Constitution). American slavery was supported by a worldview that considered black people to be less than fully human. This is what you've been trained to believe. Please Read The Book, It's On Line. Or Wikipedia's bios of Oliver Cromwell and the amount of the Irish he shipped to the Colonies.You ask, "I believe you named this discussion "The Bible and Social Justice"? I ask Social Justice for who?"

 

In reading the Prophets and the New Testament, I can't think of any distinction that was made. Yes, slavery was practiced in those times. But, it was significantly different from the race-based slavery of America. Among other things, Old-world were generally captives from war (in which the alternative was to kill or enslave). American slaves were strictly of African origin and captured or procured exclusively for the purpose of perpetual servitude. Here's the chink in that armor Geo. At what price were Blacks procured? Convicted and transported Whites could be had for song, just the price of their transpotation fron Bristol England, plus what ever else could be wrangled from the purchasers of their contracts No Blacks were in England in the 15th and 16th centuries

FWIW, I did a word count of the word 'justice' in the Bible (RVS) and found 160 hits. Whenever I think of justice, I think of Amos 5:24, "Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream." And, when I think of it, I can hear Martin Luther King's voice. This message resonated with him.

 

Geo. Do you know the three phases of Truth?

 

Hi Geo.

You sent me a reference by an author named "Smedley". I would like to buy that book, if Amazon has it. Can you send me the title again, thanks. I referenced an author named Coldham and sent a review of his book in my previous message, hoping to discribe the situation to you leading up to the British Transpotation Act which shipped convicted felons to the British colonies under contracts of Indenture for the sundry crimes they'd, committed [As An Option]to being Hanged or Beheaded. This wasn't speculation, but taken from the trial documents of these individuals, both male and female, from the British Parlementary Courts, which are still in existence.

 

Now, what's it going to take to get you to relinquish your comfort zone and access this information? If this is too much of a chore, try a little bit of critical thinking, by using some basic aritmatic. Google "Who received British Land Grants in the American Colonies". See How many English Elites received them, then, check the difference between that amount and the number of Individuals Transported to the Colonies as Free labor, irrespective of whether they were Indentured or Convicted. What you should discover is that the minority group receiving Land Grants from the Crown, were not enough or capable of accomplishing the grandiose scheme devised by the creation of the London Company, without an immense source of uncompensated human resources. This ready source was the list of individuals I referenced in Coldham's research, before Blacks got here. UNCOMPENSATED LABOR UNDER INHUMANE CONDITIONS, EQUALS SLAVERY. The history of the White victems is too extensive to ignore. So, Why not let the Irish the Scots, the Diggers and The Spirits of destitute Children, stolen, shipped and trained as apprentices, speak for themselves. It's all on Line. The Review of Coldham's book I sent you, is only the tip of the iceberg. But it's this group that constitutes the majority of Whites in America today.

 

The Three Phases of Truth: All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Arthur Schopenhauer

German philosopher (1788 - 1860) . I'm a patient person George, I can wait for you to see the light.

[GeorgeW]

Juanster,

 

"You sent me a reference by an author named "Smedley". I would like to buy that book, if Amazon has it. Can you send me the title again"

 

"Race in North America" by Audrey Smedley.

 

 

"I referenced an author named Coldham and sent a review of his book in my previous message, hoping to discribe the situation to you leading up to the British Transpotation Act which shipped convicted felons to the British colonies under contracts of Indenture for the sundry crimes they'd, committed [. . .] Now, what's it going to take to get you to relinquish your comfort zone and access this information?"

 

I am aware of indentured servitude in the history of America. My point is that this is very different from race-based slavery of Africans. I do not agree that it is the same.

 

 

"I'm a patient person George, I can wait for you to see the light"

 

I appreciate your concern and interest.

 

George

[Mona]

George, Juan;

There is a book "The Slave Trade" The History of the Atlantic Slave Trade 1440-1870 by Hugh Thomas. Copyright l997. It covers many aspects of the trade. Including the religious views held at the time of both Muslims and Christians. It is a delicious read of 800 or so pages.

 

 

 

Ronald Segal, Observer gave this review: "The horrors of the trade are here in all their cumulative rebuke to so-called Western civilization. Only the subsequent story of the abolitionist movement provides relief. In this part of the book Thomas is pasionately engaged The prose risies to its feet and races. The account of parliamentary debates and diplomatic presures as Britain moved to withdraw from the trade and then pressed other countries to do likewise has a dramatic dimension that lifts scholarship, into literature'

 

Best,

Geneva

[Juanster]

Juanster,

 

"You sent me a reference by an author named "Smedley". I would like to buy that book, if Amazon has it. Can you send me the title again"

 

"Race in North America" by Audrey Smedley.

 

 

"I referenced an author named Coldham and sent a review of his book in my previous message, hoping to discribe the situation to you leading up to the British Transpotation Act which shipped convicted felons to the British colonies under contracts of Indenture for the sundry crimes they'd, committed [. . .] Now, what's it going to take to get you to relinquish your comfort zone and access this information?"

 

I am aware of indentured servitude in the history of America. My point is that this is very different from race-based slavery of Africans. I do not agree that it is the same.

 

 

"I'm a patient person George, I can wait for you to see the light"

 

I appreciate your concern and interest.

 

George

 

Hi George,

I got lucky! Amazon has a free Kindle app for PC. With it I was able to access the 1st chapter of Smedley's book. Now, If you've read it you should recognize two of her most revealing statements that support all I've told you, to wit: "The position of this study is that [Race] does indeed exist and should be viewed not as something biologically tangible and existing in the outside world that has to be discovered, described and defined but, As a Cultural Creation, a product of human invention very much like Fairies,Leprechauns, Banshees, Ghosts, and Werewolves."

"The People most instrumental in the development of the idea of raceas experienced in North America were the English Colonists who began settlements in the 17th century. The book thus focuses on English beliefs,values and social practises, brought with them to the Colonies, that set a racial worldview in America."

 

As she states, "The English Colonists that began settlements". Do you notice how the reader isn't told exactly who these English Colonist were that had the authority to establish Settlements in this New Land, or the source of that Authority? How much was paid for the settlement sites to start building on? Who was the recipient of this payment, if there was one? Why did Smedley leave these obvious questions unanswered, didn't she know the answers? Why would she assume that the reader could deduce what these answers were or, did she have another sinister motive? Whitewashing and Redaction of the true history comes to mind, IMO. What was/is the result; a skewed interprtation of those historical events with the goal of perpetuating the conflict between fellow Earthlings of varying Hues.

 

So before your mindset becomes totally irretriviable, The hint she left hanging so tantilizingly before us is the word "ENGLISHMEN". Englishmen, then as now, are a controlled form of humanity. Controlled by a Regal Monarch. Before any Settlements could be established in the Americas, the land had first to be acquired by Royal Henchmen via Conquest in the name of that all powerful Authoritative Monarch. This Monarch would then assign parcels of land to his murderous Henchmen(Adventurers, Seadogs, Pirates,etc) in the form of LAND GRANTS as payment for their services. It was this Royal group and this group only that had the authority to establish settlements in this new land, owned now by the Crowns of England, Spain, France, and Portugal. Google the "Doctrine of Discovery" to verify this.

George, my hangup with Smedley is the fact that the references she used are addressing Genetic Codes in DNA, whereas Coldham as a British subject, has direct access to the original historical documents. The names letters of the victems,the crimes they were convicted of, the number and names of ships they were transported in, the Captains of those ships, the prices they received per individual, for providing the transport. The Contracts of Indenture signed by the Parlementary Court MPs.

 

You attempt to make the sentence of Indenture look as if it was a badge of horor is an erroneous assumption for you to make. To Be Indentured required a Contract a bill of Laden a Destination and an Affadavite as to who was to be designated as the Consignee at the termination of the voyage. Money changed hands in exchange for this White human cargo to the highest bidder.

 

George, you do understand that many are reading this discussion,and that we're only "sounding boards" with alternate notes for the same tune, correct? There are those who will search the internet for the infomation we provide as references and will probably chime in on this discussion. So, what I'm attempting to accomplish is the eradication of the divisivness that has prevented Earthmen from forming a collaborating coalition of kindred spirits, who then will make manefest the adage that; "Birds of a Feather always Flock Together". Men subjected to the same oppression become brothers in the acknowledgment of that oppression. IOW, instead of the age old tactic of "divide and conquorutilized by the Oppressor, Shared Oppression should become the Glue that Binds the oppressed together.

[Juanster]

George, Juan;

There is a book "The Slave Trade" The History of the Atlantic Slave Trade 1440-1870 by Hugh Thomas. Copyright l997. It covers many aspects of the trade. Including the religious views held at the time of both Muslims and Christians. It is a delicious read of 800 or so pages.

 

 

 

Ronald Segal, Observer gave this review: "The horrors of the trade are here in all their cumulative rebuke to so-called Western civilization. Only the subsequent story of the abolitionist movement provides relief. In this part of the book Thomas is pasionately engaged The prose risies to its feet and races. The account of parliamentary debates and diplomatic presures as Britain moved to withdraw from the trade and then pressed other countries to do likewise has a dramatic dimension that lifts scholarship, into literature'

 

Best,

Geneva

 

Hi Gen,

If you remember, this discussion originally started when you made me aware that there was in existence, the Papal Bull of Nicolas the 5th. After reading that document, it provided me with a link for further reading where I found the explaination of the "Doctrine of Discovery" which proved that the papal Bull was it's foundation. This was the authority which sanctioned Ferdanan and Isabella to commisson Columbus to go and search for a shorter route to the East by sailing West. How many are ever taught this tidbit of history in school? I thought of this Discovery document when I heard this U.S. Govenor declare that;" If You Do Not Believe As I Believe, You Can Not Be My Brother of Sister." I saw then how the Papal Bull morphed into the Doctrine of Discovery and is still being perpetuated and is so relevent to this topic.

Stay Well Dear,

The Juanster

[GeorgeW]

Juanster,

 

I simply disagree that indentured servitude and race-based slavery were equal. American slavery was based on race, not behavior. It was a life-time condition into which one was born and died. An African was not considered fully human and this concept is embedded in our Constitution. Racism persisted as Jim Crow for a hundred years after emancipation. And today, African-Americans still suffer the effects of racism.

 

Further, I don't think that indoctrination is a good explanation for African-Americans adopting Christianity. The historical record does not support this. And, it is counter-intuitive for me to accept the notion that the oppressed would accept the religion of the oppressor unless there were other factors involved. The factor that I suggest is a justice theme of the Bible that would resonate with the oppressed.

 

George

[Juanster]

Juanster,

 

I simply disagree that indentured servitude and race-based slavery were equal. American slavery was based on race, not behavior. It was a life-time condition into which one was born and died. An African was not considered fully human and this concept is embedded in our Constitution. Racism persisted as Jim Crow for a hundred years after emancipation. And today, African-Americans still suffer the effects of racism.

 

Further, I don't think that indoctrination is a good explanation for African-Americans adopting Christianity. The historical record does not support this. And, it is counter-intuitive for me to accept the notion that the oppressed would accept the religion of the oppressor unless there were other factors involved. The factor that I suggest is a justice theme of the Bible that would resonate with the oppressed.

 

George

 

Hi Geo.

It appears that we've beat this "Social Justice" part of this topic to a pulp and neglected the "Bible" portion. So let me ask; Was the Septuagint in existence during Jesus' lifetime on Earth? Was he familiar with it(the Septuagint)?

[Nick the Nevermet]

Hi Geo.

It appears that we've beat this "Social Justice" part of this topic to a pulp and neglected the "Bible" portion. So let me ask; Was the Septuagint in existence during Jesus' lifetime on Earth? Was he familiar with it(the Septuagint)?

 

The Septuagint was in existence during the time of Jesus. Also, as he is depicted in the Gospels, he appears to know its content.

[Juanster]

George,

 

Caveat: I have no authority. I am a scientist. My interest in religion runs deep. My religiosity runs shallow. However, I read extensively and it may be my reading content forming my bias.

 

My readings indicate the oppressed had nothing to look forward to. The slaves (rarely mentioned during these times, but, were quite numerous) and the poor grasped the salvation preached by Jesus. Bart Ehrman writes Jesus and his disciples literally believed a new kingdom was on the horizon. He or we and others could argue forever if Jesus believed in a coming spiritual or physical kingdom. The New Testament has contradictions. No doubt Paul captured (I like the word hijacked) this coming kingdom idea to convert the oppressed. He gave up on the Hebrews and had to go to the gentiles. You and I can probably agree about his first contacts. They were probably the rich, at least thats what Acts indicates. My theory is he went for the rich, Aquila and Priscilla (?). After developing his base they then sold it to those who had nothing to look forward to. Martyrdom fits into the idea in that death (or anything) could be better than life they endured. And the idea of Heaven being the ultimate release, objective, motive became a dominant idea.

 

Then the hierarchy developed with the base being the have-nots (a Bush term)( :>) ). The base developed so fast and so powerful even Roman Emporers couldn't contain it and eventually Constantine and Theodosius cowed to Christianity for political reasons. Constantine's mother, Josephine, may have truly been a believer. No writings indicate anything other. However, I would be interested in the motives of building Churches, spreading pieces of the "True Cross." Somewhere I read not to question the motives but look to the results. I question the motives of the mother of an Emporer from reading about relatives of most Roman Emporers. ~smile~

 

Understand, as you know, I am not critical of the striving for Heaven, salvation, a more perfect union ~smile~ and a wonderful life. We all have to have faith things will be better, we will be more powerful, we will have more money, or whatever. Our motives are what define us. We have to strive for something. In my estimation this is what sold Christianity. It gave the "project people" hope. They had no hope of having anything other than a better life after death. If I'm correct Christianity is one of the few other than some early Egyptian pieties that gives a good life after death. And again, was it Jesus' idea, or was it developed right prior to the fall of the Temple? Didn't Paul do his epistles some time in the 40-50s? Weren't the Gospels written anywhere from 65-120 depending on authority or Gospel?

 

 

Constantine's Sword, AD 381, Jesus Dynasty, When Jesus Became Christ, James, Brother of Jeuss and many other books are good sources. James Tabor has one coming soon called The Two Christianities. It is on pre-order at this time.

 

I am aware there are a couple things you and I can discuss and as you know we have in the past. I am interested if we can further this discussion with our "new friends." So far most what I've read on this forum is much over my head into the spirituality area. The history, I love.

 

Much respect,

Ron

 

Hi Ron,

Speaking of history; have you ran across any information that places the Septuagint as being in existence during Jesus' lifetime on Earth?

Be Well,

The Juanster

[GeorgeW]

Hi Geo.

Was the Septuagint in existence during Jesus' lifetime on Earth? Was he familiar with it(the Septuagint)?

 

Yes and I don't know.

 

But, how is this relevant to this discussion?

 

George

[GeorgeW]

P.S.

 

As to the question about whether Jesus spoke Greek, I looked to see what Frederick Murphy (“Early Judaism: The Exile to the Time of Jesus”) has to say.

 

About Diaspora Jews at the time, he says, “In the Diaspora, Jews spoke Greek as their native language.”

 

He says about Judean Jews, “the language at the time was primarily Aramaic, or perhaps in some cases Hebrew, though some Greek also was spoken. Even peasants and artisans may have had enough Greek to carry on trade and basic interaction with Greek speakers.”

 

About Jesus, he says, “His native language was Aramaic, although some argue that he would have had at least smattering of Greek (maybe more) and perhaps some Hebrew.”

 

This is consistent with other things I have read. So, the best answer, I think, is Jesus likely spoke a little Greek, but unlikely could read and write it and it is unlikely he read the Septuagint version of the Bible.

 

George

[Juanster]

The Septuagint was in existence during the time of Jesus. Also, as he is depicted in the Gospels, he appears to know its content.

 

Hi Nick

 

Are you basing this conclusion on the "Jot and Tittle" quote of Jesus? What IYO, was the apparent discrepancy he'd discovered in the Greek form of Torah that wasn't suppose to be there according to the Torah he was more familiar with. Apparently the one written in Aramaic?

[Nick the Nevermet]

I misspoke when I said Jesus certainly knew the Septuagint. The Septuagint existed, and Jesus seemed to have a knowledge of the the books contained within it, though I have no reliable knowledge about what language he knew Hebrew scripture through.

 

I don't usually over-extend myself like that in posts. Apologies.

[Juanster]

Hi Juanster,

 

Just to offer my own precautionary view here.... Though you quote John, in my view it may certainly not be true especially among progressive Christians that "all that claim to be practitioners of Christianity, accept that the Bible is the authentic Word of God" It seems to me that there were practicing Christians long before the present Bible was ever adopted by the church system. IMO, the The book of Acts even bears this out) I assume you're speaking of Acts.11:19-26, where the Apostles in Antioch were first called Christians, correct? My question is this; Did they(the Apostles) as Jews and Followers of the Way, appreciate being labled with such a disparaging title, indicating; One of the Uncircumcised?

It may be a requirement to accept it as authentic by some established church systems but seems to me it is indeed not a requirement of TCPC or this forum as one can discern from the 8 points to be called a practicing Christian. (also note guidelines in debate section)

 

In my opinion it is best not to even debate such a point as this. In the past this has proven to be an inflamatory issue where all are allowed their opinions but to state that someone that has a different view of the point you make, makes them a "non practicing Christian" typically leads to personal attacks. It seems to me, this is a view or opinion probably best kept to oneself.

 

Respectfully,

Joseph

 

Hi Joe,

I've tried to leave this alone as you suggested, but after thinking about it, IMO, it all boils down to your taking what I was attempting to relate, out of context. My motivation to even get into this conversation was due to this statement of George's; "Ron, Wow! A nice historical summary. (Note to others: Ron and I are interested in religious history and I hope some of the older members of this forum are as well.)"

By my referenceing the Biblical chapter and verses to support what I stated, in noway was it intended to cast any negative opinions upon how others today, practise how they wish to interpret the doctrines of their belief. This is not to say that the prescribed prePauline doctrines are not in exsistence. In keeping with the historiosity of accepted Scripture and the Bible portion of this debate, the relevance of the role the source of what has come down to us today plays, I asked a question of Nick about the discrepency Jesus alluded to in his[Jot and Tittle] proclaimation, as a result of his being allegedly famailiar with another edition of TORAH he considered, more in accordance with the Law of Moses;Deut.4:2 So I ask you;

TORAH, as the foundation of both the Septuagint and Christianity; is this area of Biblical history, IYO, too taboo to be discussed?

FYI, anything I will ever post here will in most cases be in a historical context. Because, it would be foolish of me to question why others think as they do. My Interest solely, is to trace the historical paths taken by the various religious movements and not how others have decided to employ their perceived concepts today.

 

Stay well,

The Juanster

[Juanster]

Yes and I don't know.

 

But, how is this relevant to this discussion?

 

George

 

Just trying to stay within the guidelines of your request George. Aren't you and Ron Interested In Biblical History anymore? The Septuagint, it's origins and the use of it as the foundation of Christianity would IMO,pass muster as Biblical History, wouldn't you say?

The Juanster

[JosephM]

Hi Joe,

I've tried to leave this alone as you suggested, but after thinking about it, IMO, it all boils down to your taking what I was attempting to relate, out of context.

(snip)

Stay well,

The Juanster

 

OK. perhaps it is my error.

Joseph

 

PS Please check your Personal Messenger titled "please note"

[GeorgeW]

Just trying to stay within the guidelines of your request George. Aren't you and Ron Interested In Biblical History anymore? The Septuagint, it's origins and the use of it as the foundation of Christianity would IMO,pass muster as Biblical History, wouldn't you say?

The Juanster

 

Yes, I am interested in Biblical history. But how is the Septuagint -- as opposed to other sources of the Hebrew scriptures -- relevant to the question of justice and the Bible?

 

And, FWIW, the primary source of the English translations of what we call the Old Testament is the Masoretic Text, not the Septuagint. As an example, The New King James Version (1982) says it is based on the Leningrad Manuscript of the MT, but “ the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate were also were consulted” and “draws on resources of relevant manuscripts of the Dead Sea caves.”

 

George

[Juanster]

I misspoke when I said Jesus certainly knew the Septuagint. The Septuagint existed, and Jesus seemed to have a knowledge of the the books contained within it, though I have no reliable knowledge about what language he knew Hebrew scripture through.

 

I don't usually over-extend myself like that in posts. Apologies.

 

Hi Nick,

No need to apologise, The Septuagint came into existence during the reign of PtolomeII, then ruler of the segment of Alexander's Empire which included Egypt and Palestine. Alexander marched into Egypt at approx.300-25BC. It was Ptolome II who carried out his father's Ptolome I wishes, to translate the Judean Torah into the Greek language, in honor of Alexander's Edict; "That It was less expensive to rule a people via their own Religion and Superstitions than at the point of a sword." From Josephus' [The Jewish Wars] To grasps the import of this decision on what happened to the Tribe of Judah, after the Greeks took control, will take a bit of study, but it's all there in both the Bible and secular histories,and well worth it; If you're up to it. One of the primary requirements is to realize that prior to the Greek conquest and rise to power, the lingua franca of that region, from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic and Medeterranian was the Aramaic/Semitic dialects.(Lamsa's The Bible from Aramaic into English)

[Juanster]

As I stated, the tenticles of this saga meanders throughout the books of 2Kgs, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther and Chronicles, supported by the History of The Chaldean, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman Empires. Minus this history, it will never be clear to you why Christianity's foundation resembles that of the Leaning Tower of Pisa today.

[GeorgeW]

Juanster,

 

I don’t think the origin of the Septuagint is quite as insidious as you suggest. I think most scholars agree that the motivation was much more utilitarian – to serve the needs of Greek-speaking Jews.

 

Murphy (“Early Judaism: the Exile to the time of Jesus”) says, “This [the Septuagint] was important for Diaspora Jews whose native language was Greek. It gave them direct access to the sacred word.”

 

Vanderkam & Flint (“The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls”) say, “It is clear that Greek-speaking Jews, notably in Alexandria, needed a translation of the Scriptures since they spoke little or no Hebrew.”

 

Harris & Platzner (“The Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible”) say, “. . . The Septuagint was designed for a Greek-speaking Jewish audience living in a word created by Alexander’s conquests . . .”

 

Nickelsburg ("Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah") says, "The Hebrew Pentateuch was first translated into Greek in the third century BCE to meet the needs of the Greek-speaking Jewish community of Alexandria"

 

The reason this text was created was quite mundane and the same reason the Bible was later translated into Latin, English and many other languages. It is to provide access to those who do not speak Hebrew (or now the Greek of the New Testament).

 

George

[GeorgeW]

As I stated, the tenticles of this saga meanders throughout the books of 2Kgs, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther and Chronicles, supported by the History of The Chaldean, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman Empires. Minus this history, it will never be clear to you why Christianity's foundation resembles that of the Leaning Tower of Pisa today.

 

Of course Jewish history is important to the foundation of Christianity although I wouldn't broadly describe it "the Leaning Tower of Pisa today."

 

But, why is one particular translation of the Bible (the Septuagint) vs. all others translations relevant to the issue of a theme of justice in the Bible?

 

George

[Nick the Nevermet]

As I stated, the tenticles of this saga meanders throughout the books of 2Kgs, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther and Chronicles, supported by the History of The Chaldean, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman Empires. Minus this history, it will never be clear to you why Christianity's foundation resembles that of the Leaning Tower of Pisa today.

 

I absolutely agree that knowing what texts are canonized in what languages when is important. However, could you elaborate what you mean by Christianity's foundation resembling a leaning tower of Pisa? You seem to be making a specific argument, but I can't quite see it yet.

 

EDIT: And I see George beat me to it