homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Did Joseph use slaves? (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Did Joseph use slaves?
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm judging nothing LC. I can't. I don't know what you believe. Do you believe in God the Killer as revealed THROUGHOUT the Bible? I.e. that the God of the Bible is revealed by Himself 100%? That the Bible is divine? To that God, life at least before death, obviously matters nought.

[ 07. June 2015, 21:53: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[/QUOTE]Whatever Joseph's opinions on the institution of chattel slavery, he obviously wasn't big on the idea of freedom. [/QB][/QUOTE]


How could he have been? There was no such concept at that period of time. You might as well demand he have a concept of sepsis.

Brenda

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Martin, you're overstating your case, as you do so often, and what's more, there's no definitions or explanations, just a lot of assertion. I am willing to answer, but if we do it on this thread, there will be a huge huge tangent. Either create a new thread or PM me.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:
Whatever Joseph's opinions on the institution of chattel slavery, he obviously wasn't big on the idea of freedom.

How could he have been? There was no such concept at that period of time. You might as well demand he have a concept of sepsis.

Brenda

They had the concepts of slavery and bondage, but not of freedom? How did that work, do you suppose?
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You started it!

What questions do you have about the conquest of Canaan? Which all feeds back in to the pragmatism of God in the myth of Joseph-Imhotep 500-1000 years before.

Why do we persist in seeing Love through any Bronze Age eye?

Because if we don't we'd have to question Jesus' own Iron one?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I told you I'm not doing that here on this thread. See your alternatives above. I'm not going to derail things further, and won't respond again to it here.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:
Whatever Joseph's opinions on the institution of chattel slavery, he obviously wasn't big on the idea of freedom.
How could he have been? There was no such concept at that period of time. You might as well demand he have a concept of sepsis.

Brenda

Not at all. What we're presented with in Genesis is quite clearly trying to describe a massive shift in the Egyptian polity. At the beginning of Genesis 47 there are Egyptians with their own lands and flocks. By the end of the chapter there aren't, largely because Pharaoh's henchman Joseph has used a famine he had advance knowledge of to screw them out of everything they had, transitioning from independent farmers/pastoralists to what are essentially sharecroppers. Like much of Genesis this may not be a strictly accurate story in an historical sense, but that's the narrative we're presented with.

And I'm with Dave W on this one. How exactly do you have a concept of slavery without having a concept of freedom?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I didn't say I was good with it. I have a lot of questions about it.


Have a lot of questions about it? - God allegedly orders a massacre, the genocide of a people, the slaying of babes in arms in a systematic murder of an entire people.

And you have a lot of questions about it. I mean, understatement or what? Do you "have a lot of questions" about Stalin's purges or Hitler's policies, but are open to the possibility that they can explain why they were right after all?

This is why, exactly why, I had to leave the concept of the divine authorship of Scripture behind. The God it paints is often an absolute bastard.

[ 08. June 2015, 13:54: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
fwiw, I'm loathe to jettison the whole idea of the inspiration (and therefore authority) of Scripture for the conquest-- or Joseph's involvement in Egyptian slavery. But I also can't just write off two such horrific incidents all that blithely. At best, I have to put a huge parenthesis around those texts. More likely, as mentioned before, I treat particularly the Pentateuch as a mixture of divine and human-- but so intertwined it's impossible to surgically cut between the two.

I think part of our problem, ironically, lies in our efforts to be more scholarly in our hermeneutics. Which overall is a Very Good Thing. One aspect of that has been efforts to read Scripture contextually-- again, overall Very Good Thing. But in the OT that has meant "letting the text stand on it's own"-- as opposed to "reading the OT thru the NT" which had been standard really since the early church (the NT writers themselves do not follow standard hermeneutics, and in fact play quite fast and loose in their use of the OT). After being once firmly committed to such efforts, including trying to recapture (perhaps futilely) what the text meant to contemporary Jewish audiences, I've come to the conclusion that it simply can't-- or rather, shouldn't-- be done. That the only way for a Christian to read the OT is thru the NT. I've even come to accept a form of the much-maligned "red letter Bible"-- that the closer a text is to Jesus, the more authoritative it may be assumed to be.

I don't know if that makes me more or less of a fundamentalist, but I've found it easier to align my use of Scripture with the God I know and love than when I had to make things like the God of the conquest passages fit with the God of the gospel parables.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:


And I'm with Dave W on this one. How exactly do you have a concept of slavery without having a concept of freedom?

Easy. There is no concept of freedom as a separate thing, that is a desirable good for all. Freedom is good for me. And, possibly, for my friends/relatives/tribesmen. It is not good for you. What is good for you is being my slave, so that I get my wood hewn and my water drawn.
You can see this perfectly clearly in the OT. We hated being slaves in Egypt, it was nasty building pyramids. But my slave, here and now? Totally good, fetch me another brewski, hon.

The idea of freedom as something objectively good, that everybody wants, all people everywhere, is relatively modern. You can see them wrestling with it, in the discussions around the US Civil War. There are reams of letters, sermons, speeches, pointing out that the Negro is naturally a slave and happier in that condition.

We are now completely used to the notion, and do not remember that it used to be different. When we read those pro-slavery writings we denounce them as evil. Here is a good modern example: the recent movie, Ex Machina. It is about robots. Why do the robots want to be free? They are created things, created to be workers and slaves. (Does my stapler, my car demand to be free?) But in the movie they do. The moment they achieve self-awareness they demand freedom. We expect it.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:


And I'm with Dave W on this one. How exactly do you have a concept of slavery without having a concept of freedom?

Easy. There is no concept of freedom as a separate thing, that is a desirable good for all. Freedom is good for me. And, possibly, for my friends/relatives/tribesmen.
While that may not be our idea of freedom, it's still an idea of freedom, something you claim the people portrayed in Genesis lacked. Joseph in particular would have had a very clear idea of the distinction; growing up free, becoming enslaved, and later manumitted. I'm not sure the idea that these changes in his personal situation eluded him or were somehow incomprehensible to him is at all supported by the text.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by An die Freude:


Joseph prioritised non-adultery over the potential power he would have as Potifar's head servant. However, he must have prioritised other evils, such as not just slavery but accepting excessively harsh treatment of said slaves, less than the potential good coming from the power of being Pharaoh's second in command. Where does one draw the line for what to prioritise and what to trade off for what else?

All that assumes that Joseph saw slavery as an evil. I'm not seeing anything in the text to support that impression.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
]Easy. There is no concept of freedom as a separate thing, that is a desirable good for all. Freedom is good for me. And, possibly, for my friends/relatives/tribesmen. It is not good for you. What is good for you is being my slave, so that I get my wood hewn and my water drawn.
You can see this perfectly clearly in the OT. We hated being slaves in Egypt, it was nasty building pyramids. But my slave, here and now? Totally good, fetch me another brewski, hon.

In other words, it's not the concept of freedom that was lacking, but the concept of freedom as an inalienable human right.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
One of the most radical thing God says in the OT is (I paraphrase), Be nice to strangers, because you were a stranger. Be kind to your slaves, because you were a slave. Do unto others, dammit.

What God is doing there is telling the Israelites that the Other is Us. Yeah, those people over there, with their funny habits/skin color/political system/gods/food and clothes -- they are human beings too. It took, it is still taking, a long time for this concept to go down. It sticks in everybody's craw. But He said it, and that was a grand beginning. From this has sprung, with infinite slowness, all emancipation movements, all feminism, all the GBLT stuff. If we could actually gag this one down, there may be hope for us yet.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091

 - Posted      Profile for Jack o' the Green   Email Jack o' the Green   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
One of the most radical thing God says in the OT is (I paraphrase), Be nice to strangers, because you were a stranger. Be kind to your slaves, because you were a slave. Do unto others, dammit.

What God is doing there is telling the Israelites that the Other is Us. Yeah, those people over there, with their funny habits/skin color/political system/gods/food and clothes -- they are human too.

Yes, it's a way of stating the truth of Genesis 1 that all humans are made in the image of God, and that we should "Do unto others..."
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493

 - Posted      Profile for JoannaP   Email JoannaP   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Joseph in particular would have had a very clear idea of the distinction; growing up free, becoming enslaved, and later manumitted. I'm not sure the idea that these changes in his personal situation eluded him or were somehow incomprehensible to him is at all supported by the text.

If Joseph existed and lived in Ancient Egypt, he was not manumitted. That is a concept from the very specific context of Roman slavery, as described by Brenda above, which had no equivalent in Ancient Near Eastern societies. Heck, in a cashless economy, where everybody is paid in food and clothing etc., how does one differentiate clearly between a 'slave' and a 'free servant' anyway?

Also, whoever wrote the myth had no idea how the Ancient Egyptian economy worked. Pharaoh owned all the land. His scribes calculated the amount of grain each plot was expected to yield each year, based on how good a flood it was, food for the farmer's family and seed for next year's crop was deducted and then that was the amount the farmer had to pay in tax/rent/whatever you want to call it that year.
'Egyptians with their own lands and flocks' makes as much sense in an Egyptological context as manumission.

--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
Also, whoever wrote the myth had no idea how the Ancient Egyptian economy worked. Pharaoh owned all the land. His scribes calculated the amount of grain each plot was expected to yield each year, based on how good a flood it was, food for the farmer's family and seed for next year's crop was deducted and then that was the amount the farmer had to pay in tax/rent/whatever you want to call it that year.
'Egyptians with their own lands and flocks' makes as much sense in an Egyptological context as manumission.

The account is an early "Just So" story. The state described at the end of Genesis 47 is the Egypt you describe and which would have been familiar to the author(s) of that bit of the Torah. As I previously noted the account is almost certainly not historically accurate, but it's a tale the Hebrews told each other about how Pharaoh came to own all the land in Egypt. It's not history, but it's the narrative we have about Joseph's tenure as Pharaoh's henchman.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Brenda.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I couldn't help but think of Joseph's own words while reading this thread: Genesis 50:20 FWIW

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
One of the most radical thing God says in the OT is (I paraphrase), Be nice to strangers, because you were a stranger. Be kind to your slaves, because you were a slave. Do unto others, dammit.

What God is doing there is telling the Israelites that the Other is Us.

Not really one of the major themes, I'd say - easy to miss amongst all the stuff about the "chosen people" with their special relationship to God, slaughtering the neighboring Canaanite tribes, etc.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
One of the most radical thing God says in the OT is (I paraphrase), Be nice to strangers, because you were a stranger. Be kind to your slaves, because you were a slave. Do unto others, dammit.

What God is doing there is telling the Israelites that the Other is Us.

Not really one of the major themes, I'd say - easy to miss amongst all the stuff about the "chosen people" with their special relationship to God, slaughtering the neighboring Canaanite tribes, etc.
Curiously it really IS a major theme. It comes up a lot, and underlies much of the detailed laws and regulations. Which makes the equally true themes that you mention all the more perplexing.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's the 0.1% up against the 110%

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Curiously it really IS a major theme. It comes up a lot, and underlies much of the detailed laws and regulations.

What would you say are the best examples of this?
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Curiously it really IS a major theme. It comes up a lot, and underlies much of the detailed laws and regulations.

What would you say are the best examples of this?
hmmmm... off the top of my head, I'd say probably Jonah ("should I not care?..."). But you see it popping up in several places. Which is not at all to deny the steady drumbeat of tribalism and exclusivity that comes out again and again as well. Trying to unify these discordant elements is... troubling, to say the least.

[ 09. June 2015, 12:15: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You can also view it in all the lectionary readings for Epiphany, Christ the King Sunday, and so on.
There are indeed two strains, pulling opposite ways. Should we slay our neighbors and rape their women, or should we treat them like brothers (and their women like sisters)?
Which is why micro Bible reference, pulling one verse out and waving it, is unhelpful. You can find a verse in the Bible to support just about any atrocity you can name. You have to step back and look at the big picture.
And following Jesus is also helpful. And He was not long on those verses that advocated smashing children onto rocks.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
And following Jesus is also helpful. And He was not long on those verses that advocated smashing children onto rocks.

Right, and he did say that the Law boiled down to love God and love neighbor—which, of course, prompted the question "Who is my neighbor?," and Jesus's answer to that question.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
You can also view it in all the lectionary readings for Epiphany, Christ the King Sunday, and so on.

Given their purpose, I don't think I'd agree that these kinds of collections are really suitable for providing a "big picture" view of the OT. In any case, I looked at the OT readings from the first 7 entries of this Epiphany lectionary and didn't notice much in the way of exhortations to be kind to the Other. I'd be curious to know where you see them.

cliffdweller: The example of Jonah is pretty interesting, since he's being sent out to "cry against" the heathen Ninevites - not the most agreeable of charitable interventions, perhaps, but at least he wasn't sent out to kill them. My recollection was that the prophets typically specialized in haranguing the Israelites, not their neighbors. I think the whole flashy bit about the belly of the fish really kind of buries the lede.

Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

cliffdweller: The example of Jonah is pretty interesting, since he's being sent out to "cry against" the heathen Ninevites - not the most agreeable of charitable interventions, perhaps, but at least he wasn't sent out to kill them. My recollection was that the prophets typically specialized in haranguing the Israelites, not their neighbors. I think the whole flashy bit about the belly of the fish really kind of buries the lede.

But the ending is significant-- and seems to be a pretty powerful rebuke of the troubling tribalism that is, as you note, a consistent theme up until then. The final verse, as Jonah sits petulantly under the withered plant, seems particularly poignant:

quote:
Jonah 4:11 But Nineveh has more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left, and many cattle as well. Should I not be concerned about that great city?”


[ 10. June 2015, 06:30: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

cliffdweller: The example of Jonah is pretty interesting, since he's being sent out to "cry against" the heathen Ninevites - not the most agreeable of charitable interventions, perhaps, but at least he wasn't sent out to kill them. My recollection was that the prophets typically specialized in haranguing the Israelites, not their neighbors. I think the whole flashy bit about the belly of the fish really kind of buries the lede.

But the ending is significant-- and seems to be a pretty powerful rebuke of the troubling tribalism that is, as you note, a consistent theme up until then.
"But"? I thought I was agreeing with you, at least as far as treating Jonah as evidence of God caring for someone other than the Hebrews.

I think this is an interesting exception, though, not an instance of a major theme in the OT. And if it's a rebuke to tribalism, then God must be rebuking himself, as he himself is the author of the exceptionalism.

Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313

 - Posted      Profile for HCH   Email HCH   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Rather than just Joseph, you can ask the same kinds of questions about nearly everyone in the Old Testament (and many in the New). It appears that every culture in the Bible has slavery. Did Jacob, Saul, David or Solomon have slaves? In the New Testament, did rich men such as Joseph of Arimathea have slaves?

The rejection of slavery in the last few centuries is something of a historical aberration, and, of course, there is plenty of slavery left in the world today. It is always easy to reinvent it.

Similarly, the idea of democracy is a non-Biblical concept. Every culture in the Bible is top-down authoritative, with the possible exception of anarchy in the book of Judges.

Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

I think this is an interesting exception, though, not an instance of a major theme in the OT. And if it's a rebuke to tribalism, then God must be rebuking himself, as he himself is the author of the exceptionalism.

I was asked what I thought was the most important counter-tribalism example, other shippies have provided other examples as well. While Jonah is the clearest and most direct rebuke to tribalism, as others have noted, it is a consistent theme that is found elsewhere in the OT-- often existing side-by-side with the blatant and troubling tribalism. I agree that's troubling and makes for some tortured hermeneutics if we are to treat every OT text the same. Which is why most of us, regardless of what our stated beliefs about inspiration might be, inevitably end up being somewhat selective, especially re OT texts. In an earlier text I proffered my own rubric-- not that I'm all that comfortable with it, simply that it's the best I can see at this point. It is interesting, though, that if Jonah can be dated as much later than Joshua, it would fit my paradigm.

[ 10. June 2015, 14:59: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076

 - Posted      Profile for Gwai   Email Gwai   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd agree that be kind to strangers qualifies pretty well as a theme. For one thing, look how many books of the OT say almost word for word "Be kind to strangers for you were a stranger in Egypt." I'm seeing it in Deuteronomy, Exodus, and Leviticus. Also just look at how many passages tell the Israelites to care for widows (who are excluded from society by the loss of their man) or not to oppress orphans, travellers, or the poor.

--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.


Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I'd agree that be kind to strangers qualifies pretty well as a theme. For one thing, look how many books of the OT say almost word for word "Be kind to strangers for you were a stranger in Egypt." I'm seeing it in Deuteronomy, Exodus, and Leviticus. Also just look at how many passages tell the Israelites to care for widows (who are excluded from society by the loss of their man) or not to oppress orphans, travellers, or the poor.

Exactly. The fact that those same books include these very tribalistic decrees is troubling, absolutely-- and a challenge to our hermeneutics/ assumptions about inspiration. But shouldn't be allowed to drown out this other dominant theme-- one that becomes the primary theme when you get to the NT.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
GCabot
Shipmate
# 18074

 - Posted      Profile for GCabot   Email GCabot   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Similarly, the idea of democracy is a non-Biblical concept. Every culture in the Bible is top-down authoritative, with the possible exception of anarchy in the book of Judges.

During the era of the Biblical judges, Israel was not really an anarchy. There are a number of conceptions of anarchy, but generally it would be the absence of recognized leaders/government. In ancient Israel, there was no complete absence of government. Rather, it can be described as a confederation of the twelve tribes, wherein each tribe governed its own affairs. If we want to discuss Israel as a single entity, there is actually a specific term to describe the governmental structure during this period - "kritarchy," which literally means "rule of judges."
Posts: 285 | From: The Heav'n Rescued Land | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GCabot:
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Similarly, the idea of democracy is a non-Biblical concept. Every culture in the Bible is top-down authoritative, with the possible exception of anarchy in the book of Judges.

During the era of the Biblical judges, Israel was not really an anarchy. There are a number of conceptions of anarchy, but generally it would be the absence of recognized leaders/government. In ancient Israel, there was no complete absence of government. Rather, it can be described as a confederation of the twelve tribes, wherein each tribe governed its own affairs. If we want to discuss Israel as a single entity, there is actually a specific term to describe the governmental structure during this period - "kritarchy," which literally means "rule of judges."
You may want to describe it that way, but HCH is quite correct that Judges very much describes it as anarchy, as seen in multiple verses in almost every chapter of the book saying:

quote:
In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit. (Judges 17:6, 21:25, etc etc)
That sounds very much to me like the author is trying to say "anarchy".

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

I think this is an interesting exception, though, not an instance of a major theme in the OT. And if it's a rebuke to tribalism, then God must be rebuking himself, as he himself is the author of the exceptionalism.

I was asked what I thought was the most important counter-tribalism example, other shippies have provided other examples as well.
So far we've got Jonah and (as Brenda and Gwai note) some special consideration for "strangers". The latter references are often specifically "who live among you" and typically grouped with widows and orphans. This makes me wonder if "strangers" may often some kind of class of hard luck cases - exiles from neighboring tribes, perhaps. There seems to be an air of charity for the impoverished, which is commendable as far as it goes, but I don't see any signs that this extends to general feelings of brotherly love for foreigners per se.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
GCabot
Shipmate
# 18074

 - Posted      Profile for GCabot   Email GCabot   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit. (Judges 17:6, 21:25, etc etc)
That sounds very much to me like the author is trying to say "anarchy".
You have to read the entire verse in context. The statement "everyone did as he saw fit" is stated in the framework of "Israel had no king." Therefore the best way to interpret "everyone did as he saw fit" is as merely another way of stating that there was no overarching regular authority for all of Israel. This should not be extended to implicate that Israel was in a state of anarchy.

We know that each of the tribes had some sort of internal governance - the chiefs of each tribe are explicitly named in Numbers 34:16-29 for example. Furthermore, the judges themselves contradict the idea that there was anarchy, as all of the tribes submitted to the authority of a single individual in times of necessity. There is ample evidence to show that there was common acceptance of certain forms of authority, albeit very devolved, rather than radical individualism or complete chaos.

--------------------
The child that is born unto us is more than a prophet; for this is he of whom the Savior saith: "Among them that are born of woman, there hath not risen one greater than John the Baptist."

Posts: 285 | From: The Heav'n Rescued Land | Registered: Apr 2014  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

I think this is an interesting exception, though, not an instance of a major theme in the OT. And if it's a rebuke to tribalism, then God must be rebuking himself, as he himself is the author of the exceptionalism.

I was asked what I thought was the most important counter-tribalism example, other shippies have provided other examples as well.
So far we've got Jonah and (as Brenda and Gwai note) some special consideration for "strangers". The latter references are often specifically "who live among you" and typically grouped with widows and orphans. This makes me wonder if "strangers" may often some kind of class of hard luck cases - exiles from neighboring tribes, perhaps. There seems to be an air of charity for the impoverished, which is commendable as far as it goes, but I don't see any signs that this extends to general feelings of brotherly love for foreigners per se.
Let's start with the very essence of the exclusivity/ tribalism-- the Abrahamic covenant which first sets up Israel as the chosen people. Even there the text indicates that the purpose of Israel's special status is to bless all the nations of the world:

quote:
Gen. 12:2 “I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you; I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
Gen. 12:3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”



--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313

 - Posted      Profile for HCH   Email HCH   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I will concede that "anarchy" may be too strong a term. I have known people who asserted that in the time of Judges, the actual government was theocracy, rule by religious leaders.

As I understand it, the individual judges themselves were leaders in times of emergency (e.g., Gideon) and did not exert civil authority after the end of the emergency. Some of them do seem to fit the term "anarchy"; I am thinking of Samson. In any case, they were not democratically chosen leaders, which was my point.

I apologize for raising a side issue.

Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418

 - Posted      Profile for Bibliophile     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:


And I'm with Dave W on this one. How exactly do you have a concept of slavery without having a concept of freedom?

Easy. There is no concept of freedom as a separate thing, that is a desirable good for all. Freedom is good for me. And, possibly, for my friends/relatives/tribesmen. It is not good for you. What is good for you is being my slave, so that I get my wood hewn and my water drawn.
You can see this perfectly clearly in the OT. We hated being slaves in Egypt, it was nasty building pyramids. But my slave, here and now? Totally good, fetch me another brewski, hon.

How free is our own 'free' society? Chattel slavery has thankfully now been banned but let us not forget why it was banned. It was banned because it was a form of involuntary servitude unsuited to a modern economy. The reality of involuntary servitude for huge number of 'free' people in one form or another remains.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Let's start with the very essence of the exclusivity/ tribalism-- the Abrahamic covenant which first sets up Israel as the chosen people. Even there the text indicates that the purpose of Israel's special status is to bless all the nations of the world:

quote:
Gen. 12:2 “I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you; I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
Gen. 12:3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”


Well, not quite front and center, I'd say. Israel will be great, Israel will be blessed, Israel's name will be great, Israel's friends will be blessed, Israel's enemies will be cursed. And everyone else will be blessed - through Israel.

You know, I don't think I ever quite understood just how they were supposed to be a blessing to everyone else. In OT terms alone, I mean - I realize that Christians see Christ as the fulfillment of many OT claims and predictions. In the interim, though, was there some way this transitive blessing of all peoples on earth manifested itself, would you say?

Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I wouldn't presume to speak for the Lord on the matter. My point was that, from the very beginning, the language of exclusivity was couched in an inclusive purpose-- that "love your neighbor" is there in the most central, founding element of the OT. The fact that the inclusive aspect was rarely if ever practiced in an inclusive way probably has to do with the innate tribalism of humans in general.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I wouldn't presume to speak for the Lord on the matter.

That's probably wise (though it does close off some interesting career opportunities.) But actually I was wondering if you happened to know of any standard or traditional interpretations of what this was believed to be a reference to (other than eventual salvation through Christ.)
quote:
My point was that, from the very beginning, the language of exclusivity was couched in an inclusive purpose-- that "love your neighbor" is there in the most central, founding element of the OT. The fact that the inclusive aspect was rarely if ever practiced in an inclusive way probably has to do with the innate tribalism of humans in general.

I guess that's the sticking point - to my eye the elevation of Israel over everyone else in the world (including in the passage you quote) combined with their frequent and God-sanctioned belligerence towards their neighbors, far and away dominates any consideration for the other. I understand the view that the lack of inclusivity (and other virtues) can be ascribed to human fallibility, but I think efforts to separate God from some of the things he seems to be saying or doing in the OT can result in some pretty strained readings of the text. (Presumably one's willingness to accept interpretations more or less charitable towards God depends a lot on what other independent reasons one has to believe in him, or not.)
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I guess that's the sticking point - to my eye the elevation of Israel over everyone else in the world (including in the passage you quote) combined with their frequent and God-sanctioned belligerence towards their neighbors, far and away dominates any consideration for the other. I understand the view that the lack of inclusivity (and other virtues) can be ascribed to human fallibility, but I think efforts to separate God from some of the things he seems to be saying or doing in the OT can result in some pretty strained readings of the text. (Presumably one's willingness to accept interpretations more or less charitable towards God depends a lot on what other independent reasons one has to believe in him, or not.)

Totally agree-- as I said upthread. I'm just making the point that there IS this dominant theme of inclusivity/ love for "others"-- existing often side-by-side (as here) with the egregious and sometimes deadly exclusivity/tribalism. I'm not trying to excuse it, including God's hand in it. Just putting both sides on the table.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The 0.1%, absent in ALL other contemporary cultures, dominates the 110% by transcending it.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bibliophile:
How free is our own 'free' society? Chattel slavery has thankfully now been banned but let us not forget why it was banned. It was banned because it was a form of involuntary servitude unsuited to a modern economy. The reality of involuntary servitude for huge number of 'free' people in one form or another remains.

I don't think that's quite correct. It was abolished because some people were eventually convinced it was wrong for one person to claim to own another. There were plenty of people who went to war to retain it. A key reason for their resistance to something which to us now looks ethically self-evident, because there was a lot of money at stake. It made sense to own slaves rather than employ workers.

If one takes the ethical imperative away, slavery is quite capable of reappearing, as with the millions of state slaves in Russia during the 1930s and 40s.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think we have to distinguish between slavery, and work.
We all have to work, because Fall of Adam, by the sweat of your brow shall you earn your bread, Paul making tents, etc. We contemplate, say, a layabout son in front of the TV 20 hours a day, clutching the remote, playing video games and eating pizza, and we know this is not right. Get out there, you lazy bum, and get a job!
OTOH we can also easily perceive the evil of slavery. The Roman who can rape his slave, sell her babies into slavery, cut her hair once a year for sale to the wigmakers, and dump her in the gutter when she's no longer fertile, this is inarguably wrong.
But if you peel out all the bad stuff about the Roman slave -- if you draw a border between work and slavery -- then work must be OK. (It has to be, otherwise per St. Paul we starve.) The nature and permeability of this border is under constant negotiation and debate, of course. (Everything from unduly sexy women scientists to minimum wage law here.)

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

 - Posted      Profile for Komensky   Email Komensky   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Since it's been brought up, and people are running with it, I'll say what I've said elsewhere. The OT law never claims to be a statement of God's perfect will for human beings.

Someone else seems to think differently:Matthew 5:18

[code]

[ 12. June 2015, 15:49: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
First: (and cheapest): He isn't calling it perfect there, just permanent. Second, and more to the point--when we say "Law," we may mean the moral Law, which is what I believe he's referring to here; or we may mean the whole kit-and-caboodle, including the bit about how to properly take a dump (hint: involves a shovel) as well as cooking rules and things not to do to your beard. Are you really suggesting that that part was intended to be eternal?

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools