There's a commandment that states thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife is there not?
Well the original commandment stated "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, property, or slaves.
Slaves.
The original Commandment.
How can the bible say this? The bible, the good book.
So, Mr. Lincoln, what's worse avoiding the topic of slavery in the declaration of independence, or the blunt statement of Thou shalt not...... slaves?
What do you think? Hiding the word, or showing it front and center?
Ps. I saw this on a program called bibles mysteries or something like that. Quite interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm not sure I'm getting exactly at what you mean David, but I think that on touchy topics like that it's better to just get it over with and say what you mean. That way there is no misunderstanding and no ambiguous sidestepping. Everyone is on the same page which is a good place to start.
ReplyDeleteAlso, are you questioning the Bible's blunt usage of the word slave? I mean that's what they were called weren't they? Slavery was only observed as an immoral system recently and is still in use in parts of the world today. Slavery was a part of everyday life during the time the Bible was written. I'm guessing that the only reason that the writers of the declaration sidestepped the word was because that time was just around when slavery was beginning to be viewed as wrong.
Ah, I see what David is saying. Because the original text listed "slaves" in the Commandment, Lincoln is essentially a hypocrite and his speech in our prior prompt is equally hypocritical. Maybe you mean something milder?
ReplyDeleteJefferson "sidestepped" the word because he was a slave owner. Carina is right; ever heard of sex slaves? Watch that movie "Taken."
So, no, David, Lincoln probably would not be disappointed, since abolition was the right path and the only path mankind could take.