(July 23, 2021 at 11:55 pm)Angrboda Wrote: That was rather incoherent. It doesn't mean that it's the source of the belief, but that also doesn't mean that it isn't. Your post is nothing but a ramble of nonsequiturs.I apologize it was incoherent this’ll be my last attempt to clarify before some sleep.
I don’t believe that people CAN be property due to my definition of property. This isn’t about whether biblical exegesis promotes slavery or misogyny, which I’m certain many people here believe.
Let’s say I do believe in slavery for the sake of argument. I don’t believe slaves could be considered property. Less than, second class, a whipping post, bad people sure… but not property because they have their own will.
Back to the post, under this scenario, if I were an advocate for slavery I could use many Historical references and even a scripture to justify that belief. That justification isn’t the source of my belief, but it does bolster the belief from my perspective. The source of the belief isn’t the same as the justification and the justification has little to do with the source. I hope that makes more sense.night
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari