It doesn't what? be clear ,
Have Human Religions Evolved and If So How?
- Thread starter joepistole
- Start date
It doesn't what? be clear ,
You know The Israelite were in slavery and they were expected not keek people in bundage, that is one of the reason jubilee .
My post wasn't clear enough for you? Contrary to your assertion the Torah doesn't "teaches" anyone against slavery. Slavery was a well established practice in Judaism. The Torah, along with other Jewish texts contain a set of laws regulating the treatment of slaves.
The Jewish Jubilee isn't about slavery. It's about forgiveness, kindness, and generosity. It's a celebration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_slavery
Forgiveness, means forgive the debt, a slave is a debtor .
Did Jews obey God's commandment ?
That doesn't change a thing comrade. Jewish law, the Torah, endorsed slave ownership. A slave isn't a debtor. A slave is a slave. A slave is property.
The one part I know . I can endorse myself into slavery if I owe you money but you have to discount my labor into paying my debt. At jubilee I am set free of debt and I am no longer your slave .
Does Not that how it works as we get indebt they foreclose us , and we are continuously in debt.
No, that's not how it works. You are confusing indentured servitude with slavery. Slaves are property, like a horse, cow, pig, or house.
Which kind? Indentured servitude of fellow Jews for debt, or does it include every kind of captive? What about the Nubian concubines of the king?
(Though, I suppose, after 49 years, he wouldn't want them anyway and setting them "free" would be an easy way out of supporting the grandmothers of his illegitimate kids.)
Then why did they do it, and Jesus didn't disagree?
I am not sure if you can find written that in the gospels > I know Saul . ( Paul ) mentioned as ( slaves obey your masters )
It's in there. Jewish law explained what was permissible in disciplining one's slaves.
The adoption of pagan Holy Days as the dates of Christian religious rites and rituals is an acquired characteristic which has been inherited by subsequent divisions and sectarian splittings of Christianity: Lamarckian evolution.
The original communist economic organization of Christian communities, with the hard work attendant upon individual poverty and the charity that maintains individual poverty among the hardworking as signs of virtue, appears to have generated its opposite, a theology in which God rewards the faithful and pious individually with material wealth - and the two synthesized in a theology in which God rewards the hardworking with material wealth in order to put its distribution and employment in the hands of the pious and faithful: Hegelian evolution.
That made moneylending at interest, and then even at compound interest, possible for Christians - it had been forbidden for a thousand years. It is still forbidden for Muslims, whose religion took a different evolutionary path. A significant difference, no?
And so forth. Darwinian evolution is not the only possible pattern.
Last edited:
I didn't think it was. And your take is interesting.... though I'm not sure those examples demonstrate the evolution of religion itself. Seems to me more a matter of adapting institutions and their rules to the society in which they operate. Christianity couldn't have survived the industrial revolution without allowing capitalist investment. But something similar obtained in ancient Athens and other commerce-oriented civilizations, before Christianity.
I believe interest charges on loan started about 1000 AD during the crusades by the knits defending the pilgrims visiting the holy land
Not at all. It comes with civilization. The more commerce and trade a nation has, the more it relies on borrowing.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/...t-rates/3000-b-c-500-a-d-the-ancient-economy/
I doubt religion plays a substantial role, other than Jehovah forbidding Jews to lend at usurious interest to other Jews - but not to gentiles. The nobility in medieval Europe considered business and finance beneath their dignity, while they spent money like crazy on their wars and weddings, and didn't promote the economic development of their own nations. That's how the Rothschilds came to banking prominence, and the people of England and France and the German duchies bore a huge tax burden.
When the system became overloaded with debt, some king would declare a purge on the Jews and seize their property. That, too, was financial persecution, disguised as religious, to sell it to the masses; similarly, many of the accused "witches" and "necromancers" had property that a n archbishop or a duke wanted.
The Vatican itself didn't mind getting its hand dirty on some lucre. https://www.worldfinance.com/banking/a-history-of-corruption-in-the-vatican-bank
That's a cute spin on those infamous slaughter-fests.
Last edited: