Quote:
Originally posted by DoggyStyle82:
That is a poor example. This "country" has never taught that Blacks were destined to be slaves. Some individuals, yes, some churches, yes, but never this country or the Bible. The Bible, nor the books of Moses ever states that Ham or his descendants were cursed with Blackness. There is a companion to the Torah (not the Torah itself), that states that the Hamitic curse led Africans to have dark skin, red eyes, and elongated penises. The actual Hamitic curse was place on Canaan, Ham's grandson, and it was not placed by God, but by Noah, therefore, it is not the Word of God that was incorrect, but how a corrupt mankind chose to misuse the Word for nefarious purposes. Please be advised that what you have described are man's selfish interpretation and not what the word says.
|
I must stand by the statement that this country taught that Blacks were destined to be slaves. While we may find examples of churches, or individuals, etc. who did not believe this, the fact is that this ethos was espoused from every segment of White society. It was this premise that laid the groundwork for the idea that Blacks were "property" and not human, and later that they were "3/5 human" and not whole. St. Claire Drakes book "Black Folk Here and There V I&II" discusses the horrific impact this ideology (and theology) had on Blacks and Whites in great detail.
I think you actually stated my point, that the scriptures never state that Blacks were destined to be servants by divine curse. But an entire people's culture, lives, and history were negatively effected (a?) by mal-interpretation. That is why it is soo important to make sure of what it is you are reading as God's Word. (hint, hint, grab a concordance)
Quote:
|
Which is what you are seeming to do, trying to change the Word to suit your needs (by saying that it is invalid). While some translations may be grammatically incorrect, the King James version has proven to be thematically and theologically correct when compared to the original Hebrew and Aramaic.
|
I think if you read my original post (and you don't have to read it all that carefully, I think I was fairly obvious for my reverence for the Bible) you will not find one statement that claims that I feel the Word is invalid, or that I tried to change it around.
Simply that it is important to understand what we are reading. The Bible says to "love thy neighbor as thy self" right? But don't you think it is important to understand which love the Word was speaking of? Was it eros love, phileo love, agape love? God forbid we were to go around "eros" loving all of our neighbors!
A fairly simple example, yes, but imagine that on a larger scale. All because we failed to receive correct interpretation from one language to the next.
A basic problem (and there were many) in the US issue w/ China over the spy plane was that we were using the wrong type of "sorry". They wanted us to say "sorry" (real basic paraphrase, but you'll see the point, I hope) and we said "sorry". But the "sorry" we used did not convey the "sorry" that they wanted to hear. I remember one reporter claiming that there were over 9 types of "sorry" in their language, and all conveyed a different type of remorse. So the interpretation of a thing from one language to the next is
very, VERY important.
And while the King James may be thematically or theologically correct, it is in the practical application that it is considered the most poorly translated. We as humans draw our practical applications of the Word, only partially from theme's or theology. In situations like discussing the role of women in church, I as a woman, think it is very important to make sure we are as clear as possible w/ regards to what the Spirit was saying. As seen in the example about slavery, I for one can not trust "the goodnes of MEN'S" hearts to lead in this area. So I suggest we all make our conconrdance our best friend. Sorry so long, but there were a lot of points to address.
[This message has been edited by 1 Woman of Virtue (edited June 11, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by 1 Woman of Virtue (edited June 11, 2001).]