epic solution: just make humans go extinct
now you won’t have to see anything you don’t like, because you don’t exist.
1 Like
i do want to make some corrections, now i do like debates however pretty sure i saw this exact topic in politics or political groups and i rlly hate politics as right now it doesnt promote any critical thinking or good debating skill and i do not want this thing to turn into an mess
no, we are judging them by their morals, during these times they had:
- natural slave (the view that some people are naturally born as slaves), even if u were enslave you wouldnt suddenly become anti-slavery, instead you would believe ur enslavers are born as natural slaves
- women being inferior than men
- honor and shame, honor challenges would be common, that why you see the way people talk, for example you might see “isnt that x that is daughter of y?”, that so u dont take honor away from the person that above you, even numbers were used to give honor and shame and honor and shame defined what is good and evil, if it brought u honor and the community at large consider it as homor bringing, then the action was good
- order > chaos, that is way more complex, isnt good and evil, if the king of an land did a crime, would be better for him to remain king so order remains, the ancient people would see our society as a failure bc we can freely revolt, same for jobs, if u had a shameful and/or sinful job, would be a worse sin to leave it due to bringing chaos
their morality depended on these stuff, which themself gave birth to more ideas, they didnt do stuff bc they were good
however this is one where even if the topic goes into a messy stuff, i can still make it to go back on the rails
note some quotes might be too long and so i will summirize them but im willing to dm anyone the full qoutes
this ended up being way bigger than i expected
“Scholars who cited Aristotle as justification for viewing women as biologically inferior had to reckon with profound ambivalences within the Bible itself. The sanction given husbands to rule over their wives was not the only perspective provided by scripture on relations between the two sexes.” (pg 274) -Dominion how the christian revolution remade the world
Thomas Aquinas—great admirer of Aristotle though he was—had struggled to square the assumption that a woman was merely a defective version of a man with the insistence in Genesis that both had been divinely crafted for precise and specific purposes. Eve’s body, ‘ordained as it was by nature for the purposes of generation’, was no less the creation of God, ‘who is the universal author of nature’, than Adam’s had been,” The implications of this for the understanding of the divine were too glaring to be ignored. ‘But you, Jesus, good lord, are you not also a mother?’ Anselm had asked. ‘Are you not that mother who, like a hen, collects her chickens under wings? Truly, master, you are a mother.’’ Abbots, even as they lived their lives in chastity, might not hesitate to compare themselves to a nursing woman, breasts filled with ‘the milk of doctrine’? It was no shame for a priest to talk of himself in such a manner—for the feminine as well as the masculine was a reflection of the divine. God the Father was also a mother (pg.274-275) -same book
pages 282 and 283 also talk about how christianity remade marriage, it was viewed as a sacrament so the submission had to be mutual, equal, men had to marry 1 woman and men had to be loyal, marriage has been seen as a big self denial act, and popes were authorized to marry women if they agreed and to marry them even without the family consent, it was based on love and choice, something that women didnt have
“But the general thesis of Christian Human Rights is that through this lost and misremembered transwar era, it is equally if not more viable to regard human rights as a project of the Christian right, not the secular left” christian human rights (8)
the entire chapter of women rights from the book “christianity and human rights” (seriously i did not expect so much information that it would make it impossible to qoute from it)
the Ephesians verse starts at verse 21, “submit toone another out of reverence for Christ”, then after verse 24 it goes to men which bassically says to love their wife as christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, it continues to describe the high standard men are to be hold by, verse 30 ends with “for we are members of his body”
to also qoute from the book “Honor, Patronage. Kinship & purity. Unlocking new testament culture”, “This is something that Paul brings out forcefully in Ephesians v5:21, the preface to the entire household code: “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Mutual love , unity, cooperation for one another’s good, putting the interests of the other ahead of one’s own–all these form of the relational context in which these household codes are to be enacted and the interpretive lens through which they are to be understood and applied” (pg 231)
Corinthians 14:15, there is literally nothing about women or rights, its just Paul praying
Timothy 2:11-12 has some good arguments that we didnt understand it and that its a response to what timothy sees, however i havent look too much into that so i will take a theological response, first we know of Junia the apostle and Phoebe a deacon, when a church tries to say that women should remain silent, Paul ask them if suddenly they are the one with the holy spirit in, so there is much more to this verse, i would argue that the reason why that is, is more theological, as christ being the body of the church and the husband of the church, the church should be a window to heaven and the kingdoom of good therefore we should be as accurate as possible, we also have to aknowledge that eventually there will be a kingdoom of priest and preistes, women arent left out
sure there might had been some good stuff, codexes (books) or science in the early stages, stuff that christianity didnt invent but help to populize, however christianity still created our current morals
Christians human rights talks about how christianity was essential for human rights and how it drew nearly everything from christianity for morality and moral equality (pg 5 and 8) and how that human rights became at enlightement is harder and harder to sustain (page 52), dominion talks about how humanist came from christianity (page 539), our morals, from equality to anti slavery to human worth come from christianity
We literally had a council (nicaea) to put the christian belief written to combat airinism, every christian agrees on the core christianity, i would even say that 99% of the stuff are universily agree by christianity
ya i will be honest i dont get ur last point
3 Likes
can i ask how this is related to their opinion on breasts though, i don’t see the connection
also what is this saying? i can’t understand it
well i did bring christianity bc its the moral value we use, im not rlly a fan of these more political sided debates, even if it has some philosphy (since that a moral question), but he did made a whole section about christianity which i have way more experience
ya that a big difference between us and the ancient world as he claims that isnt fair to judge them based of their moral, i understood it as its due to external sources, i disagree, they made these morals and they are intrinsic and one of these stuff was their order and chaos system, if a woman was to work somewhere req them to be topless or just known for that, leaving that, even if moraly correct, it would be seen as a bad thing, as bad a a sin or crime for them, since that would cause chaos, so my claim is that due to this and other stuff, we shouldnt look at the ancient people morals since their morals were depended on flawed things
This has gotten too sophisticated for my taste
was gamehero’s example from egypt a job requiring her to show her breasts? i thought it was just a style of dress
i don’t think the purpose was to try and adopt the morals of the past, just to see if topless women have always been stigmatised as they are today. something like that isn’t really related to their views on things like slavery i would think, though i could be wrong
well that can go for day to day life not just jobs, if a culture or community had some expectation for people to behaive in a specific way or to dress in a way, you would do that to keep order, even if it wasnt a moral thing, this is also a moral question
i said that to give the full effect of the point since that wasnt just about topless women but also about equality
kinda same but i mean my post asked for an explanation
Islam is Middle East though?
Just checked, all of them have origins there.
You’re cooked (literally)
1 Like
Yes, however, it is still more prominent in the western world than Hinduism or Buddhism
Or are we going to call both of those western religions too, as you can get to eastern Asia by going far enough west?
“hamburgers and fries are obviously american cause we’re the most notorious for them!!” ahh logic
this topic is weird and the people in it are even more strange im never gonna understand how it went from tits to “oh yeah religion is evil and people in history are fools!!” make it make sense
Islam? I get your argument for Christianity, but Islam? Also what’re you yapping about going “far enough west”. I also checked and Judaism isn’t that big compared to Christianity either (at least in America). Both Islam and Judaism I’d argue are still mainly Middle East religions, not Western.
how did ts turn into a religion debate again
because discussions about the history of oppression usually involve religion
bc most people barely know anything about religion
1 Like
yeahhhh but dont you think this topic is likely to get a little heated
especially if a certain italian side dish joins in
man the topic already ask a moral question that is also a political thing, im surprise it didnt get closed yet
I’m surprised this topic still exists
Those forumers casually ignoring my point to argue about geographical terms: