Jesus versus Buddhism saying.

AstralProjectee

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows." Maybe not necessarily beaten with many blows but suffer a lot more.

Thanks.

Lady_Alison

Edit and put this is comparitive religion

Dakini

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows." Maybe not necessarily beaten with many blows but suffer a lot more.

I have no idea what this means. Context, please? Can anyone explain this?

Lady_Alison

Parables are wonderful to decipher...in this story one of the interpretations given is that a servant of his master, who understands his master's will but willfully goes against it will be chastised severely.

A servant who was ignorant of his master's will, will be only chastised lightly.

In the verses prior it says that a servant who does the will of his master will be given more and more...but warns ...the servant should behave good even when the master is not are home.

It warns about irresponsibility, whether in a form of ignorance, willful disobedience, or carelessness.

Loyalty and duty are important...those who behave prudently, right deeds, good action for the sake of others will be given more to distribute to others...such as a wise Buddhist feeding a person who hungers for spirituality..

Also, the verse talks about testing the servant, to find his worth...is he trustworthy, loyal, prudent, compassionate, quick to anger, irresponsible, drunkard, glutton?

With a blessing that more will be give to those who act in accordance with the good.

Dakini

It seems like it's talking about intention and the different karma that will result from similar acts that have different intent. For example, if the servant willfully transgresses his master's will, he/she gets a more severe punishment than if the transgression occurs due to ignorance or accident, i.e. if there's no volition behind the act.

Thanks.

Lady_Alison

Yes, karma and intention has much to do with it and I over looked that within...this is why I enjoy deciphering parables with people who have other faiths...they can give me new eyes.

Lady_Alison

People who act out of ignorance only have a slight chastisement...perhaps they suffer from the karma that came about their bad deeds and now can remedy it...as it is only light suffering compare to a person who has overcome his ignorance and is entrusted with the "livelihood" of others.

That makes sender...with more strenght comes more responsability...strength is used to help the weak.

WallyB

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows."

no, this does not hold true in Buddhism...it is simply too violent & too servile...it is rubbish

Lady_Alison

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows."

no, this does not hold true in Buddhism...it is simply too violent & too servile...it is rubbish

Compassion in action as well as the 8fp are done in service to others. Suffering is a form of violence. Please explain your statement...parables are riddles to be taken apart and deciphered...they are ancient, older than your surname is...please be mindful. . . Or at the very least explain your position instead of calling it rubbish...

Dakini

Actually, the lesson about intention making a difference in the consequences to one's actions does apply to Buddhism.

WallyB

it is rubbish...let it go...forget it...buddha did not teach in parables....suffering is not a form of violence....suffering is a cry for help & cessation

Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork...

Buddha

Lady_Alison

No, you have no power here. Op asked a question and you are trying to diminish it's importance and validity..if not in Buddhism than definately comparative studies...

Lady_Alison

@wallyb atleast explain why you think the entire parable is "rubbish " according to your INTERPRETATION and obviously myopic understanding...clearly you did not bother to read it.

WallyB

the OP asked does it hold true in Buddhism...i disagreed...Buddha encouraged self-reliance. Buddha gave instruction to a student who went off & practised the instruction...the student succeeds or fails based on their own efforts...the Buddha does not violently punish his students...Buddha said if a student does not practise he "kills the student" by keeping silence towards the student

vinlyn

...buddha did not teach in parables...

He certainly did teach in parables.

Lady_Alison

the OP asked does it hold true in Buddhism...i disagreed

THEN SAY, "I DISAGREE "...that I get. But you called it rubbish, violent and servile...I asked why. My thought is that you gave the parable a cursory look at best and said: "nah! "

Wisdom is hidden...you know this better than most, I have read your insightful posts...so I was amazed at your response.

WallyB

Wisdom is hidden...you know this better than most, I have read your insightful posts...so I was amazed at your response.

i disagree

in Buddhism, wisdom is not something "hidden"...wisdom is overt & follows natural truth

karma is visible...the results of karma are visible to all of us...everyday, we can witness for ourselves the sufferings & joys of humanity & their causes

the truth of nature is visible...all things are subject to birth, aging, illness, death (impermanence)...and nothing can be possessed or owned (as 'mine')

dhamma truth is seen in a leaf falling off a tree

Lady_Alison

the OP asked does it hold true in Buddhism...i disagreed...Buddha encouraged self-reliance. Buddha gave instruction to a student who went off & practised the instruction...the student succeeds or fails based on their own efforts...the Buddha does not violently punish his students...Buddha said if a student does not practise he "kills the student" by keeping silence towards the student

What does this have to do with the retelling of a parable said by a Jew to a community who needed to understand in layman's terms. The master, Stewart, and servant roles existed in the first century...people wore chattels and were punished for going against their masters or employers. We are not looking at the literal interpretation...but the spiritual.

Buddha was pre christ...it is probable that his teachings were known in Jerusalem.

We could also compare some Socrates and Aristotle too. What does it matter if it facilitates understanding.

WallyB

ok...in our love for punishment, violence & parables, what about this?

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Sumbhas. Now there is a Sumbhan town named Sedaka. There the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Monks!"

"Yes, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "Suppose, monks, that a large crowd of people comes thronging together, saying, 'The beauty queen! The beauty queen!' And suppose that the beauty queen is highly accomplished at singing & dancing, so that an even greater crowd comes thronging, saying, 'The beauty queen is singing! The beauty queen is dancing!' Then a man comes along, desiring life & shrinking from death, desiring pleasure & abhorring pain. They say to him, 'Now look here, mister. You must take this bowl filled to the brim with oil and carry it on your head in between the great crowd & the beauty queen. A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.' Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside?"

"No, lord."

"I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.020.than.html

Lady_Alison

Wisdom is earned through understanding and experience...it is natural but must be sought...

That is what I mean by wisdom, it is subtle...@vinlyn is going to get me a parable too. Their is wisdom in parables...but in the interpretation.

Lady_Alison

Love of PARABLES, STOP TWISTING WORDS. I'M DONE...this went off track and no longer about op.

ok...in our love for punishment & violence, what about this?

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Sumbhas. Now there is a Sumbhan town named Sedaka. There the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Monks!"

"Yes, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "Suppose, monks, that a large crowd of people comes thronging together, saying, 'The beauty queen! The beauty queen!' And suppose that the beauty queen is highly accomplished at singing & dancing, so that an even greater crowd comes thronging, saying, 'The beauty queen is singing! The beauty queen is dancing!' Then a man comes along, desiring life & shrinking from death, desiring pleasure & abhorring pain. They say to him, 'Now look here, mister. You must take this bowl filled to the brim with oil and carry it on your head in between the great crowd & the beauty queen. A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.' Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside?"

"No, lord."

"I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.020.than.html

WallyB

He certainly did teach in parables.

occasionally...rarely....the essence of his teaching was not in parables nor were his parables "riddles" that required intense reflection....Buddha taught with similes and metaphors rather than "parables"....

you would need to provide evidence that Buddha taught in parables...and then weigh up the proportion of parables to the proportions of expositions of natural truth

Lady_Alison

Sorry op...if you want, you can pm me. I hope you are doing well in life and health.

Good night, wallyb. I tried!

WallyB

Wisdom is earned through understanding and experience...

the "wisdom" you are referring to appears to be about how to relate to people..."feminine wisdom", which is not really related to Buddha wisdom

Buddha taught:

And what is the faculty of wisdom? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with discernment of arising & passing away — noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it has come to be: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of wisdom.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html

Lady_Alison

What you said above is interesting but off topic. I wouldn't mind you sending a link to me or starting a different thread. I'm going to bed and I will wait for op to post. Good night, ty, btw.

Lady_Alison

Night !

vinlyn

He certainly did teach in parables.

occasionally...rarely....the essence of his teaching was not in parables nor were his parables "riddles" that required intense reflection....Buddha taught with similes and metaphors rather than "parables"....

you would need to provide evidence that Buddha taught in parables...and then weigh up the proportion of parables to the proportions of expositions of natural truth

Definition of parable: "A parable is a succinct story, in prose or verse, which illustrates one or more instructive principles, or lessons, or (sometimes) a normative principle."

Good example -- the boat crossing river parable. Pretty familiar to any Buddhist.

WallyB

Good example -- the boat crossing river parable. Pretty familiar to any Buddhist.

it is a simile used together with an actual straightforward teaching. it is not a mysterious parable with a hidden meaning

eg.

(a) actual teaching: dhamma is used for crossing to Nibbana and not for clinging

(b) simile: when cross a river with a boat, don't carry the boat on your head after crossing

Buddha used simile as an explanatory principle rather than a riddle & secret teaching

parables are "secret teachings"

13. "I shall show you, monks, the Teaching's similitude to a raft: as having the purpose of crossing over, not the purpose of being clung to. Listen, monks, and heed well what I shall say" — "Yes, Lord," replied the monks. and the Blessed One spoke thus:

"Suppose, monks, there is a man journeying on a road and he sees a vast expanse of water of which this shore is perilous and fearful, while the other shore is safe and free from danger. But there is no boat for crossing nor is there a bridge for going over from this side to the other. So the man thinks: 'This is a vast expanse of water; and this shore is perilous and fearful, but the other shore is safe and free from danger. There is, however, no boat here for crossing, nor a bridge for going over from this side to the other. Suppose I gather reeds, sticks, branches and foliage, and bind them into a raft.' Now that man collects reeds, sticks, branches and foliage, and binds them into a raft. Carried by that raft, laboring with hands and feet, he safely crosses over to the other shore. Having crossed and arrived at the other shore, he thinks: 'This raft, indeed, has been very helpful to me. Carried by it, laboring with hands and feet, I got safely across to the other shore. Should I not lift this raft on my head or put it on my shoulders, and go where I like?'

"What do you think about it, O monks? Will this man by acting thus, do what should be done with a raft?" — "No, Lord" — "How then, monks, would he be doing what ought to be done with a raft? Here, monks, having got across and arrived at the other shore, the man thinks: 'This raft, indeed, has been very helpful to me. Carried by it, and laboring with hands and feet, I got safely across to the other shore. Should I not pull it up now to the dry land or let it float in the water, and then go as I please?' By acting thus, monks, would that man do what should be done with a raft.

"In the same way, monks, have I shown to you the Teaching's similitude to a raft: as having the purpose of crossing over, not the purpose of being clung to.

14. "You, O monks, who understand the Teaching's similitude to a raft, you should let go even (good) teachings,how much more false ones!

WallyB

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows." Maybe not necessarily beaten with many blows but suffer a lot more.

ok, back to OP

in Buddhism, it is most essential we follow our own will. in other words, we see suffering for ourselves and resolve to remedy it. to follow the Buddhist path because we perceive we are expected to in order to please Buddha can be disadvantageous. the motivation ideally arises from 'within' rather than 'without'

all the best

federica

Edit and put this is comparitive religion

yes, miss, whatever you say, miss.... :rolleyes:

ZendoLord84

boeddha and jezus seems nice guys to me....
would like to drink some tea/coffee with them and talk about life,

Jeffrey

I think the whole notion of servant and master is totally alien to our culture. In this culture we have capitalism. Where the task is the job function and not serving. Except for customer relations and then it's not a question of power of saying one has to do something rather it is a negotiation.

person

Does the same hold true in Buddhism of what Jesus said. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows." Maybe not necessarily beaten with many blows but suffer a lot more.

Thanks.

This can be interpreted to have some correlation to karma. Though the master/servant and punishment aspect is so far removed from the Buddhist worldview that I would recommend abandoning it and seeking to find Buddhist understanding within Buddhist teachings.

The notion of karma is more like you fall off your bike and the consequence is you skin your knee. To apply the passage you gave the previous example would be like saying that you skin your knee as a penalty or punishment from not staying on your bike and not because of the force of your soft knee hitting the hard ground.

In Buddhism we modify our behavior not because we will be punished for being bad but because negative acts lead to negative outcomes and positive acts lead to positive outcomes. Karma isn't reward and punishment its natural law and when we understand natural law we act in ways that lead to outcomes we desire.

WallyB

Yes, karma and intention has much to do with it...

:hair:

And how, O monks, should the nutriment volitional [intentional] thought be considered?

Suppose, O monks, there is a pit of glowing embers, filled to cover a man's height, with embers glowing without flames and smoke. Now a man comes that way, who loves life and does not wish to die, who wishes for happiness and detests suffering. Then two strong men would seize both his arms and drag him to the pit of glowing embers. Then, O monks, far away from it would recoil that man's will, far away from it his longing, far away his inclination. And why? Because the man knows: 'If I fall into that pit of glowing embers, I shall meet death or deadly pain.'

In that manner, I say, O monks, should the nutriment volitional [intention] thought be considered. If the nutriment volitional thought is comprehended, the three kinds of craving are thereby comprehended. And if the three kinds of craving are comprehended, there is, I say, no further work left to do for the noble disciple.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.063.nypo.html

And how is the nutriment of intellectual intention to be regarded? Suppose there were a pit of glowing embers, deeper than a man's height, full of embers that were neither flaming nor smoking, and a man were to come along — loving life, hating death, loving pleasure, abhorring pain — and two strong men, having grabbed him by the arms, were to drag him to the pit of embers. To get far away would be that man's intention, far away would be his wish, far away would be his aspiration. Why is that? Because he would realize, 'If I fall into this pit of glowing embers, I will meet with death from that cause, or with death-like pain.' In the same way, I tell you, is the nutriment of intellectual intention to be regarded. When the nutriment of intellectual intention is comprehended, the three forms of craving [for sensuality, for becoming, and for non-becoming] are comprehended. When the three forms of craving are comprehended, I tell you, there is nothing further for a disciple of the noble ones to do.

WallyB

Wisdom is earned through understanding and experience...it is natural but must be sought...

OK...riddle me this! :wtf:

And how, O monks, should the nutriment consciousness be considered?

Suppose, O monks, people have seized a criminal, a robber, and brought him before the king saying: 'This is a criminal, a robber, O Majesty! Mete out to him the punishment you think fit!' Then the king would tell them: 'Go, and in the morning strike this man with a hundred spears!' And they strike him in the morning with a hundred spears. At noon the king would ask his men: 'How is that man?' — 'He is still alive, Your Majesty.' — 'Then go and strike him again at noontime with a hundred spears!' So they did, and in the evening the king asks them again: 'How is that man?' — 'He is still alive.' — 'Then go and in the evening strike him again with a hundred spears!' And so they did.

What do you think, O monks? Will that man, struck with three hundred spears during a day, suffer pain and torment owing to that?

Even if he were to be struck only by a single spear, he would suffer pain and torment owing to that. How much more if he is being struck by three hundred spears!

In that manner, I say, O monks, should the nutriment consciousness be considered. If the nutriment consciousness is comprehended, mind-and-matter are thereby comprehended. And if mind and body are comprehended, there is, I say, no further work left to do for the noble disciple.

Lady_Alison

I don't know how the above relates to the Luke parable and I would much rather hear your interpretation of it. Since I don't understand what nutriment or counscious means?

Lady_Alison

Honestly, I'm a begginer. I'm an abrahamic monotheis (Muslim liberal) I'm very much about how it can be interpreted...the parables I have studied and the history. Sutras, I have not.

I am only interested in Buddhism as to add to my belief structure and find similarities rather than differences. I'm not too proud to admit when I simply don't know...but I wont call your belief, rubbish. That's mean! That's why I begged an explanation.

WallyB

I don't know how the above relates to the Luke parable and I would much rather hear your interpretation of it.

to me, the Luke parable appears to be specifically given to Peter, who Jesus said would be the leader of his church. it appears to exhort Peter his responsibilities and, especially, to not misuse the power of his position for any personal gain

this is similar to the Buddha's teaching of the four agati (bias; prejudice), which is taught to all abbots & buddhists in positions of social responsibility, to not act with bias or prejudice due to self-love/self-interest; due to hate; due to fear; & due to ignorance

Peter asked, “Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everyone?”

The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.

“The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

Dakini

to me, the Luke parable appears to be specifically given to Peter, who Jesus said would be the leader of his church. it appears to exhort Peter his responsibilities and, especially, to not misuse the power of his position for any personal gain

this is similar to the Buddha's teaching of the four agati (bias; prejudice), which is taught to all abbots & buddhists in positions of social responsibility, to not act with bias or prejudice due to self-love/self-interest; due to hate; due to fear; & due to ignorance

OK, so it does hold true in Buddhism? It's not rubbish?

WallyB

I don't know how the above relates to the Luke parable and I would much rather hear your interpretation of it. Since I don't understand what nutriment or counscious means?

hi

it can be related to the Luke Parable.

consciousness is sense awareness, which allows seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching & mental cognition to occur. without consciousness, living life would be impossible

the nutriment of consciousness means consciousness is like food. it is something we cannot live without. however, we should not misuse consciousness, abuse it or misregard it.

the word 'nutriment' in Pali is 'ahara', which means 'food'

the parable of Jesus states the "food allowance" (spiritual food) is not to be abused or misused (because all of Peter's power & spiritual "food" comes from Jesus, the master. Jesus said to them in John: "Without me, you can do nothing", just as Buddha said: "The Spiritual Friend is the whole of the holy life")

the Buddha parable means each time consciousness (what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched & cognised) is clung to, appropriated or 'stolen like a thief' as "I", "me" or "mine", one will be stabbed with a spear of suffering

this is similar to the Jesus parable, that if Peter & the apostles act selfishly in their roles, with self-cherishing, they will be punished

John 15:5
I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

WallyB

OK, so it does hold true in Buddhism? It's not rubbish?

if we need to use the straightforward teachings given by Buddha to interpret Christian parables then are they ideal teachings? if the teaching is not self-explanatory, is it ideal? if we must rely on Buddha to understand Jesus, then was Jesus really a good teacher?

returning to Luke 12, what does the below mean? will we rush in and apply Buddhist mindfulness teachings and their fruits?

Watchfulness

“Be dressed ready for service and keep your lamps burning, like servants waiting for their master to return from a wedding banquet, so that when he comes and knocks they can immediately open the door for him. It will be good for those servants whose master finds them watching when he comes. Truly I tell you, he will dress himself to serve, will have them recline at the table and will come and wait on them. It will be good for those servants whose master finds them ready, even if he comes in the middle of the night or toward daybreak. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.”

vinlyn

^^ I've never heard a Christian seek out Buddhist teachings to understand Christian teachings. And, I don't think it's up to Buddhists to label Christian teachings as rubbish. Let Buddhists believe what Buddhists believe. Let Christians believe what Christians believe. No benefit to bringing an air of superiority into religion.

WallyB

^^ I've never heard a Christian seek out Buddhist teachings to understand Christian teachings.

agree. but there are many people, with Christian conditioning, who are taking an interest in Buddhism. then they use Buddhist teachings to validate Christian teachings, which they formerly saw no value in. they start to believe Jesus was a great teacher despite the fact that before they found Buddhism they did not believe Jesus was a great teacher. they start to 'see' things in Christ's teachings which Christians do not see. they even start to believe Christ was a 'Buddha' :wtf:

Dazzle

I think there's also a book "Jesus and Buddha as Brothers"

vinlyn

^^ I've never heard a Christian seek out Buddhist teachings to understand Christian teachings.

agree. but there are many people, with Christian conditioning, who are taking an interest in Buddhism. then they use Buddhist teachings to validate Christian teachings, which they formerly saw no value in. they start to believe Jesus was a great teacher despite the fact that before they found Buddhism they did not believe Jesus was a great teacher. they start to 'see' things in Christ's teachings which Christians do not see. they even start to believe Christ was a 'Buddha' :wtf:

I'm sure there are some people like that. I would say I am the opposite. I always thought Jesus was a great teacher, still do. But I can't imagine using the teachings of one religion to support another religion. Again, I agree with you that it happens. I just don't see it or understand why it would happen.

Lady_Alison

I'm using the benefits of meditation to focus prayer among many things...I have a theory and not a new one at all that God is found intimately in the space created by meditation and mindfulness awareness and I am putting it to the test. I needed to find a philosophy and religion that taught howe to do this and I believe Buddhism has the longest tradition, since Sufism can be a little insane.

@wallyb thank you for that long explanation...I do appreciate it.

^^ I've never heard a Christian seek out Buddhist teachings to understand Christian teachings.

agree. but there are many people, with Christian conditioning, who are taking an interest in Buddhism. then they use Buddhist teachings to validate Christian teachings, which they formerly saw no value in. they start to believe Jesus was a great teacher despite the fact that before they found Buddhism they did not believe Jesus was a great teacher. they start to 'see' things in Christ's teachings which Christians do not see. they even start to believe Christ was a 'Buddha' :wtf:

I'm sure there are some people like that. I would say I am the opposite. I always thought Jesus was a great teacher, still do. But I can't imagine using the teachings of one religion to support another religion. Again, I agree with you that it happens. I just don't see it or understand why it would happen.

Cinorjer

The parable is not hard to understand, since that entire chapter was devoted to admonishing the earliest Christians to prepare for the day of judgement, even though they did not know when that would be. The verses illustrate the different guilt and thus punishment for slaves that knowingly disobey their masters, versus slaves that unknowingly disobey. The usual translations use "servant" instead of slave but the word means exactly that and when written slavery was considered normal and Christians saw nothing wrong with owning slaves as long as they were treated fairly. For a slave. Before you get too worked up about that, Buddhist cultures had no problem with slavery either as part of a lay person's life.

I suppose it's comparable to Buddhism thoughts about intention.

vinlyn

The parable is not hard to understand, since that entire chapter was devoted to admonishing the earliest Christians to prepare for the day of judgement, even though they did not know when that would be. The verses illustrate the different guilt and thus punishment for slaves that knowingly disobey their masters, versus slaves that unknowingly disobey. The usual translations use "servant" instead of slave but the word means exactly that and when written slavery was considered normal and Christians saw nothing wrong with owning slaves as long as they were treated fairly. For a slave. Before you get too worked up about that, Buddhist cultures had no problem with slavery either as part of a lay person's life.

I suppose it's comparable to Buddhism thoughts about intention.

Not arguing with you, but just want to point out that much of the "slavery" in historic Thailand was actually voluntary...men would sell themselves over to a master for a certain number of years.

Cinorjer

"Indentured servitude" was the term, I think. Exists today in various forms and everywhere people's rights have been eroded and they're treated as disposable property.

Problem is, the masters always cheat their slaves because the slaves have no power to enforce whatever rights they're supposed to have, and it takes a certain type of person to be a master to a slave in the first place.

Slavery is one disease that I hope never catches on again in the world as normal and natural, but it's still out there.

vinlyn

"Indentured servitude" was the term, I think. Exists today in various forms and everywhere people's rights have been eroded and they're treated as disposable property.

Problem is, the masters always cheat their slaves because the slaves have no power to enforce whatever rights they're supposed to have, and it takes a certain type of person to be a master to a slave in the first place.

Slavery is one disease that I hope never catches on again in the world as normal and natural, but it's still out there.

I agree, except that indentured servitude is different than slavery.

David

It's a touchy subject to be sure and I have to admit there is much to Christianity I find irresponsible.

Indentured servitude may be different than slavery in name but beating somebody into submission with many blows is vile behavior under any banner.