Featured Reparations

I don't understand your question. Are you referring to Ezra as the author or to the author calling for reparations for African Americans whose ancestors were forced into slavery?
If the latter, then, yes he is misrepresenting Ezra.

 

If you follow the Persian-Greco conflict you will note that Persia is moving supplies at the same time as giving Jews passage to Palestine. Having the temple rebuilt is a wonderful guise for movement of troops and supplies westward.

 

The problem is that reparation is political. In the Old Testament, you read of nations conquered or defeated and the victor plundering their enemy (the spoils of war). There is no scriptural support for reparations in the way that Thabiti Anyabwile is proposing. A better question to ask is whether the Bible addresses this topic in a different way. It does if we are talking about how Christians are to treat each other. It does not when the context is about nations. As has already been brought up, the United States Federal government passed legislation and implemented programs that ostensibly were to benefit those in systemic poverty and who were denied equal opportunity, which included millions of Americans of African descent. Thabiti's article takes the passages he uses to defend reparations out of context. He does the same thing that black liberation theologians have been doing for decades.

The bottom line? The reason you are not getting any "principles of reparations" in scripture is that there are none.

 

That is beside the point. His checking for the document of Cyrus was as a result the Jews request to him to honour Cyrus' decree.

 

I think his narrative is created by his personal desire for reparations. He then attempts to use Ezra as a prooftext. The king taxed his people, not for reparation to Jews, but because he was growing an army to attack Greece. The Jews were his cover for his bigger goal. God used that bigger goal to effectively fulfill his promise in bringing back and establishing a remnant in Israel. The passage is not about reparation. But, the author needs a prooftext for his own wishes.

 

The assembly? Sure. Ephesians 4:28 can be used to teach those who used to steal to labor in order to bless others. However, that is in the context of the local church. Can that be applied outside the church? Yes. Can it be used to defend large-scale reparations? No.

 

Well if you believe the current teaching on chronology,* Ezra was in the reign of Artaxerxes over 80 years after that account. i.e. Between Ezra ch 6 and ch 7 there is at least 80 years, Interesting eh?

* I don't.

 

I can appreciate wanting to make this non-political, but it is made such, or made moot in bringing up "the American practice of slavery" of the past. If you wish to discuss modern human trafficking or false imprisonment (through false witness or prejudice), then perhaps the discussion could move forward, but perhaps we already agree on those.

What I would ask of anyone worried about reparations for "the American practice of slavery" of the past is whether they have in any way condoned, excused, advocated, practiced or participated in abortion. If they have, I would suggest they cease worrying about reparations and instead worry about those they have murdered or allowed to be murdered but cannot ever provide reparations to, only pay life for life. That realization should end the reparations discussion for practically all.

 

I just won't respond to any of your post then.
MB

 

What about Islamic slavery today?

 

OK, thanks. We are only talking about people who purchased African slaves in the USA and how Americans can pay reparations, right? I would add that the Islamic slave traders past & present have done nothing wrong because Islam teaches that slavery is okay, right? The obvious answer is to pass legislation to pay money to all blacks in the USA, right?

 

If you were to do what I suggested instead of ignoring it, you might make some progress. Focus it on current issues: human trafficking, false imprisonment, and the like.

You are not going to resurrect those who were enslaved or those who enslaved them. You are raising a moot issue leading to a deadend. The best you could do on that point is study the history of what was done at the time, why (or on what basis) it was done, and see what might have or should have been done differently.

This pretending that nothing at all was ever done is a lie, no matter how much Scripture you throw at it. In your quest here, you are already buying into the politics of it whether you admit it or not.

 

Thats Tha I pointed out the Indian.