The Impotence of Nature in Aristotle’s Politics: The Case of Natural Slavery

The far-reaching divide on the authenticity, intentions, and the compositional arrangement of Aristotle’s Politics is quite understandable. In the all-encompassing system Aristotle was building, the Politics was supposed to be the crown of it all. The Nicomachean Ethics is to find its ultimate fulfilment in the Politics since politics, as Aristotle asserts, is the noblest place where human eudemonia can be found. The apparent inconsistencies and seemingly infra dig arguments found in the Politics, however, have raised several questions. In an apparent move to rescue Aristotle, some experts have advanced interpretive alternatives to the work.

Theories abound on what one could make of the body of works titled Politics. As Carnes Lord explains: “the specific difficulties posed by the text of the Politics continue to be regarded by many as convincing evidence of a lack of unity and coherence in the work as a whole, and in its basic argument” (459-60). For instance, Lord summarizes the position of Werner Jaeger, an Aristotle scholar, thus “the Politics is essentially an amalgam of two separate treatises or collections of treatises written at widely separated intervals and embodying very different approaches to the study of political phenomenon” (460). Internal evidence within the work informs the general suspicions scholars hold about the integral status of the work. Scholars have pointed out inconsistencies with the endings of a sizeable portion of the books of the work, as well as transitioning clauses that do not seem to belong where they are found. The discovery that some of Aristotle’s works were only intended by him as educational treatises and not for popular consumption has also split scholarly views on the matter.

Continue Reading

On the Office of the Bishop of Rome: Matthew 16:13-21 is Certainly NOT about the Papacy

Matthew 16:18-19 ESV
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

One of the key biblical texts used to defend the office of the Bishop of Rome is Matthew 16. I have written fuller exegetical blog entries on this passage elsewhere without referring to the Papacy. I think it is a good time to do so now. Please note that I am tabling this in the service of truth and not to malign or offend. I respect several Catholics and hope they will have much to add to enrich our collective understanding of this matter. In the end, I want to argue that, at best, the office of the Bishop of Rome had to be one of the least concerns of Jesus and Peter in this passage.

Continue Reading

The Gospel and the “Sons of God” of Genesis 6

The Easter Story Retold: How It All Started

According to the Christian calendar, the Holy Week commemorates the most important week ever in the cosmos’ billion years of existence. It is the week of Easter or, to be more inclusive, the week leading to Resurrection Sunday. The idea that one week can identifiably be more significant than all others may offend a thinking mind at first. After all, we have repeatedly heard the argument that our earth is only a speck in the big picture of things. It is an argument asserting that size matters. Ordinarily, I would agree with the argument, but there are exceptions. People do not usually conclude, for instance, that the butt is more important than the brain due to size. Similarly, a speck of uranium may be considered more important than the mountain of trash standing over it.

For generations, churchgoers have been taught to believe that a Messiah became necessary because of Adam and Eve’s sin, but that is an incomplete story that accounts for only one-third of the data. To be sure, the story arc resulting in the Messiah’s coming began with Adam and Eve, but there is more. Let us begin from the beginning.

So, how did we get here? As far as we can tell, an uncreated creative mind wanted to get to work. Evidently, it was not his first attempt at creating. He had already created a myriad of essentially immaterial beings “eons” prior to the “moment” he decided on another project. Undoubtedly, there were innumerably infinite ways the project could have taken shape. But just as he had to narrow down the options with his other creative projects, he must do the same here. God decided to make a class of beings constructed of molecules for unrevealed reasons – a terrifyingly complicated undertaking.

How do you build a being from molecules? Easy — you start with, well, molecules! The problem is that molecules did not exist yet. So, the ultimate project must wait as God began by creating the Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Phosphorus, Sulphur, and other isotopes needed to make the molecules from which his end product would be constructed. But how long would the construction project have to wait? It is not very long – only about 30 million years, which apparently equals about a few days in God’s reference scale. Once the material universe was in place with its arrays of stars coming into and out of existence and all the requisite atoms were available, God could initiate the building of functional molecules.

It soon became clear that God did not want wild humans. Hence, though he had caused vegetation to spring up everywhere on the blue globe, he yet proceeded to carve out a garden for the creature he was about to construct. The human was going to be cultured. After arrangements for human flourishing were in place, God finally built his project after waiting a few million years, a dating that excludes moments “before” the cosmos came to be. The human God created was neither male nor female. It was a genderless composite. In time, it became apparent that the human would not optimally flourish in its composite state. It must be split equally into two complementary forms. Hence, God formed the woman from a rib of the human he had made. It is interesting to note that the Hebrew term for “rib” is a construction term often used to describe a side of a temple. Here, then, is how we finally got the gendered male and female humans. She was in no way inferior to the man. Yes, she was a suitable “help” for the man, but “help” often describes how God is a “help” to humans. If “help” suggests any asymmetry, it is probably in the other direction.

I wish they lived happily ever after, but there would not be a worthwhile story if they did. Some of God’s earlier creations were not down with God’s new hairy creatures. It is not immediately clear if it is the hair or something else, but those older immaterial beings were ticked. Soon enough, they figured out how to mess up God’s project. They would corrupt the young creatures before they have exercised their spiritual muscles unto maturity. Obviously, this implies that the hairy creatures were not incorruptible. If they became corrupted, it was because they could be corrupted. They were not perfect, only good. Very good, actually. Sinister forces succeeded and corrupted the humans.

Continue Reading

Demonstrating the Islamic Dilemma

If the Quran is true, then the Bible is true. But if the Bible is true, then the Quran is false.

That is the dilemma. I know this will disturb some, and others may take offense. But I want to begin by saying I’m not looking to do any of those things. My interest here is truth. I am interested in what we can establish from primary texts. As I often remark, I do not pretend to be an expert. In fact, I would appreciate substantive, reasoned pushback and clarification.

I will present my argument in three blocks. First, I will show that the Quran consistently approves of the Bible, especially the Torah and the Injeel (i.e., Gospels), as divinely inspired and unalterable words of Allah. Then, I will show that the Quran is often wrong in many details compared to the Bible. Finally, I’ll demonstrate that the Bible knows nothing about and does not anticipate the Quran.

Continue Reading

Atonement Requires More than the Death of Jesus

I understand that this can become a charged issue for many Christians and that various Christian traditions over the ages have taught that Jesus’s death by itself was sufficient for atonement. Indeed, I believed similarly until I came across a scholarly work by David Moffitt. When we interact with various biblical data points, we will see that the Bible says something different about our topic. The belief that Jesus’ death was all needed for atonement has much biblical data for it. Here are a few:

John 1:29 ESV
The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

The idea here is that of the sacrificial lamb in Jewish temple rituals. Of course, John would further clarify that this lamb was slain in Revelation 5:6. Together, the verses imply that the slaying of the Lamb equals the taking away of sins.

Continue Reading

Women are Eternally Inferior in Islam

To a Christian, the fourth chapter of the Quran would be most important for its emphatic denial of the crucifixion of Jesus (4:157) and Jesus’ sonship (4:171), important ideas we have addressed elsewhere. However, this chapter also fleshes out an idea earlier introduced in the Quran: the inferiority of women. As we shall argue, the Quran is consistent in its portrayal of the inferiority of women. Women in Islam are not only inferior in this life but will also remain inferior in the afterlife. Let us begin with 4:2-3:

Surah An-Nisa, Verse 2:
وَآتُوا الْيَتَامَىٰ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلَا تَتَبَدَّلُوا الْخَبِيثَ بِالطَّيِّبِ وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَىٰ أَمْوَالِكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ حُوبًا كَبِيرًا

And give to the orphans their property, and do not substitute worthless (things) for (their) good (ones), and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property; this is surely a great crime.

Surah An-Nisa, Verse 3:
وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تُقْسِطُوا فِي الْيَتَامَىٰ فَانكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنَىٰ وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَلَّا تَعُولُوا

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

Continue Reading

The Damascus Road Experience: Understanding Galatians 1:11-12

Galatians 1:11-12 NIV
[11] I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. [12] I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

That is a staggering claim. Paul here says the gospel he preached had no human origin because no human taught it to him. In other words, Paul claims not to have attended a Sunday School meeting or responded to an altar call. If he had done any of these things, he would have been exposed to the human teachings of the gospel.

However, Paul seems to affirm the opposite position in 1 Corinthians: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures” (15:3 ESV). Here, Paul says he received the central Christian message concerning the death of Jesus apparently from those who were Apostles before him. (It also could be that Paul here says he received it from Jesus himself.) Do we have a contradiction in Paul’s messaging, or might there be more beneath the surface? That is the question this piece is devoted to. I shall argue that Paul’s encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus is the key that unravels these verses and that there is no contradiction. Being a late apostle, Paul had to rely on the earlier Apostles for the historical bits he missed out on, such as the sermons, sayings, and deeds of Jesus while he walked among disciples. However, Paul’s claim of not being taught the Gospel can co-exist with his (later) reliance on the Apostles.

Continue Reading

Unveiling Scriptures: The Quran on Alleged Bible Corruption

“Elohim”, “Allah,” and “God” function quite similarly in their original linguistic contexts. Indeed, the English language is somewhat odd here. The modern rule of capitalizing proper nouns muddies the waters. Initially, without qualifications, these words do not pick out any specific deity. At various points, I have highlighted that elohim is a common noun, not a proper one. In the Bible, elohim refers to Yahweh, Satan, angels, foreign gods, the spirit of a dead human, and so on.
Similarly, “allah” in the pre-Islamic era does not mean what it is now taken to mean. Indeed, the allah of that era was Hubal, the moon god with a dedicated shrine at the famous Ka’ba in Mecca. Some Islamic sources tell us that Hubal was imported from Syria. According to Islamic tradition, Muhammed cleansed the Kabah by destroying the idols and rededicating it to another God identified with the Biblical God, but this narrative is not without problems, as we shall now see.

Continue Reading

Yahweh and the Other Gods: Understanding Biblical Idolatry

Background

In ancient times, people did not worship idols as if they were, per se, deities. Agbẹ́gilére, the skilled sculptor who creates numerous copies of a deity’s idol in his shop, understands that these idols are not the real divine beings; if he believed they were, there would absurdly be countless Èṣù and Baal as gods. Moreover, on a successful business day, his shop would otherwise be empty of gods—something no one desired! Everyone recognized that an idol was a vital point of contact, a mediator, to connect with a specific deity. Noah Marsh reminds us that “an idol formed the primary locus or medium for the deity to manifest himself or herself in the world.” Each “idol worshipper,” a misnomer, sought to reach her particular deity through the idols and her supplications. Strictly speaking, nobody thought a god was destroyed because his idols were burned. And, of course, a devotee could always get new replacement idols. This is not to deny that devotees sometimes think of their idols as gods, especially after repeated associations. However, idols can be viewed as gods precisely because of their connection with immaterial, external deities. Marsh further notes, “In the ancient Near East, deities needed idols to represent their presence on earth because they lived in the heavenly courts”. Readers may recall that the heavens are the realm of divine beings.

Continue Reading