Mejia deportation case raises the question: What kind of society are we?

it has several common usages, such as a care-taker or possibly a financial supporter or often...a guardian...for another person [...] Also, it can sometimes be an unpaid or paid custodian of another’s property, a tenant (responsibility for landlord’s premises), and more. [...] it tends to come out as keeper, without any animal husbandry implications. Possible, yes. Usual, no. I think it probably here means pretty much what it usually means, namely someone who looks after the well-being of another or helps defend him or her.

It was certainly not my intention to overemphasize the "animal husbandry" angle - it was just my way of illustrating that the expression (at least in King James-era English; I have no idea what implications the original Hebrew phraseology may have had) does not have particularly positive or savory connotations when referring to a hale and hardy individual perfectly capable of looking after himself.

God's query was certainly rhetorical; as an Omniscient Being, he most assuredly already knew all about what had happened (i.e., that Cain had murdered Abel). It was simply a "conversation starter," akin to "Just what have you been up to, young man?"

What is interesting is that Cain chose to likewise respond with a rhetorical question - in effect, pretending to understand God's question literally, and answering a question with another question: "So, are you saying that I am supposed to keep tabs on my brother? To watch over him constantly? To keep constant track of his whereabouts?"

In any event, I think that it is completely off-base to interpret this passage in any way as meaning that God expects us to be able to give an accounting of other people's whereabouts and/or doings - which only a "keeper" (as in "brother's keeper") could do.

Q.E.D.

Regards,

Yes we are our brothers keeper.

If I were your "keeper" (or your "care-taker" or "legal guardian" [because you had, e.g., been declared by a Court of Law to be mentally incompetent]), wouldn't I have a right - nay, an obligation - to see to it that you got enough bed rest, didn't eat too much, didn't indulge in any excessive drinking, etc. - sort of like how I treat my 9-year-old son?

Wouldn't I, as your "keeper," be entitled to curtail your seeing your friends, if I thought they were a bad influence upon you? Etc.

And how could we all be each other's keeper - i.e., how could it possibly be a reciprocal relationship?

It is a logical impossibility.

Even substituting the word "help-mate" in place of "keeper" is problematic - God ordained only that "man and wife" would (have to) be that to each other.

Regards,

I believe the rest of the Bible is the answer to that question and as it turns out - yes, yes you are your brothers keeper.

See my post #42. If I am your keeper, I have the legitimate authority to tell you to stop drinking so much beer, to go to bed at 8:30 p.m., to not watch so much tv.

Obligations imply rights.

To ALL:

Sheesh, people: If Cain had simply replied to God "Are you implying that I am supposed to follow him around all day, checking up on his whereabouts?" - which is what, in reality, his sassy question back at God meant - this passage of the Bible could never be used to argue that we can't regulate immigration, or that we are obliged to provide for the material comfort of our fellow humans.

Regards,

Each adult ( who is capable, not genuinely disabled) must take responsibility for himself. Plus, s/he has responsibilities for her neighbors/ her society. Thsee are major biblical themes. A person who doesnt pursue them lives a failed life. And yes, we’ve responsibilities towards animals too

But framing that set of responsibilities (civic duties, really) in the context of "You are your brother's keeper" is more than disingenuous.

The term "keeper" (or "caretaker," if you like) implies that my brother is in a subordinate position to me, and that I have a certain degree of authority over him.

See my examples in earlier posts.

Regards,

So when God asked Cain “Where is Abel your brother?” His question was inappropriate or wrong because Cain is NOT his brother’s keeper and shouldn’t know at any given time where he is?

Were God to ask me where my brother is, I’d answer I suppose, “Lord, I believe he is up in (city, state), working on his house.”

Not, essentially, “How should I know? What do you mean by asking me that?” and correcting God’s question to me, as it were.

So when God asked Cain “Where is Abel your brother?” His question was inappropriate or wrong because Cain is NOT his brother’s keeper and shouldn’t know at any given time where he is?

No, of course not! As I said above, it was a rhetorical question!

Being omniscient, God of course knew what had happened! He was NOT implying that Cain should know! He was, in essence, saying: "What have you got to say for yourself after murdering your brother?"

God never issued a commandment to Cain, saying "You are your brother's keeper, so I expect you to always know where he is."

Regards,

Were God to ask me where my brother is, I’d answer I suppose, “Lord, I believe he is up in (city, state), working on his house.”

That would be a nonsensical question on the part of God.

Being omniscient, he would never have to ask in anything but a rhetorical sense.

If God asked me a non-rhetorical question, I would reply: "That makes no sense to me! How could an omniscient being not already know?"

Regards,

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.