Is Slavery an Acceptable Practice?

[Bible Highlighter]

It's helpful to use words.

Actually he did use words. It is called Word picture art that is intersecting.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Exactly. So, why have I been enslaved? Why am I forceful used to serve the purpose of another?

Are you still upset?

How does one become a slave according to God's version of slavery? Or do you consider all slavery the same? Do you think it is possible for you to have slaves today?


....

 

[Hank77]

Read Philemon in the New Testament. It's a letter from St. Paul to a slave master who had converted to Christianity. St. Paul encourages him to treat his escaped slave as a Christian brother. It was an indirect way of telling him that he should set the slave free.

I hadn't thought of it that way before. Paul may have been doing just that. What man wishes to be owned by another man.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Read Philemon in the New Testament. It's a letter from St. Paul to a slave master who had converted to Christianity. St. Paul encourages him to treat his escaped slave as a Christian brother. It was an indirect way of telling him that he should set the slave free.

Set him free? That is quite a leap. Paul could have easily said that directly. You've let imagination run a bit wild, I think.

 

[Hank77]

The truth is, I am a slave. I have been forced to serve the needs of others under threat of arrest and imprisonment.

It is not slavery when all citizens of a country are by law told they must do the same thing no matter who they are. One is always free to leave the country if they don't like the laws. One is not being held captive, no one is going to track them down and forcefully bring them back.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Set him free? That is quite a leap.

It's not a leap. It's impossible to treat someone as a Christian brother while keeping them as a slave.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

all citizens of a country are by law told they must do the same thing no matter who they are.

You do understand that less than half of US citizens are forced serve the needs of others, right? Most people don't pay income tax.

You also understand what the working definition of slavery is, as I set out plainly in the OP, and to which everyone agreed, until, that is they understood I was the salve. Then there was backpedaling.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

It's not a leap. It's impossible to treat someone as a Christian brother while keeping them as a slave.

Can a Christian have employees?

Did Paul tell him to set him free?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Can a Christian have employees?

Did Paul tell him to set him free?

Rome had chattel slavery which is like the kind that Africans experienced when they were brought over to North America. It wasn't like being an employee. So the slave master would have to set his slave free to take St. Paul's letter to heart and treat his slave as a Christian brother.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

This scene from the movie Ben-Hur is what slavery was like in the Roman Empire:

 

[Hank77]

You do understand that less than half of US citizens are forced serve the needs of others, right? Most people don't pay income tax.

You also understand what the working definition of slavery is, as I set out plainly in the OP, and to which everyone agreed, until, that is they understood I was the salve. Then there was backpedaling.

You are not held captive by anyone. You are free to leave and to go wherever you choose.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

You are not held captive by anyone. You are free to leave and to go wherever you choose.

You are completely missing the point, and blaming the victim.

 

[TurtleAnne]

Aren't many of us slaves of sorts even to this day? In a subjective sort of way. Anything I earn or own isn't really considered mine, if my government passes some laws to take it away from me, and if that is the case and I refuse to cooperate, then they can literally throw me in a cage for the rest of my life. Sure I am permitted by the government to keep/have certain things, but it seems that most slaves throughout human history were permitted to have at least some certain things, though the master could take it away at any time, so it wasn't really theirs (the slaves'). Additionally, if I just wanted to be done with the whole thing and go live by myself somewhere in nature and do my own thing, left alone, again that is not really allowed, either. I mean if Waco and Ruby Ridge are any examples to go by. So there is no 'running away' either, almost no matter where you go on earth, since there is government nearly everywhere.

Then there is the matter of currency sort of creating a buffer for perceptions. You can work for an employer, and then receive money, which you can then use to pay for shelter, food, etc, whereas with most cases of slavery of throughout history, there would be a master, the slave would obey the master, and the master would give the slave shelter, food, etc.

With at least most of the ancient slavery systems I've read about so far, it seemed to be the case that for many people, being a slave wasn't a whole lot different than being stuck in one's financial situation in the modern industrialized world. There were politically and financially wealthy people, and then there were people who had to do what they had to do to survive. Even in today's world, one could more or less 'quit the system' but would struggle to survive and wind up getting harassed and threatened by strangers and law enforcement on the streets regardless while having much difficulty participating fully in society with certain things like I.D., vehicle, phone number, etc, same as with a slave in ancient times who had run away and would have a difficult time surviving even if they make it pretty far.

So there is all of that, none of which I personally condone but it's the situation none the less, almost like some sort of inescapable fate given our species. And then there is behavior like.. abducting people and keeping them as prisoners, just for the sake of it, which to my knowledge was never condoned in the Bible (?? could be something I haven't read yet, of course). There were instructions given for how to handle survivors in the aftermath of war, that I read, but it was also part of slaves rebelling in the first place, so it seemed to be at least somewhat tit for tat, as opposed to like.. Go over there and enslave all of those people, just to have them as slaves. Or.. Go abduct that family and lock them in the cellar.

Instead seemed to be more a case of gradually promoting higher ethical ideals in response to an already established culture, which was largely practical, if not ideal (which I think could be said about many parts of modern society, as well). Like technically back then a man would purchase his wife from the woman's father, but a lot of that involved the man making a display of proof that he could provide for a family, in addition to acknowledging the reality that parents would get a lot of help from their children, and one of their adult children (the daughter) was going to be leaving. And so on.

Again I see a difference between that and some instructions from God to go into the neighboring village and just enslave everybody for the sake of having slaves.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The world of the Israelites is surely different from the world of the Christian.
Seeing we are Christians of the New Covenant and not Israelites who are are a part of the Old Covenant, we should address this topic or issue as a Christian.

Here is part of a quote from a really good article that speaks about slavery for the New Testament Christian:

In examining the successive thoughts that Paul offers in verses 1-15 and 18-25, one is apt to miss the primary point that the apostle was making. Stripping away the side points that he musters along the way in building his appeal allows the central purpose of the letter to come into view as a result of Paul’s triple repetition of “receive him” in verses 12, 15, and 17. He folds the culminating objective in between the latter two verses. The climax is seen in his explicit allusion to the nature of the reception: to get Philemon to receive Onesimus back “no longer as a slave” (vs. 16).

Here is the real message of Philemon—and the Christian stance on slavery: God would have slaves not to be treated as slaves! This divine intention effectively eradicates the forms of slavery that are deemed objectionable. To treat a slave as an equal (“more than a slave”—vs. 16), and to treat him the way one wishes to be treated himself (Matthew 7:12), strips the institution of slavery of its objectionable traits. Who would not want to be the “slave” of a person who treats you as a dear, beloved brother? Paul’s directives to masters elsewhere in the New Testament focus on this same necessity of being just, fair, impartial, and non-threatening (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1). Recognizing that slavery would continue in the Roman Empire until Christian principles were able to gradually permeate and infiltrate its institutions, Paul gave sensible advice to Corinthian Christians:

Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave (1 Corinthians 7:20-22, emp. added).​

Article Source:
Philemon and Slavery

 

[LinkH]

Slavery in it's worst form "taking someone unjustly by force and enslaving them as property".. (as was practiced In 17th century America with regard to African slaves) is expressly forbidden in the Old Testament.

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him, or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death" (Exodus 21:16).

Do you have any record of North Americans capturing free people of African descent in North America and turning them into slaves? There may have been a little of this with the Indians early on, but it doesn't seem to have become a big part of the culture. From what I've read, slave traders bought slaves in Africa.

However, it was clearly stipulated such exceptions were limited to a period of no more than "seven years", (Exodus 21:2, Leviticus 25, and Jeremiah 34:14). After seven years, a Hebrew was required by law to "release" a slave, or suffer punishment from God. There were no exceptions to this stipulation.

Did you read these passages that you cited? The seven year law is about HEBREW slaves. Hebrew slaves had to be set free after seven years. Where does it say that Gentiles from the surrounding nations were to be set free?

Becoming a slave of a Hebrew may have also been a blessing, since through it one could partake of the Abrahamic covenant.



In Ephesians 6:8-9 it states unequivocally, there is only one "Master" among men, and he is the God of Heaven..

So I would have to venture, "slavery" as Israel has enslaved the Palestinian people.. can neither be condoned by Old, or New Testament biblical standards.[/QUOTE]

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

It helps towards truth (for those seeking TRUTH) IF
and ONLY IF
you can FIND
a translation that puts the word "slave"
EVERYWHERE
that it is in SCRIPTURE. (instead of mis-translating it)

 

[SolomonVII]

The greatest figure in Jewish history is Moses.
The greatest figure in Christian history is Jesus.
What they are both most noted for is redeeming people from slavery.

It is a pretty safe bet therefore, that when it comes to slavery, God is against it.
He is all about the freedom.
Man's history is all about a descent into slavery. God's sacred history, as recorded in the Bible is all about a redemption from that fall, and teaching people the parameters of freedom, one baby step at a time.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Do you support government programs which forcibly make a person serve the needs of another?

The draft might qualify as such, if it were in effect. And what about making diners serve black people their meals, not being allowed to refuse service on account of race? Those are "forcing" people to serve others but do not rise, in my opinion, to the level of what we normally call slavery. What is your opinion about forcing a restaurant to serve people regardless of their race?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

What is an "OP"?

the OP is the Opening Post.

 

[dqhall]

Defining slavery as the forceful use of one person to serve the purpose of another, is slavery an acceptable practice?

Does God approve of it?

Is it acceptable under certain circumstances?

Why is it wrong?

In Leviticus 25:44-46 the law allowed the Jews to keep Gentile slaves for life and to will them to their heirs.

Hebrew slaves were to be kept for seven years (Exodus 21:2-3). This is yet slavery. Stalin sentenced criminals and dissidents to seven year sentences in Siberian prison labor camps where many did not survive their seven year sentences (Solzhenitsyn). Some got two consecutive seven year sentences.

In Luke 4 Jesus arrived in Nazareth:
16 He came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. He entered, as was his custom, into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 The book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. He opened the book, and found the place where it was written,

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to heal the broken hearted,"
to proclaim release to the captives,
recovering of sight to the blind,
to deliver those who are crushed,
19 and to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

Jesus came to serve, not to auction Gentiles in the slave market. In 1 Timothy 1:10, Paul denounced slave traders as contrary to sound doctrine.