Is Slavery Moral?

[Deidre32]

What are you talking about? Im' asking questions because if disagree with he answers others on this thread. Isn't this the apologetics section. Do I have to agree with you in order to contribute?

I stated that slavery is immoral. I've explained I'm not a Bible literalist. Be genuine when you ask questions, and don't bait people. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Caliban]

I stated that slavery is immoral. I've explained I'm not a Bible literalist. Be genuine when you ask questions, and don't bait people. That's all I'm saying.

What do you mean by baiting people?

 

[cvanwey]

I'm not a Bible literalist, I said that a few posts above. I have no idea why slavery went on back then, just like I have no idea why it goes on today. I think it's wrong. I said it's morally wrong. You make the mistake of thinking that everyone who is a believer, thinks exactly alike.

My response was not to suggest that all believers think alike. My point is that the Bible makes specific provisions to allow slavery - (in which you state is 'morally wrong'). If the Bible never mentioned slavery, then this entire topic would most likely not exist coherently.

I'm not suggesting you need to be a 'literalist', or are one.

However, if the book you believe in condones/allows slavery, and you have just reconciled that it is 'morally wrong', what does this actually mean?

Another point was made, much prior, that it is most likely such verses were written by greedy humans to enforce laws, and to state they came from 'God', as many/most belief in God.

Does this conclusion make any sense?

 

[Caliban]

My response was not to suggest that all believers think alike. My point is that the Bible makes specific provisions to allow slavery - (in which you state is 'morally wrong'). If the Bible never mentioned slavery, then this entire topic would most likely not exist coherently.

I'm not suggesting you need to be a 'literalist', or are one.

However, if the book you believe in condones/allows slavery, and you have just reconciled that it is 'morally wrong', what does this actually mean?

Another point was made, much prior, that it is most likely such verses were written by greedy humans to enforce laws, and to state they came from 'God', as many/most belief in God.

Does this conclusion make any sense?

Amen

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What are you talking about? Im' asking questions because if disagree with he answers others on this thread. Isn't this the apologetics section. Do I have to agree with you in order to contribute?

No, this isn't the apologetics section, really. I'm sorry to have to inform you of that.

Additionally, I'm open to talking with you about these issues, and I'm willing to put down and kick away what may appear to you as an ego trip on my part, but do keep in mind that some of us here are a bit gun-shy because we have to deal with skeptics and atheists every day who seem to come to CF because it looks to them like an ideological toilet on which to relieve themselves. Moreover, as you can see, @cvanwey has already preceded you in blazing a very long trail of criticism for well over 1,054 posts now in just this one thread alone on slavery.

 

[Deidre32]

My response was not to suggest that all believers think alike. My point is that the Bible makes specific provisions to allow slavery - (in which you state is 'morally wrong'). If the Bible never mentioned slavery, then this entire topic would most likely not exist coherently.

I'm not suggesting you need to be a 'literalist', or are one.

However, if the book you believe in condones/allows slavery, and you have just reconciled that it is 'morally wrong', what does this actually mean?

Another point was made, much prior, that it is most likely such verses were written by greedy humans to enforce laws, and to state they came from 'God', as many/most belief in God.

Does this conclusion make any sense?

Yes, that conclusion makes sense. To me, it's a book that was written during a time that I don't live in. They were nearly barbaric in many of their ways. How they treated women, how they treated children, slavery was legal, etc … Slavery isn't the only problem I have with the Bible.

My faith honestly doesn't come from the Bible. I've read the Bible and see its value. But, I see many problems with it, that I don't dismiss or explain away. I left Christianity largely due to my disagreements with the Bible, but I returned based on an experience I had a few years ago. I don't dismiss the Bible as an outdated text, but it was written by a group of people that historically, led very different lives than most of us do today. I often ask myself, why was God different then?

 

[Deidre32]

What do you mean by baiting people?

You pretend like you're interested in having a genuine discussion, but then you twist people's words or distort what they're saying. Baiting.

I don't want to talk to you if you're going to do that. It's not necessary, we can all have our own opinions, and agree to disagree.

 

[Caliban]

No, this isn't the apologetics section, really. I'm sorry to have to inform you of that.

Additionally, I'm open to talking with you about these issues, and I'm willing to put down and kick away what may appear to you as an ego trip on my part, but do keep in mind that some of us here are a bit gun-shy because we have to deal with skeptics and atheists every day who seem to come to CF because it looks to them like an ideological toilet on which to relieve themselves. Moreover, as you can see, @cvanwey has already preceded you in blazing a very long trail of criticism for well over 1,054 posts now in just this one thread alone on slavery.

My fault for confusing this with another category. I can't help the fact you are "gun shy" or that others have abused this forum. I am new to Christian Forums and have meet nothing but hostility in a mere 24 posts. Yes, I disagree. But why is that so controversial? Since I am new to this website, maybe you can understand that I haven't read this entire thread (which probably consists of several thousand words). I have not been hostile nor denigrated anyones opinion. Yet I have been told I'd be reported to moderators. I've never encountered this on any other forum. Can we get back to ideas?

 

[cvanwey]

Yes, that conclusion makes sense. To me, it's a book that was written during a time that I don't live in. They were nearly barbaric in many of their ways. How they treated women, how they treated children, slavery was legal, etc … Slavery isn't the only problem I have with the Bible.

My faith honestly doesn't come from the Bible. I've read the Bible and see its value. But, I see many problems with it, that I don't dismiss or explain away. I left Christianity largely due to my disagreements with the Bible, but I returned based on an experience I had a few years ago. I don't dismiss the Bible as an outdated text, but it was written by a group of people that historically, led very different lives than most of us do today. I often ask myself, why was God different then?

Okay, fair enough. I REALLY want to ask you what experience led you back; but this is better reflected in the 'Apologetics' forum most likely

 

[Deidre32]

Okay, fair enough. I REALLY want to ask you what experience led you back; but this is better reflected in the 'Apologetics' forum most likely

Okay. We can try, sometime. I don't know if I've ever been in that section. lol

 

[2PhiloVoid]

My fault for confusing this with another category. I can't help the fact you are "gun shy" or that others have abused this forum. I am new to Christian Forums and have meet nothing but hostility in a mere 24 posts. Yes, I disagree. But why is that so controversial? Since I am new to this website, maybe you can understand that I haven't read this entire thread (which probably consists of several thousand words). I have not been hostile nor denigrated anyones opinion. Yet I have been told I'd be reported to moderators. I've never encountered this on any other forum. Can we get back to ideas?

Ok. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this since you're a new member to these forums, and I think I can see now that you're not just trying to bait and badger the rest of us here. I'm all for discussing the ideas, and I do think a healthy discussion would be more productive for all involved. So, where do you think we should start anew with this gnarly issue about "biblical slavery"?

 

[Caliban]

Ok. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this since you're a new member to these forums, and I think I can see now that you're not just trying to bait and badger the rest of us here. I'm all for discussing the ideas, and I do think a healthy discussion would be more productive for all involved. So, where do you think we should start anew with this gnarly issue about "biblical slavery"?

Thank you, it is a gnarly issue. I know everyone here despises slavery. And, I know that everyone interprets the New Testament to be a paradigm shift away from many of the legal requirements of the Old. My question is, does even the presence of slavery in the Old Testament (specifically Exodus 21) indict God as immoral (or at least the concept of God)? Is this evidence of purely human authorship?

 

[Deidre32]

I think God permits free will. Does that make God cruel?

 

[Caliban]

I think God permits free will. Does that make God cruel?

If god says it is permissible to to own slaves, I don't think that relates to free will. Scripture, inspired by God, actively endorses slavery.

 

[Deidre32]

If god says it is permissible to to own slaves, I don't think that relates to free will. Scripture, inspired by God, actively endorses slavery.

How did they know God permitted it?

It just seems convenient that God agrees with these things, you know?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Thank you, it is a gnarly issue. I know everyone here despises slavery. And, I know that everyone interprets the New Testament to be a paradigm shift away from many of the legal requirements of the Old. My question is, does even the presence of slavery in the Old Testament (specifically Exodus 21) indict God as immoral (or at least the concept of God)? Is this evidence of purely human authorship?

See, that's hard to answer here. By that I mean it's hard to answer "here in this specific thread," because these questions really require a step and a hop over into apologetics, and to answer these I have to both 1) defend God and 2) defend the Bible, rather than just try to assert that biblical slavery could be "moral" in some shape, form or fashion, or what have you. I guess we can try to discuss/debate it (civilly), but don't be surprised if this whole thread gets picked up and moved over to the Apologetics section. [And if it comes to that, then that section requires new members to accumulate a number of posts first elsewhere in CF, and some 'likes,' and briefly apply to enter into the apologetics section.]

So, I just want to make you aware of that at the moment.

I'll tell you what. Let's stop for the moment since it's getting late where I'm at and let's try to pick this back up where we've left of with your specific questions tomorrow (or whenever). Will that work for you?

 

[Caliban]

How did they know God permitted it?

It just seems convenient that God agrees with these things, you know?

I understand your point. Exodus 21 begins with the words, “These are the laws you are to set before them:". This is the word of God, speaking to Moses. God continues to detail the laws concerning the purchase and treatment of slaves including passing slaves as an inheritance, to children. If God is speaking, isn't is logical for me to think he permits slavery?

 

[cvanwey]

I understand your point. Exodus 21 begins with the words, “These are the laws you are to set before them:". This is the word of God, speaking to Moses. God continues to detail the laws concerning the purchase and treatment of slaves including passing slaves as an inheritance, to children. If God is speaking, isn't is logical for me to think he permits slavery?

Yes, yes, yes. Because He says so in many verses

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Thank you, it is a gnarly issue. I know everyone here despises slavery. And, I know that everyone interprets the New Testament to be a paradigm shift away from many of the legal requirements of the Old. My question is, does even the presence of slavery in the Old Testament (specifically Exodus 21) indict God as immoral (or at least the concept of God)? Is this evidence of purely human authorship?

Picking up with where we were beginning to realign our attempt to discuss these concerns of yours as they reflect the main theme of the OP, R.Miller, I'm first of all going to reclarify what I said last night about where I think we presently stand in our dialogical situation. And the situation is this: according to the CF rules this thread area, I can't do 'apologetics,' so with that being the case, I'm not going to try to address the second concern that both you and @cvanwey and even to some extent @Deidre32 have expressed about whether or not any one of us should still view the bible as inspired by God since we glaringly find various forms of servitude within it's archaic pages.

But, I think that to some extent, we can at least partly discuss your first question, even if maybe it is in an indirect fashion. And to add some gravy to the conversation, I'll just offer up both a (1) concession and a (2) caveat in this regard, the concession being that 1) I do think it is within your right to indict a Supreme Being for moral negligence, but the caveat is that 2) we have to recognize that any moral indictment of a Surpreme Being can only be done from within an ethical framework that not only houses and harbors particular ethical assumptions as being axiomatic, but any ethical framework is just one of many o choose from.

So, just as many of us like to apply the Outsider Test for Faith to various epistemological and historical issues as they pertain to our determination about the truth of Christianity as it compares to other world religions, THEN it is likewise the case that each of us who feels that we should indict a Supreme Being will have to apply a similar Outsider Test for Ethics since there are a bevy of various ethical positions--along with their various applications we find within Medicine, Political Science, and Religion--which we can all recognize and which all call for our full attention. None of them should just get a "free lunch," and they all should be under our scrutiny if we're going to start out from the assumed position that if there is a biblical God of some sort, He is guilty of moral negligence in light of the issue of slavery (among other moral issues) we find sitting in a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]-eyed fashion within the pages of the Bible.

And this is where I start with the whole issue..............................................

 

[Caliban]

Picking up with where we were beginning to realign our attempt to discuss these concerns of yours as they reflect the main theme of the OP, R.Miller, I'm first of all going to reclarify what I said last night about where I think we presently stand in our dialogical situation. And the situation is this: according to the CF rules this thread area, I can't do 'apologetics,' so with that being the case, I'm not going to try to address the second concern that both you and @cvanwey and even to some extent @Deidre32 have expressed about whether or not any one of us should still view the bible as inspired by God since we glaringly find various forms of servitude within it's archaic pages.

But, I think that to some extent, we can at least partly discuss your first question, even if maybe it is in an indirect fashion. And to add some gravy to the conversation, I'll just offer up both a (1) concession and a (2) caveat in this regard, the concession being that 1) I do think it is within your right to indict a Supreme Being for moral negligence, and the caveat is that 2) we have to recognize that an moral indictment of a Surpreme Being can only be done from within an ethical framework that houses and harbors particular ethical assumptions as being axiomatic.

So, just as many of us like to apply the Outsider Test for Faith that various epistemological and historical issues as they pertain to determining the truth of Christianity in comparison to the existence of other religions in the world, THEN it is likewise the case that each of us who feels that we should indict a Supreme Being will have to apply a similar Outsider Test for Ethics since there are a bevy of various ethical positions--along with their various applications in Medicine, Political Science, and Religion--that we can all recognize and which all really call for our attention. None of them should just get a "free lunch," and they all should be under our scrutiny if we're going to start out from the position that even if there is a God of some sort, He is guilty of moral negligence in light of the issue of slavery as it sits in [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]-eyed moral fashion in the pages of the Bible.

And this is where I start with the whole issue..............................................

Thank your you response. I think your conclusion is the only honest way to understand the implications. It is far from an orthodox view, but honest. Do you thing these are others on this forum who would agree with you; I'm still trying to get a sense of the landscape of Christian Forums.