Slavery IS Regulated in the Bible!
- Thread starter cvanwey
- Start date
- Status
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
No, none of us are ever authorized to punish in any such way ever.
The passage means (and by all means look up a commentary to help you if you can't learn it from me) -- that God Himself will punish pastors/priests/church leaders of any kind on the Day of Judgement after this life if they hurt church members and others they are meant to help and care for.
For example: pastors or priests that abused people in their church in significant ways (not only rape or other great evils but even it seems things like serious and repeated verbal abuse also; anything akin to the level of 'beating...slaves' ) -- they will lose Eternal Life and instead die the "second death" in the place with "weeping and gnashing of teeth".
It is saying God will punish those of us in positions of power or influence for 'beating slaves' and every thing as seriously wrong as beating slaves (unless utterly repented of in a total change way) -- with hell, and the second death there.
It's an example of the ultimate Law from God, today, for which the OP is asking: why isn't there Law against these things? -- Well, there is.
Upvote
0
PhantomGaze
Carry on my wayward son.
I'll admit, sometimes the simplest answers are the best, sometimes they're the worst. Context is important. As for your imaginary conversation, that depends upon the context. Do I find them on the street somewhere? A kkk convention? A Performing Arts Center acting out a novel articulating the evils of slavery? A civil war re-enactment? Like I said, context is important.
I am not aware of any Christian societies that have abolished and brought slavery back, but that's besides the point. Before Christianity no one in a rush to abolish slavery. That came as a logical extension of Christian values.
Certainly it does. Keep in mind much of the Bible is written to a bronze age culture, but many good stories start out pretty dark. There is a grander narrative to the Bible that overlays the specific details.
I don't think your argument is logical here. The Bible is literature. It has to be understood as literature. The entire narrative from Genesis to Revelation speaks of God's interactions trying to restore a relationship with a fallen and wicked mankind, and how Christ stepped into the world to redeem humanity from its own evil. In the New Testament we see Paul in his letter to the Galatians:
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male or female, for you are all one in Christ."
In other words, all men are brothers. Everyone is equal in Christ.
Again, context is important. You have to understand the Bible as a larger narrative, not just some apodictic rule book. (Although I admit some Christians do take it this way, they tend to fall among the less educated variety.)
You and I clearly have different understandings of how to interpret the Bible. We both derive our positions on what God thinks from it.
In other words, it was the West's adoption of Christian values that caused us to eventually abandon slavery. The pagan world certainly wasn't going to. If we eliminate Christianity as you seem to hope we do, we lose the meta-ethical basis for the eradication of slavery.
Upvote
0
This is quite incorrect. In order to read and understand anything, you must do it carefully and with full attention to context - and without bias.
As an atheist, I have no preference on whether God is a moral being or not; as far as I'm concerned, God is a character in a story. You can therefore rely on me to read the Bible fairly. If it turns out that God is a wonderful moral example, that makes no difference to me.
Christians, on the other hand, just believe that God is good, as it is an essential part of their religion. This explains why you are staring the facts of God saying "you can take, keep and punish slaves" in the face and denying them.
We've already seen that. You, on the other hand, might get them from us.
RIght. Not the absolute nadir. That, perhaps, might capturing people against their will and torturing them for no reason. Much in the way that God sends people to hell. But "take people, keep them against their will, force them to work for you, and punish them as much as you like, just without killing them" sounds pretty close to the worst form of slavery in real life.
Yes, that would certainly have been an improvement.
Not really, no. The Bible shows that God accepts an imperfect world, and His reasons for doing so are a different topic of discussion. However, it is you who said that God had a plan to eliminate slavery, and I am pointing out that you are obviously just projecting your own morality and preferences on to "history" as shown in the Bible.
Good point. If God really wanted to stop slavery, that is one of the things He could have done. But this is missing the point, which is that it God really was against slavery, He would have acted against it, and He didn't.
If you wish to read this verse as being against shipping slaves (which it obviously isn't) then we must point out that it is against slaves usurping the absent master's authority.
As I thought. Therefore, it is irrelevant to say that it is against punishing slaves.
(sigh) If you are referring to the Golden Rule, it was obviously not effective. Slavery continued for centuries, and was eventually stopped by a complicated network of factors, among which Christianity was only a small part.
In other words, if God did have a plan, it was an extraordinarily ineffective one.
And so we come to the conclusion: if you think that God hates slavery and wanted to stop it, your only recourse is to picture a God of astonishingly limited powers and limited intelligence. Since that is not how Christians define God, we can safely say:
God supports slavery.
Upvote
0
- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
Seriously? This is your answer? Then I guess we need not to listen or adhere to any moral teachings from Jesus. Nothing matters. There exists no right or wrong. Jesus spent a lot of time telling humans what to do, and what not to do. I guess it's all for nothing. Because, like you've now stated, 'we are all one in Christ'. I guess the only binding principle is belief and repentance. Nothing else matters.
Now please answer the questions and observations presented in post #219 and #220, since you are dodging them. I'll refresh your memory:
1. If you are a Jew, you are not to be enslaved for life. But if you are not a Jew, you can be enslaved for life. If we are 'all one in' with Christ, why the Jewish favoritism? Seems as though Jesus is fond of the flesh, Jewish flesh specifically.
2. God allows slavery then, now, and forever. Any form of slavery is permissible, as slavery is not well defined. God does not consider slavery a sin.
3. Your notion of progressive revelation seems odd. God allows slavery, and does not consider it sin. So why then is there a need for it to later be changed or abolished?
4. God would know people use all forms of slavery. And yet, God never clarifies that any of such slavery is 'wrong.' If God knows humans are either dumb, or self serving, why would God not clarify what type of slavery is not permissible?
5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.
6. Slaves are considered property (less-than-human). Slave owners are to do with their slaves what they will, as instructed by the NT.
Upvote
0
- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm addressing the seemingly relevant points, as they pertain to the OP.
Well, I see conflicts here.
1. God was NOT silent about the topic of slavery. A matter of fact, God mentions slavery specifically. And in doing so, not one time defines what the term 'slave' actually encompasses, and what 'slavery' does not encompass. And yet, God goes on to later specify what one can do to their slaves. (i.e.) Beat them for life, own them as property for life, etc... Again, granted they are not Israelites - (only under very specific conditions).
2. Since property is considered a possession, it would seem the 'golden rule' does not really apply to a 'slave', as a slave is merely nothing more than the slave master's property.
3. Even if the slave was still somehow considered equally human, you must still attempt to reconcile that most would not want to be enslaved for life, beaten for life, and considered property for life. So to attest about such verses as your fundamental 'principles' (i.e.) Matthew 7:12 or Mark 12:31, in relation to such allowances for basically all forms of slavery, appears as diametrically opposing propositions.
Well, I see conflicts here.
1. God was NOT silent about the topic of slavery. A matter of fact, God mentions slavery specifically. And in doing so, not one time defines what the term 'slave' actually encompasses, and what 'slavery' does not encompass. And yet, God goes on to later specify what one can do to their slaves. (i.e.) Beat them for life, own them as property for life, etc... Again, granted they are not Israelites - (only under very specific conditions).
2. Since property is considered a possession, it would seem the 'golden rule' does not really apply to a 'slave', as a slave is merely nothing more than the slave master's property.
3. Even if the slave was still somehow considered equally human, you must still attempt to reconcile that most would not want to be enslaved for life, beaten for life, and considered property for life. So to attest about such verses as your fundamental 'principles' (i.e.) Matthew 7:12 or Mark 12:31, in relation to such allowances for basically all forms of slavery, appears as diametrically opposing propositions.
Upvote
0
- Oct 28, 2006
- 21,171
- 9,958
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
What parts are "ambiguous"? The parts about how those who identify with God should not oppress others, even foreigners, and should set their captives free?
How about if you read Isaiah 56 to 59, in full? There's a lot there that a white slave owner in the Antebellum South should very well have chewed on [but probably didn't if he wasn't well educated], don't you think? In fact, the entire book of Isaiah should be more than enough for most Americans who claim to be Christian and have lived in the context of the political developments of American society to chew on. And that's not even getting into ALL of the various 'laws' in the Torah pertaining to how the Israelites were commanded by God to love and empathize with the well intended FOREIGNER/STRANGER/SOJOURNER.
Of course, on the other hand, those foreign prisoners of war and/or criminal types [think 'gangsta types'] who were not 'well-intended' could be subject to ... some beatings as slaves, especially if they remained recalcitrant to correction.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The antebellum South was extremely familiar with the Bible, and happy to quote it. As you read the Bible you will find that it supports the pro-slavery side.
http://civilwarbaptists.com/thisdayinhistory/1861-january-27/
Reading this sermon we can agree that the slave holders were wrong, and can find many things to be horrified at. But when he makes the case that slavery is founded in the Bible, he's on rock solid ground:
Had God, the Great Law Giver, been opposed to slavery, he would perhaps have said, “thou shalt not hold property in man: thou shalt not enslave thy fellow being, for all men are born free and equal.” Instead of reproving the sin of covetousness, he would have denounced the sin of slavery; but instead of this denunciation, when He became the Ruler of his people, He established, regulated and perpetuated slavery by special enactment, and guaranteed the unmolested rights of masters to their slaves by Constitutional provision.
And
He reproved them for their sins. Calling them the works of the flesh and of the devil. He denounced idolatry, covetousness, adultery, fornification, hypocrisy, and many other sins of less moral turpitude, but never once reproved them for holding slaves; though He alluded to it frequently, yet never with an expression of the slightest disapprobation.
Upvote
0
Thank you that. Very funny.
So you'd like to know the context? But of course. It was God telling the Israelites the right and proper way to live their lives. In other words, it was God telling them to take, keep and punish slaves.
You clearly how very little of the history of slavery and abolition. Slavery was reestablished as a booking business by Christian countries, and while the abolition movement was largely Christian, so we're it's opponents, who could make a persuasive case that slavery was God's will, simply by quoting the Bible.
Okay. I'll play this game. So the Bible is a story of moral instruction? In that case, it begins by saying that slavery is not only permissible, but right and proper and to be encouraged. It never rescinds or contradicts this, and continues to encourage it even in the New Testament.
And He did have quite a lot to say about various evils, didn't He? And yet Jesus never once mentioned slavery, except to praise and encourage it.
YEs. All christians, even slaves.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Oct 28, 2006
- 21,171
- 9,958
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Please stop repeatedly skipping over the actual details of what I've asserted and what I'm, therefore, having to repeatedly having to reaffirm. And while you're at it, please explain how ALL of the laws in the Torah and the statements of the prophets which pertain to the humane and caring treatment of well-intended FOREIGNERS wouldn't have impinged upon the ways in which ancient Israelite legal adjudicators would have interpreted how allowances for suppositions of slavery would have been handled overall.
Upvote
0
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Slavery continues today.
Humans are in a temporary life in which we need internal change , because what's needed isn't only to do an occasional kindness, or even something good each day, say like a criminal might (to help illustrate), but something instead to actually change us fundamentally inside.
In the 'heart'. So that instead of the million ways people typically mistreat others, from disregard, cutting off, gossiping against, making jokes at the expense of, misrepresenting, just All the not -love actions from ignoring all the way to murder...that we stop wanting to do those.
That's like changing human nature.
It's not a couple of years of self improvement and a shift working at a charity....
Something much deeper --
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor iand hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies...
46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. "
No one can do this much, long, without a profound change inside. This is what Christ came.
So that we could change, those "few" (not everyone, but some) that would follow Him.
It's not at all simply saying one is Christian and making a show. The real thing leads to real change in the heart.
46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Upvote
0
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Slave owners once converted to Christianity would need to free their slaves (all that wanted freedom), and treat any that remained as employees with fair wages (as they would a hired hand).
Or else they go to the place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth" because of continuing in clear wrongs, losing eternal life. In the vernacular, "going to hell."
Because of the words from Christ, above.
Upvote
0
- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
You listed verse Isaiah 58:12. It is ambiguous. I'm asking for a verse, or better yet, verses, which would somehow negate the opposing verses (which completely allow for slavery), in practically every form humanly imaginable. And as told to others, even if you could find something in there; HOW would you then reconcile such found verses directly AGAINST the verses which specifically tell individuals how to enslave?
You would then need to practice your own 'moral judgement' to decipher which 'side' to ignore. And since humans are not perfect, we are to be told 'absolutely' or 'objectively', what constitutes as 'sin' directly against what is permissible/allowable, or deemed not a sin in the eye's of God. And since the human is flawed, this is exactly why so many here use the Bible as 'truth'. This is why the moral topic comes up so very often. If I tell you I think 'something is wrong', you might 'knee jerk' with a theistic response, such as, 'what's your standard.' Well, I could argue for hours on the topic of morality, to no end... But I'm not going there...
But I instead point out the axiomatic....
Does God allow all forms of slavery, or, does God completely oppose all forms of slavery? To resolve this, I must IGNORE some verses, and instead evaluate, with my 'flawed human brain'. But I may be 'wrong' in God's eyes.
So I again ask, cite a verse(s) which tells me that if chattle slavery was again legalized, why I could NOT use Bible verses to justify my actions as permissible by God? And when you do, please also, for grins, tell me why I must no longer adhere to the verses which seem to condone such practices? And also while your at it, please tell me why many other OT laws are still binding to boot, while others are no longer binding? You starting to see why we have 1,000's of sub-sects in this belief system?
How about them? Can you please be a little more specific? Most here have no problem providing specific verses. Please demonstrate the axiomatic statements, as told from 'Isaiah', which will negate/overthrow/nullify the aforementioned passages of seemingly condoned chattle slavery? And while you are at it, if these verses are also in the OT, WHY are these verses STILL binding, while the OTHER verses I mentioned in the OT, are NOT? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Or can you?
That's enough for now...
Upvote
0
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Slave owners once converted to Christianity would need to free their slaves (all that wanted freedom), and treat any that remained like employees, with fair wages and good treatment (as they would a hired hand).
Or else they go to the place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth" because of continuing in clear wrongs, losing eternal life. In the vernacular, "going to hell."
Because of the words from Christ, above.
Not all that say they are 'Christian' do what Christ says.
But those who do what Christ says will gain eternal Life, and those that do not will "perish" in the second death.
Or else they go to the place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth" because of continuing in clear wrongs, losing eternal life. In the vernacular, "going to hell."
Because of the words from Christ, above.
Not all that say they are 'Christian' do what Christ says.
But those who do what Christ says will gain eternal Life, and those that do not will "perish" in the second death.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
Um....
'6 All slaves should show full respect for their masters so they will not bring shame on the name of God and his teaching. 2 If the masters are believers, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. Those slaves should work all the harder because their efforts are helping other believers who are well loved.'
************************
Can you please stop dodging my requests? I will gladly update them again for you. You know, the ones you keep avoiding:
1. If you are a Jew, you are not to be enslaved for life. But if you are not a Jew, you can be enslaved for life. If we are 'all one in' with Christ, why the Jewish favoritism? Seems as though Jesus is fond of the flesh, Jewish flesh specifically.
2. God allows slavery then, now, and forever. Any form of slavery is permissible, as slavery is not well defined. God does not consider slavery a sin.
3. Your notion of progressive revelation seems odd. God allows slavery, and does not consider it sin. So why then is there a need for it to later be changed or abolished?
4. God would know people use all forms of slavery. And yet, God never clarifies that any of such slavery is 'wrong.' If God knows humans are either dumb, or self serving, why would God not clarify what type of slavery is not permissible?
5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.
6. Slaves are considered property (less-than-human). Slave owners are to do with their slaves what they will, as instructed by the NT.
Upvote
0
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Indentured servitude, slavery, every kind -- no type of status would be any excuse for the one being served to in any manner abuse those servants.
If he did abuse slaves (or anyone else, of any status for that matter also) and continued abuse, he would lose eternal life, and perish in the second death. Any instance of forced slavery breaks Matthew 7:12.
See yet?
Both the indentured servant/slave and the master, both would have to follow Matthew 7:12 (and repent for times they did not).
Or if they acted badly towards others, including masters or servants (and anyone else for that matter also!), and continued to do that wrong, without repenting, then this is the result for them: "weeping and gnashing of teeth" after the Day of Judgement -- the loss of the infinite gift, loss of eternal life.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
Correct, since the Bible does not define slavery, it is all allowed/permitted just-the-same; as the OT God and also the reincarnate - Jesus/God both attest to or permit.
So let me get this straight....
You are saying that God does not like 'slavery'. And the ones that do impose 'slavery', will surely be punished? Why doesn't the Bible say this? The only one which is saying this, is YOU. Again, according to the Bible, 'slaves' are 'property'. 'Slaves' may be beaten, just short of death. Property does not possess equal rights. When you keep referencing the 'golden rule', this would not apply to 'slaves', as defined by the Bible. Otherwise, you would not see such explicit verses in the OT, which Jesus never states 'no longer apply'. OT verses state what slave masters can do to their property/slaves. Jesus comes along later, negates none of it, and then explicitly mentions 'slaves' again. He does not define what a slave is and is not. Hence, we are left with the predetermined definitions of the OT definition. Which is, property for life, can be beaten for life, can be passed down for life, can be purchased from around you - just as long as you are not a Jew. Now tell me how this differs from the classical definition of chattle slavery?
Please see above.
Furthermore, you seem to think such actions, in beating your slaves, is bad; when God speaks to the contrary. If God thought it was bad, sure He would have mentioned as such. But instead, He condones it, and does not state any such action is sin.
I see you have continued to dodge all my valid observations. Care to respond to them? I will surely keep furnishing them below, as long as you respond. I Don't want you to miss the opportunity to 'set me straight,' once and for all; and teach me of how I'm not understanding
If the Bible never mentioned slavery, like it does not mention other activities, in which I'm sure we both think are 'bad', then maybe you've got something. But the Bible explicitly draws a road-map, as to what God thinks is permissible. regarding 'slavery'. And now you are furnishing responses, not backed by scripture
You are placing words into God's mouth. Words He never expressed to humans. But somehow, you seem to have the 'inside track' to what He really meant to say Again, God does not consider slavery 'bad'. You do! Hence, the reason you are providing rebuttal.
Now, can you please address my observations. Maybe you will see them if I place them in red:
1. If you are a Jew, you are not to be enslaved for life. But if you are not a Jew, you can be enslaved for life. If we are 'all one in' with Christ, why the Jewish favoritism? Seems as though Jesus is fond of the flesh, Jewish flesh specifically.
2. God allows slavery then, now, and forever. Any form of slavery is permissible, as slavery is not well defined. God does not consider slavery a sin.
3. Your notion of progressive revelation seems odd. God allows slavery, and does not consider it sin. So why then is there a need for it to later be changed or abolished?
4. God would know people use all forms of slavery. And yet, God never clarifies that any of such slavery is 'wrong.' If God knows humans are either dumb, or self serving, why would God not clarify what type of slavery is not permissible?
5. In affect, what (you) are saying, is that it is the Christians which don't like slavery... Why does Jesus not agree wholeheartedly? Why is it a 'feather in your cap' moment that America abolished slavery, when Jesus could care less if it's abolished? Jesus allows for it.
6. Slaves are considered property (less-than-human). Slave owners are to do with their slaves what they will, as instructed by the NT.
Upvote
0
- Mar 17, 2015
- 17,184
- 9,196
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
No. Just the exact opposite.
Instead you will learn in the New Testament -- if you are willing to learn -- that the opposite is the case: those that abuse others, including servants, slaves, foreigners, (including 'illegal immigrants'), the poor, someone at court, your neighbor, your child, your neighbors child, you uncle, Fred's aunt -- all cases, A-Z, every kind of abuse of others, breaking Matthew 7:12, is always wrong, no exceptions, ever, and only those that repent and change can be saved. Those who continue in sin will die the second death.
Obviously a lot more than only slave owners are in great danger. But we can surmise especially slave owners as a group over time, especially, since involuntary slavery breaks Matthew 7:12.
Basically, to be repetitive, they would need to free all their slaves that wanted freedom, and pay the rest a good wage. In order to have a chance on the Day of Judgement all will face, including us.
See, Christ came because of human evils, to help save us from ourselves.
Luke 5:32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance."
Christ came for sinners like you, like me, and like every slave owner, and everyone else too. That we be totally changed, and become different than we were.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Status
Similar threads
