On slavery in the New Testament:
I didn't say that Paul freed Onesimus, nor did he command such a thing, but he does encourage it and so is included in the list of verses that encourage freedom for slaves. And I agree that his reasons were about the Kingdom, but it is still encouraging freedom.
But this doesn’t encourage freedom for slaves. It shows Paul asking for ther freedom of a single slave for the specific reason that he liked him. If Paul had actually considered slavery to be a moral evil – as he clearly didn’t – he would have tried to help Onesimus escape. Instead, what did he do? He sent him back to his master, because it was right, to him, that the decision to free a slave should be taken by his master. Remember: try seeing this through the eyes of the people at the time, and not from a modern, western perspective.
If a Christian master owns Christian slaves then after reading Philiemon they might be encouraged to consider that their slaves might do more for the kingdom elsewhere... or they might not.
Well, exactly. They might, or they might not. Not exactly building a strong case, are we?
Irrespective of that they still had to treat their slaves justly and fairly and they still had to sit with them in the churches and worship with them and even be taught by them (if Onisemus is an example).
The companion to the Great Apostle Paul, who practically single-handedly started the Christian religion as a major movement?
No. I don’t really think that Onesimus is an example of a typical slave.
That's the problem though, I don't agree with Warren on everything, I just agree with some of what he says. If he had said, "Jesus is Lord" I would be able to say amen, but it is primarily the way that he uses what he says and what he doesn't say that I have a problem with.. and I made that clear in the posting.
I know. I didn’t really expect you to agree with Warren, even in the face of the evidence. I mean really, how could you? You told me already that it would create problems if the evidence showed that God supported slavery. Well, we can see that it does, and the problems are emerging: you are unwilling to face the truth.
To be in favour of something you have to promote it, push it, encourage it. I don't see that in any of the New Testament writers. They just live with it. You are putting words and intent into their mouths (bias again).
Not at all. Just quoting them accurately.
Ephesians 6: 5-8
Slaves and Masters 5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ;6not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart.7Render service with enthusiasm, as to the Lord and not to men and women,8knowing that whatever good we do, we will receive the same again from the Lord, whether we are slaves or free.
In other words, it is pleasing for a slave to fear his master and obey him; as humans fear God, so slaves should fear masters; and just as it is wrong for men to disobey God, so it is wrong for slaves to disobey those who have been set over them.
Colossians 3: 22-24
22Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything, not only while being watched and in order to please them, but wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord.23Whatever your task, put yourselves into it, as done for the Lord and not for your masters,24since you know that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward; you serve the Lord Christ.
In other words, it pleases God when slaves do their duties well. Those who do so will be rewarded.
1Tim 6:1-2
1Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be blasphemed.2Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful to them on the ground that they are members of the church; rather they must serve them all the more, since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved.
In other words, it is an offence to God for slaves to be disobedient.
Titus 2:9-10
9Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back,10not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior.
In other words, it pleases God when slaves do their jobs well.
These are all pro-slavery messages; they all show God as being pleased by slavery and by slaves doing their jobs well. They warn against abolition; if God wishes for slaves to stay slaves and serve their masters, surely He would be displeased by anyone who tried to deprive a master of His slave.
Now, your natural reaction might be that my interpretation is wrong, because to your mind – and mine – this is not a loving way to behave. But that’s just the point. Our idea of “loving behaviour” does not seem very similar at all to the Bible’s. For the speakers in the New Testament, “loving behaviour” meant keeping slaves as slaves, since their servitude glorified the Lord.
Again, why is that favourable. At best it could be said that it is indifferent, but it doesn't favour masters, since they too have a command to keep. There is a two-way process going on and to keep failing to see that is to have bias.
Not at all. The text is speaking to masters – in other words, confirming their rightful place. If the Bible was in fact anti-slavery, it would say that there should be no masters or slaves. If the Bible was in fact indifferent to slavery it would not tell masters or slaves what to do one way or the other. But the Bible is in fact pro-slavery. “Slavery is right,” it is saying, “and this is the way you should do it.”
And let us remember that when the Bible tells masters to be good to their slaves, we are going by the Biblical definition of loving behaviour – one in which slaves are told to obey their masters with fear and trembling, and Jesus speaks of God as a master who punishes slaves with beatings. Punishment, in this era, was seen as a form of love. God chastises those that he loves, and slave masters were ordained to do likewise.
Again: to us this does not seem loving. Try not to see it through modern, western eyes. This was great advice you gave, and I suggest you heed it.
I'm not going to agree with Warren on this. "not as equals to the master" is clear indication that the man is attempting to justify his views - The slave should be his brother in Christ and Warren seems to have missed these words of Jesus: "The greatest among you will be your servant. And whomever exalts himself will be humbled and whoever humbles himself will be exalted."
Warren is humbling others and exalting himself and the masters.
If you think a little more about what you just said, you will see it is not so. Indeed, this very idea was one of the great preservers of slavery in medieval Christianity: the idea that bodily servitude meant nothing, because the greater suffering you had in life, the more you would be rewarded in heaven. As for exalting himself, Warren is doing nothing of the sort. He is exalting God, for having put such a system into place. This is why slaveowners were so eager to have slaves taught to be Christians. It's a religion in which bodily suffering is shown to be unimportant, as all that matters is the reward of heaven. So what does it matter if a person is a slave on Earth, just so long as they are a saved Christian. Indeed the more a person suffers, the more sure their reward will be in the afterlife. That's what your quote from Jesus is saying.
I think either Warren was very lucky in the area he preached in or very naive.
And again, this is one side of the argument. That you (and Warren) are unable to acknowledge the other side, even to quote it is an indication that the argument is never going to be over.
It is just like that those who get up in arms about the command for wives to obey their husbands as though that is the end of the argument, rather than the beginning (husbands love your wives, in case you are not familiar).
Any time you look at the subject of slavery, you should look at the whole subject, not just bits of it, else error will creep in.
I'd have more respect for Warren if he had a sermon on the subject of how masters should love their slaves. As it is all you have presented is a very one-sided view of what was going on.
I agree that none of this would make a slave less a slave, but Christians were there egging their governments on to do away with slavery (e.g. Wilberforce, Newton, Lincoln).
Two points: first, cvanwey has already explained the Biblical pecking order to you, so that takes care of your main objection. And second, Warren was indeed preaching a sermon that masters should and did take good care of slaves. “They constitute an element in the social and religious relations of life, not as equals to the master, but as good subjects of a patriarchal government, under their moral and spiritual interests are supplied through the gospel – they are fed, clothed and protected – nursed affectionately when sick, and bountifully provided and tenderly cared for when old. Under this treatment, they cherish an affection for the master akin to the love of children to their parents, and thus
through affection is the yoke made easy and the burden light.”
This sounds exactly like what the New Testament was saying; and undoubtedly the New Testament, like Warren, did not see this as being inconsistent with punishing disobedient or trouble-making slaves.
The New Testament is full of references about loving and helping others. It condemns acts that seemed commonplace in the Atlantic Slave Trade. Neither Jesus nor any of his apostles held slaves. We know only of a few disciples that did and they are universally told to love their brothers.
So the ONLY thing that the Bible does not condemn is the holding of slaves, everything else is roundly condemned.
That is quite incorrect. The Old Testament clearly says that slaves can be captured, kept for life and beaten, and the New Testament clearly says that slavery is an institution that honours God and should be maintained.
The New Testament is neutral on the subject providing guidance for both slaves and masters. If you live in an environment where that is happening, then here is your guidance. Where you do not (like now) then it is just a piece of information that informs the way the work ethic we ought to have as Christians along with the work ethic companies ought to have in dealing with their employees - and sadly which many do not).
There you go again, speaking as if the Bible was written by a twenty-first century citizen of a democracy. Try to see it from their point of view. The Bible was speaking of actual slaves. Slavery is an important part of the stories of the Old Testament. Jesus knew all about them, and referred to slaves in his parables more than once, never with any intimation that there was anything wrong with their servitude; and other writers in the New Testament make a point of propping up the institution of slavery.
