Is Slavery Moral?

[cvanwey]

According to the Bible, the God of the holy Old Testament and New Testament seem to condone slavery (a few samples below):

OT: Exodus 21, Leviticus 25:46
NT: Luke 12:47, and Luke 17:7-10, John 13:16, Ephesians 6:5, 1 Timothy 6:1-2

Does this mean slavery is moral?

Thank you in advance for the response(s).

 

[JackRT]

No.

 

[Saucy]

The slavery in the bible is really a type of welfare. The laws exist to keep the bosses from abusing their slaves. It's a choice they had to pay off debts or to survive when times were bad by working for the rich.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Hebrew slavery was indeed moral.

transATL slavery was not.

 

[cvanwey]

No.

Does this then mean you disagree with God's stated morality?

 

[cvanwey]

Hebrew slavery was indeed moral.

transATL slavery was not.

Can you please elaborate?

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

Hi we live in an era where bankruptcy and all is cool with no regard to who or how much you stiffed the other guy. most of history had debtor prisons so say you loaned a guy a large sum and he lost it he would be in prison until he paid the debt. This seems cruel but it also takes a very high regard for paying back what you borrow. So if you could not pay back you could become a slave and work off the debt. In this regard it is better than debtor prisons and better than taking no responsibility for the money you did not pay back. In war slavery was a better option than death. The slavery we had in the 18th century was certainly wrong as innocent people were kidnapped and forced into slavery for profit. In the new testament the idea of being a bond slave of Jesus is spoken off. This is cool. I do not think there will be slavery in the millennium.

 

[jacknife]

Slavery is never moral.

 

[cvanwey]

The slavery in the bible is really a type of welfare. The laws exist to keep the bosses from abusing their slaves. It's a choice they had to pay off debts or to survive when times were bad by working for the rich.

This is false. Otherwise, please explain Leviticus 25:45-46, which also speaks about non Jewish people being kept for 'life', as 'slaves', and (also) being passed down to their children, and also being referred to as property.

This is also false, because the law states you could beat them, just as long as they did not die within two days, via Exodus 21:21. So I guess as long as you don't kill them, this is regulated sufficiently?

 

[Occams Barber]

The slavery in the bible is really a type of welfare. The laws exist to keep the bosses from abusing their slaves. It's a choice they had to pay off debts or to survive when times were bad by working for the rich.

When you've finished here I also have a few walls that need white washing.
OB

 

[Saucy]

When you've finished here I also have a few walls that need white washing.
OB

yessa massa

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Can you please elaborate?

Hebrew slavery was voluntary and, as already explained, was a way to pay off debt or a way to make a living during tough economic times. after a certain period of time slaves had to be set free and in some cases with compensation.

the transATL slave trade was a form of man-stealing which is condemned in both the old and new testaments. people were stolen from their land and forced into harsh labor.

 

[cvanwey]

Hi we live in an era where bankruptcy and all is cool with no regard to who or how much you stiffed the other guy. most of history had debtor prisons so say you loaned a guy a large sum and he lost it he would be in prison until he paid the debt. This seems cruel but it also takes a very high regard for paying back what you borrow. So if you could not pay back you could become a slave and work off the debt. In this regard it is better than debtor prisons and better than taking no responsibility for the money you did not pay back. In war slavery was a better option than death. The slavery we had in the 18th century was certainly wrong as innocent people were kidnapped and forced into slavery for profit. In the new testament the idea of being a bond slave of Jesus is spoken off. This is cool. I do not think there will be slavery in the millennium.

You are explaining indentured servants, which does not pertain to the following... I will give you the same response I gave another:

Please explain Leviticus 25:45-46, which also speaks about non Jewish people being kept for 'life', as 'slaves', and (also) being passed down to their children, and also being referred to as property/money.

The law states you could beat them, just as long as they did not die within two days, via Exodus 21:21. So I guess as long as you don't kill them, this is regulated sufficiently?

 

[cvanwey]

Slavery is never moral.

So you disagree with God's word?

 

[Saucy]

This is false. Otherwise, please explain Leviticus 25:45-46, which also speaks about non Jewish people being kept for 'life', as 'slaves', and (also) being passed down to their children, and also being referred to as property.

This is also false, because the law states you could beat them, just as long as they did not die within two days, via Exodus 21:21. So I guess as long as you don't kill them, this is regulated sufficiently?

I didn't say the laws would pass a modern inspection. Times were no doubt different back then. The law also says to share your goods with your slaves, not to rape them, to take care of them, feed them, etc. It's NOTHING like the African or Irish slave trades that took place. There are different types of slavery.

 

[jacknife]

So you disagree with God's word?

Yes

 

[cvanwey]

Hebrew slavery was voluntary and, as already explained, was a way to pay off debt or a way to make a living during tough economic times. after a certain period of time slaves had to be set free and in some cases with compensation.

the transATL slave trade was a form of man-stealing which is condemned in both the old and new testaments. people were stolen from their land and forced into harsh labor.

Thank you for the clarification, but please rationalize a small sampling below:

Exodus 21:21 – Slaves are referred to as property. This is not indentured servitude.
Leviticus 25:46 – Permanent slavery is not indentured servitude.
Exodus 21:6 – Being branded and kept for life is not indentured servitude.
Exodus 21:4 – Tricking the slave to stay for life, by holding their family permanent hostage, is not indentured servitude.

 

[cvanwey]

Yes

Winner winner chicken dinner I'm sorry, I did not see your description, or I would not have asked you ;-)

 

[cvanwey]

I didn't say the laws would pass a modern inspection. Times were no doubt different back then. The law also says to share your goods with your slaves, not to rape them, to take care of them, feed them, etc. It's NOTHING like the African or Irish slave trades that took place. There are different types of slavery.

I'm sorry, but your rationale is intellectually dishonest. If this passage came from the Holy Qur'an, you would agree these verses appear pretty unequal, which is the antithesis to claims of objectivity.

The verses state they could be beaten, as long as they don't die in a couple of days. So you are going to come back and state, 'well, it says not to rape them, so it's somehow okay?' And of course you must feed them, otherwise, they could not continue to work for you. This is just logic.

If it 'does not pass a modern inspection', then this means the law was never 'objective', as objective truth is unchanging. Using such logic, one could then argue that murdering babies might actually be considered moral starting next year. If the law ever changes, it was never objective. If it's not permitted, it's not permitted. If it changes, it was subjective to the time, and is demonstrated NOT to be objective moral law.

So when you state, it was a different type of slavery, and the Old Testament states they are to be kept for life, can be beaten to just before death, and be passed as property to their children, how is this a 'different kind of slavery?'

 

[seeking.IAM]

Not any more. Morals are tied to a time and a place. They are pinned to a society's "mores," defined as the essential customs and conventions of a community. They change across time, culture, and place. Sometimes we confuse "morals" and "sin." I submit that they are different. Slavery may have been usual and permitted 2,000 years ago but modern society deems it immoral.