Is slavery morally wrong?

[revolutio]

Well there are more pressing topics I would like to debate, but it seems Christians and Non-Christians are determined to have as little in common with one another as possible :\

 

[draper]

On topic here, there are some people enslaved willingly...

 

[lunachick]

On topic here, there are some people enslaved willingly...

Errm - this statement is a rather vague and meaningless abstract, draper.

Can you enlighten us as to who these people are? How many of them there are? How are they may be considered enslaved? How do you know they are willingly enslaved? etc.

 

[Philosoft]

On topic here, there are some people enslaved willingly...

Well, I suppose, inasmuch as the definition of "slave" only specifies that the individual being slaved is "bound in servitude." However, I consider the "servitude" part to be unowed and/or uncompensated. Thus, I strongly question the sanity of anyone who claims to be a "willing servant."

 

[paul becke]

In the *Old Testament*, God specifically stated that slave-trading, particularly Israelites abducting their own brethren to sell them on, was detestable to Him. How much more so, Christians! You have your answer now, Aaron.

Are you Jewish, Aaron? If so, do you think the slave labour to which Jewish prisoners and indeed others were subjected by the Nazis, would have accorded with either the Jewish or Christian religion?

In the early years of the Church, from the teachings of the Evangelists it is clear that evolution was required of Christians. Not revolution. Otherwise, God would have had to intervene supernaturally to save them, or they would all have been executed.

Christians were also taught to *honour the Emperor* for much the same reason; although also to prevent anarchy.

It certainly doesn't mean that Christians had to pretend that the likes of Nero were in their own person honourable human-beings! Far from it.

 

[KatebTheChaotic]

How did/does god instruct slaves and masters to act? Daily memos to slaves and their owners? E-mail? A perfectly-written and scientifically-accurate book written in all the languages of the earth and available to all to read and learn, and without bloody murders and torture?

The story of hagar and sarai comes to mind

 

[draper]

Go to www.yahoo.com and search for 'Dominatrix Stories'. You'll see my point.

 

[Johnny_Tsunami]

What about the koran? Why is the bible written by god, but everyother religious text is wrong?

Proof would be nice.

We should know that something is definitely written by a deity before believing it all to be true.

In reply to the koran-[why can't other religions be taken seriously... etc.], the reason why the Bible is the only book that can be taken seriously is because it is the inspired word of God. Now I see your point, too. Why can't the koran be taken as truth?
Muhammed was supposedly another prophet of God, or Allah. This prophet started receiving testimony and inspiration from his God around the age of 40.. blah-blah-blah. Onto to the point. He was not inspired by the true God. You can argue your point, but he was either a. hit on the head by a rock and received frequency from a local radio station, b. received messages from what he thought was his God, or c. made it up. There is no proof on the koran.
Now you may ask what proof there is in the Bible. Well... basically, if you argue every point down to the bare minimum, there is none at all. Faith. Faith. Without faith, neither religion would run properly. [I'm not saying, though, that both are correct, and they will not both lead you to the same place] The immense joy that God gives you, along with his grace, is all the knowledge that Christians need to understand that the Bible is not just a book. It is life itself.
Now to culture. If you live, in lets say Pakistan, then of course, being around other people of Islamic faith, you will find it hard to take seriously Christianity. But please listen. Your culture defines your faith, obviously. If you grow up among Muslims, you are 99.9% going to be a Muslim. Most likely, that is. Same with Christianity. So let's move on, now that that's out of the way.
The Bible is written almost as a story. With a beginning [Garden of Eden], middle [Jesus's Death, crux.] and then end [Revelations], it explains why we are sinners, why we need Christ in our lives, and why this is so urgent, for the end times are coming. The koran, however, was written as a blank nothing. It was written, in comparison to the Bible, as almost Proverbs is written. It is just a book of phrases. And more Phrases. [don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with this.] But when the entire koran is written like this [the beginning=phrases, the middle=phrases, and the end=phrases,] with bunches and bunches of meaningless phrases, then what is there to hold to? There is nothing to base Islam on! No beginning, no middle, no end. No Saviour. No rescue from sin.
Another topic is deliverance from sin. In the Bible, there is a clear way to wash away sins [Jesus]. In the koran, there is nothing except bodily functions: i.e., what we can do: washing ourselves... blah-blah. There is no Saviour. Anyway... I feel very strongly on all this, so write back and we can have a very nice argument...
Anymore questions, or rhetorical objections to this? Please send back...
J-T.

 

[Logic]

Slavery helped to build America.

Slavery is a horrible, terrible, no-good, very bad thing. I don't see how anyone could morally justify slavery, but the bible on the other hand...

 

[truthnluv]

I have heard some people try to say that slavery is immoral. Let's hear what you all have to say.

Menstealing is immoral(1 Timothy 1:10) and That was the situation in America.

As for servants in Paul's day I would make note of the Christian master Philemon and his Christian slave/servant Onesimus.(Philemon)

Paul gives regulations for Christian masters and for Christian servants(Eph.6:5-9)

Slavery was not always the cruel dehumanizing version that we have come to know within the context of American history.

If you could not provide for yourself then you would become a bondservant to someone. After seven years a Hebrew servant could decide to go free or remain with that master forever in ancient Isreal. This would occur if they thought they would be safer under the protection of that household or just better off because he was a kind-hearted master, for example.
(Ex. 21:1-11, Lev.25:44-55) Notice the servant had to be treated fairly and released after seven years if they wished.

Slaves were often treated as part of the family in ancient Rome, for example, and could buy their freedom and citizenship.

This is all a moot point now, however, because buying slaves is illegal and therefore sinful.

But when starvation and violent death were the issues of the day people often chose to sell themselves into a form of temporary slavery for food, shelter, and protection.

truthnluv

 

[mpshiel]

truthnluv, you really need to stop reading gospel tracts and start picking up basic roman histories. Like take the cases of Cicero for instance. Roman law was based on arguement and reason more than evidence and testimony. Slaves could be called for testimony but as they were know to be completely dependant on their masters, all testimony was required to be tortured out of them.

And of course you realize that if the master was murdered, all the slaves owned by the master could be killed in retribution. The majority of slaves were not happy household slaves (who weren't really that happy as they had no control over thier own lives including who they could or could not marry) but mine slaves, galley slaves, farm slaves, road slaves, building slaves, sewage slaves and every other type of job that no one wants to do (look around at the migrants doing below minimum wage jobs - those are what used to be slave job - only they worked till they died).

Slavery continues to be practiced in many parts of the world, particularly sexual slavery - in fact America, in liberating Afganistan has brought about a new wave of slavery where 11 or 12 year old girls are sold off as wives to pay for debts. True, America did stop slavery only 100 years after the rest of the civilized world. Slavery always means that one person is at the mercy of another, and knowing human beings, in a lot of ways that goes bad, really bad.

Even in Roman society, Slaves were considered the lowest, else why would both Paul and Jesus shock followers by comparing themselves and taking on the acts of slaves.

But as you point out, the bible clearly supports slavery and only gives guidelines for those within it instead of denouncing it. But like many other issues, Christians have found that the principals of the bible overwiegh the cultural examples of the time.

 

[truthnluv]

truthnluv, you really need to stop reading gospel tracts and start picking up basic roman histories. Like take the cases of Cicero for instance. Roman law was based on arguement and reason more than evidence and testimony. Slaves could be called for testimony but as they were know to be completely dependant on their masters, all testimony was required to be tortured out of them.

And of course you realize that if the master was murdered, all the slaves owned by the master could be killed in retribution. The majority of slaves were not happy household slaves (who weren't really that happy as they had no control over thier own lives including who they could or could not marry) but mine slaves, galley slaves, farm slaves, road slaves, building slaves, sewage slaves and every other type of job that no one wants to do (look around at the migrants doing below minimum wage jobs - those are what used to be slave job - only they worked till they died).

Slavery continues to be practiced in many parts of the world, particularly sexual slavery - in fact America, in liberating Afganistan has brought about a new wave of slavery where 11 or 12 year old girls are sold off as wives to pay for debts. True, America did stop slavery only 100 years after the rest of the civilized world. Slavery always means that one person is at the mercy of another, and knowing human beings, in a lot of ways that goes bad, really bad.

Even in Roman society, Slaves were considered the lowest, else why would both Paul and Jesus shock followers by comparing themselves and taking on the acts of slaves.

But as you point out, the bible clearly supports slavery and only gives guidelines for those within it instead of denouncing it. But like many other issues, Christians have found that the principals of the bible overwiegh the cultural examples of the time.

Let's both forget about the references we both made to secular Roman history. Such things cannot be verified since they are not in scripture. Nor were we there.

Just make note of the verses I gave in order to get a biblical view of slavery.

The question was if slavery was immoral. Let immoral be determined by scripture.

By the way, are you implying that Philemon was somehow immoral and going against the princibles of scripture just because he had a slave? Paul seems to have thought the opposite and He is the one who gave most of the princibles of scripture for the Church(Phil.2-7).

truthnluv

 

[mpshiel]

Let's both forget about the references we both made to secular Roman history. Such things cannot be verified since they are not in scripture. Nor were we there.

errrr.....no. The point of reading history is you get the perspective of someone who was there. That's why with all of his faults, Josephus is an interesting read, if only to find out exactly where all the trees around Jerusalem went (due to the burning and reconstruction of the Roman siege equipment, by the time the city fell there was not a tree within 70 miles of Jerusalem). Vellum was adopted over parchment for law cases because parchment only lasted 200-300 years, while vellum was good for up to 1000. I mean we might as well say that the US didn't have slavery either because we weren't there.

Just make note of the verses I gave in order to get a biblical view of slavery.

The question was if slavery was immoral. Let immoral be determined by scripture.

By the way, are you implying that Philemon was somehow immoral and going against the princibles of scripture just because he had a slave? Paul seems to have thought the opposite and He is the one who gave most of the princibles of scripture for the Church(Phil.2-7).

truthnluv

There is more that is moral and immortal than is spoken of in scripture. Scripture for the most part can only give us principles and illustrations on how to live our lives. Did Jesus or the prophets talk about pot, or about gambling, about movies, about dealing with loud neighbors, about spousal abuse?

Yes, Philemon was at the time unable to see that in owning another human being he was bringing onto himself responsibilties he could not fulfill - that of being God - does that make him a bad person - no more than the rest of us - I am sure some further generation will shudder at what we see as commonplace. If you disagree, I am willing to buy you or one of your children for $50.

 

[Phred]

I have heard some people try to say that slavery is immoral. Let's hear what you all have to say.

Wanna real answer? Ask a slave.

 

[Joe Atheist]

I have heard some people try to say that slavery is immoral. Let's hear what you all have to say.

I can't think of what on earth could be morally wrong if not slavery...

 

[truthnluv]

errrr.....no. The point of reading history is you get the perspective of someone who was there. That's why with all of his faults, Josephus is an interesting read, if only to find out exactly where all the trees around Jerusalem went (due to the burning and reconstruction of the Roman siege equipment, by the time the city fell there was not a tree within 70 miles of Jerusalem). Vellum was adopted over parchment for law cases because parchment only lasted 200-300 years, while vellum was good for up to 1000. I mean we might as well say that the US didn't have slavery either because we weren't there.

We cannot quote historical facts with any accuracy if it is not in the bible and we were not there. This is because men are liars. "Let God be true and every man a liar" Romans 3:4

It has been said that history is a lie agreed upon. This is true.

Besides men being liars in their natural state, they also have VERY finite minds causing their understanding and their perspective to be warped.(Is.55)

I enjoy secular history, but I take it all "with a grain of salt."

There is more that is moral and immortal than is spoken of in scripture. Scripture for the most part can only give us principles and illustrations on how to live our lives. Did Jesus or the prophets talk about pot, or about gambling, about movies, about dealing with loud neighbors, about spousal abuse?

That's where you are quite incorrect, my friend. The things not addressed in scripture are Christian liberties.

Paul said, "Speak not above what was written."1Cor.4:6 So, if it's not addressed in God's word then you have no right to make declarations about if it's moral or immoral.

Pot is sinful because it is ILLEGAL. And that's the only reason.

Cannibinoids are NOT sinful because they are LEGAL(This is the active incredient in marijuana used for medical purposes).

Valium, Ativan, Lithium, etc. are not sinful because They are LEGAL.

Alcohol is not sinful because it is LEGAL.

Drunkenness(NOT BEING IN CONTROL) is addressed by scripture as wrong and is therefore sinful. The implication of the text is that any substance that reliquishes you of control is sinful and all drugs must be examined by this BIBLICAL criteria AND it's legality ALONE.

Gambling is not addressed by scripture as being sinful. "speak not above what was written." and then check your state laws to find out if it's illegal/sinful or not.

Movies not addressed by scripture. "speak not above what was written"

Dealing with brethren and non-believers(this includes loud and quiet neighbors) in addressed in great detail in the New Testament Epistles. To sum it up, BE NICE.

Spousal abuse is addressed in scripture and men and women are told exactly how to behave towards one another in the New Testament Epistles. Again, be nice.

Yes, Philemon was at the time unable to see that in owning another human being he was bringing onto himself responsibilties he could not fulfill - that of being God - does that make him a bad person - no more than the rest of us -

If he was living in a sinful situation Paul would have told him to stop. I'm sure he would have seen it if Paul had simply mentioned it him.

However, Paul told Onesimus to put himself back under Philemon as a servant and He told Philemon to forgive Onesimus for running away and allow him to come back not only as a servant, but a brother. Christian master's were told to treat their servants like brothers. Couldn't the writers of the New Testament just said to release them? Why didn't they?

If you disagree, I am willing to buy you or one of your children for $50.

I am not influenced by my emotions when it comes to this issue or any issue of scripture, my friend. It says what it says... I am not prepared to add to it or take away from it to accomodate what I like or don't like.

truthnluv

 

[angelnstix]

What kind of dumb question is that...this being asked to the person that created this thread...it really sickens me to see that you HAVE to ask such a thing!
SqueezetheShaman said it best in her post. Good job squeezetheShaman!

 

[Faith In God]

...So, if you were to go out into international waters, then smoking pot would be okay...not sin...hmm, i should move...

in other words, i disagree with you, truthnluv.

anyway, what you are saying is exactly the argument that the Confederates used to justify slavery. You are saying that they are right and we should've submitted to the confederacy? I agree in that the bible is actually kind of silent on this, but that doesn't mean we should condone slavery (mostly because most of the world sees it as not morally good either). an example would be suicide. the bible doesn't say if it is right or wrong, but we shouldn't go around advocating it, but should discourage it to avoid looking evil in any way (as Paul tells us to do).

(and save a life. duh )

 

[truthnluv]

...So, if you were to go out into international waters, then smoking pot would be okay...not sin...hmm, i should move...

in other words, i disagree with you, truthnluv.

anyway, what you are saying is exactly the argument that the Confederates used to justify slavery. You are saying that they are right and we should've submitted to the confederacy? I agree in that the bible is actually kind of silent on this, but that doesn't mean we should condone slavery (mostly because most of the world sees it as not morally good either). an example would be suicide. the bible doesn't say if it is right or wrong, but we shouldn't go around advocating it, but should discourage it to avoid looking evil in any way (as Paul tells us to do).

(and save a life. duh )

Actually, I said the confederates were wrong. Menstealing is a sin and that's how they aquired their slaves(1Tim.1:10).

Also, if the government says it is illegal to buy or sell people then it's sinful to disobey them.

Please understand me, I have no personal opinion on this issue. I am simply responding to the original post Biblically.

It doesn't matter what I personally feel about slavery or ANY other issue. And I a suggest to you, it doesn't matter what you feel either. We must look to the scriptures ALONE for our answers.

As for beer, alcohol, pot, etc. These things must be weighed by the amount of control they take away from you and their legality in the country you live in(Eph.5:18, 1Cor.6:12, 1Pet.2:13-17, etc.).

truthnluv

 

[womendon'tbesilent]

Hmm... is it really as simple as right and wrong?

As someone already mentioned, ancient Rome civilization practiced slavery widely. On one hand, it was brutal and inhumane: the slaves were pried away from their families and taken to far away lands where they would die after a lifetime of servitude. However, it's undeniable that slavery was absolutely essential to the rise and establishment of the Roman empire, and to the Greek civilization as well. It was because thousands of people were laboring away in the fields, the kitchen, the stable, etc. that the fortunate enslavers were free to devote their time to leisure habits such as philosophy, art, politics, civil discourse, literature, etc... all the accomplishments that we consider the most essential and the highest human accomplishments. And since we are as someone said a footnote to Plato (who doubtless had a few slaves to scrub his house), and our philosophies of equality go back straight to the Greeks, our own civilization and the benefits we take from previous civilizations are directly linked to the tireless and ceaseless toil of many many people. The same is somewhat true for Britain, the other great power more recently at it's height: it's because it was such a socially stratified culture where the lower classes are basically servants to the higher classes, that allowed the aristocrats at the top to live off the land and do absolutely nothing but draw, play piano, and plan the glory of Britannica,... and think more about freedom and equality, which America inherited from them.
The plain fact is that to survive takes a lot of work, and unless you have someone else to do your survival for you, you're going to be out in the fields toiling, or in the house scrubbing and too dead tired to think about anything and elevate yourself from the level of living just a bit better than animals.
But on the other hand, those who did have the chance to soar because of others took the rest of humanity up with them. Kind of like Thomas Jefferson - he had slaves and considered having sex and children with his female slave, Sally Hemmings, his right...but he wrote the Constitution and built the country that would ensure the freedom of Sally Hemmings descendants (which they wouldn't have, had they been born in Africa). There you have it.