Slavery and the American Declaration of Independence - scriptural?

[shernren]

There's an argument starting up in another thread about slavery and the Bible's condonement of it. Which is again another interesting study into the American literal hermeneutic. (I say American because frankly I've never seen anyone else come up with it on their own within the last two centuries. Every creationist I know here learnt the stuff from your books. So it's your fault! )

Here's the question:

Does the Bible condone slavery?

If no, where does it specifically prohibit slavery?
If yes, why don't you have a slave?

It is rather interesting to study how American history is related to the Bible. After all, the drafters of the Declaration of Independence (I hope I'm not touching any nerves) were surely Christians, and yet much of what they say can be "refuted" from the Bible. For example:

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

Really? The right to life I won't contest. But if man's unalienable right is to liberty then why were there regulations of slavery in God-given Laws? And neither can I find the right to pursuit of happiness in the Bible, except an admonition from Ecclesiastes that there is nothing better for man under the sun. C.S. Lewis has said as much too, that "man has no right to happiness".

That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed

Don't governments derive their just powers from God?

that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

But we are supposed to pray for governments, not alter or abolish them.

Yet if the signers of this document were Christians, they must have been convinced that it was Scriptural. Is it still Scriptural?

Can a practice or belief be Scriptural in one age and not in another?

 

[Critias]

There's an argument starting up in another thread about slavery and the Bible's condonement of it. Which is again another interesting study into the American literal hermeneutic. (I say American because frankly I've never seen anyone else come up with it on their own within the last two centuries. Every creationist I know here learnt the stuff from your books. So it's your fault! )

Here's the question:

Does the Bible condone slavery?

If the Bible is silent on the issue, it still doesn't mean it condones it. Since, I know you are talking about the conversation I was participating in, I will state quite clearly my position. If I am not clear enough, please let me know.

I am not advocating for slavery. I am advocating that God has a plan for each us and uses us in the various different circumstances that we are in. When Paul was arrested unjustly, did he physically try to fight to be free? No, he submitted. Why? Because he knew God had a plan for him in prison. What happened when he was in prison? People heard the Gospel and became Christians.

Now, slavery must be defined to location for salvery has been going on for quite some time everywhere in the world. Since you have defined it in America, that is where I will concentrate on.

In the slavery days, many slaves were Christians. There were many instances where the slaves taught their masters about Jesus Christ and their masters became believers. Do you think this was God's plan; was God in control here?

If no, where does it specifically prohibit slavery?
If yes, why don't you have a slave?

People are treated unjustly all the time. The Bible speaks against the many abuses that went on during the American slavery times.

This shouldn't be about whether or not slavery was right or wrong but about God working within real history to help spread the Gospel message. That is what I have been trying to convey in the other thread, but my message has not been accepted.

Where in the Bible does it say it is wrong that the Early Church Father were murdered for their faith? In the Ten Commandments. Where does it say in the Bible that it is wrong to put someone in jail for speaking the Gospel message? It doesn't.

The Bible does talk about treating each other as we want to be treated. Sadly, many don't follow this teaching very well, including Christians. We can look just in this forum alone and see that.

It is rather interesting to study how American history is related to the Bible. After all, the drafters of the Declaration of Independence (I hope I'm not touching any nerves) were surely Christians, and yet much of what they say can be "refuted" from the Bible. For example:

Because we are Christians doesn't mean we always do right, does it? Again, look at this forum and how we treat each other. Should we say we aren't Christians because we haven't treated each other as we would want to be treated?

Really? The right to life I won't contest. But if man's unalienable right is to liberty then why were there regulations of slavery in God-given Laws? And neither can I find the right to pursuit of happiness in the Bible, except an admonition from Ecclesiastes that there is nothing better for man under the sun. C.S. Lewis has said as much too, that "man has no right to happiness".

See above.

Don't governments derive their just powers from God?

Yes. Sadly, man doesn't always recognize this.

But we are supposed to pray for governments, not alter or abolish them.

Do you know that as Christians we are to submit to authority? Our place is not in trying to change government laws, but rather to spread the Gospel message. We are not of this world and we ought to stop acting like we are.

We are to help spread the message of Jesus Christ, not change government laws. That is our true calling.

And don't take that as I am against people who are in government, I'm not. Rather, I see our calling as Christians to be spreading the Gospel message.

Yet if the signers of this document were Christians, they must have been convinced that it was Scriptural. Is it still Scriptural?

Have you been wrong about how you have understood Scripture? I have.

Can a practice or belief be Scriptural in one age and not in another?

No. Scripture is always consistent. It is man who has been wrong. We tend to read it with biases towards this world. We tend to have one foot in the world and one foot for Christ. That is our problem.

If we could, just for once, realize who we belong to, what He has called us to do, what He has called us to be, and acted on it, it would be amazing!

We tend to get too involved in this world, its teachings, its morals, its beliefs.

 

[Critias]

One thing you have to remember Shernren is that we are all slaves. We are either slaves to sin or slaves to Jesus Christ. Therefore you cannot equate slavery with the treatment the African Americans received from white men and women.

 

[QuantaCura]

The servant master relationship in the Bible is different than the dehumanizing chattel slavery of the American South. Not all involuntary servitude is immoral either--take prison labor for example.

 

[shernren]

In the slavery days, many slaves were Christians. There were many instances where the slaves taught their masters about Jesus Christ and their masters became believers. Do you think this was God's plan; was God in control here?

Of course God was in control. Was God condoning the act of slavery? I don't think so. God used Joseph as the prime minister of Egypt; but surely He would not have condoned his brothers' actions in selling him away. God used Assyria to punish Israel, but later said that He Himself would punish Assyria - that He did not condone their actions. It is clear that God can use events and actions which He does not condone for His own purposes. That does not mean we should deliberately do what He does not want us to do.

This shouldn't be about whether or not slavery was right or wrong but about God working within real history to help spread the Gospel message. That is what I have been trying to convey in the other thread, but my message has not been accepted.

Maybe you don't really get my argument, since I wasn't clear. I am asking about and investigating the relationship between popular theories, the Bible, and the people that use the Bible to support them. In the days of slavery, the Bible was used to support it. Today in the days of post-slavery, we look back and use the Bible to denounce it.

Has the Bible changed? No! But people and the society around the Bible change. The Bible, having been more or less unchanged since its canonization, may yet say different things to different people in different places. It is in the same way that God is one and unchanging, yet shows Himself to be different to different people.

And of course how this applies to creationism is obvious. It may be that YECism was Biblical for another society and age, but not for this.

 

[shernren]

Let me be specific. I am talking about the slavery of men to men, and how slavery of Jews to Jews within their society was used to condone the slavery of blacks to whites within white society. Was that right? Or wrong? And how do we know that we might not be similarly mistaken today to use Scripture to condone YECism?

 

[Critias]

Let me be specific. I am talking about the slavery of men to men, and how slavery of Jews to Jews within their society was used to condone the slavery of blacks to whites within white society. Was that right? Or wrong? And how do we know that we might not be similarly mistaken today to use Scripture to condone YECism?

Well let's first answer the question I posed in the other thread. Was Paul wrong to send Onesimus back to Philemon to be accepted as a slave? Paul's wish was that he be accepted as a brother. Was Paul wrong to tell Onesimus to go back to Philemon?

How do we know we might not be wrong today to use Scripture to condone TEism? You call it a myth much like other ancient myths that were used to show that the King was divine. How do we know that scientists who are Christians are not doing the same thing to exalt themselves instead of God?

It is obvious that slavery is wrong, but we ought to accept our lot in life and allow God to work within us, to use us for His good.

Did call you to make yourself part of this world? Or did He call you out of this world?

 

[shernren]

Well let's first answer the question I posed in the other thread. Was Paul wrong to send Onesimus back to Philemon to be accepted as a slave? Paul's wish was that he be accepted as a brother. Was Paul wrong to tell Onesimus to go back to Philemon?

No, Paul was not wrong to have done that then. But I believe that if (though a big if) Paul were living in this time and age he would have condemned slavery along with the rest of us and told Onesimus to walk in liberty. We must remember that the society of the first century AD was far less technologically equipped and far more labor intensive, and I believe that would have justified responsible slavery during that time. What was wrong was to take the Bible's justification of 1st century slavery to justify the modern and far more cruel slavery. Both wrong in and of itself (as it was not as necessary as it was 1st century) and wrong because of the way the slaves were treated.

How do we know we might not be wrong today to use Scripture to condone TEism? You call it a myth much like other ancient myths that were used to show that the King was divine. How do we know that scientists who are Christians are not doing the same thing to exalt themselves instead of God?

Well I live and talk (hopefully) with the assumption that I might be proven unscriptural by the theologians of the future. Most YECs don't.

 

[shernren]

Just found this posted over at the Youth Guys forums. Good and balanced exposition.

http://westminster-abbey.org/voice/sermon/archives/010912_sermon.htm

 

[Crusadar]

Let me be specific. I am talking about the slavery of men to men, and how slavery of Jews to Jews within their society was used to condone the slavery of blacks to whites within white society. Was that right? Or wrong? And how do we know that we might not be similarly mistaken today to use Scripture to condone YECism?

If one wants to make such a claim that a plain reading of scripture leads to the sanctioning of slavery not only is he misled but also could not be further from the truth! You would need to do a much better job than make such spurious assertions shernren - like um, not only examining slavery critically in the light of biblical context but also the evolutionary and cultural context slavery occurs in?

In Biblical times particularly during Jesus’ time, the term “slave” in Rome had quite a different meaning than it does here in America’s history. The status of a slave in Roman time was actually honorable where it was considered a position of trust and authority – in fact it could even lead to emperorship Jewett Robert state in Romans to Revelation:

“The Roman bureaucracy that was rapidly developing at the time Paul wrote this letter was made up of highly trained and highly paid slaves of Caesar. These persons were preferred in the imperial offices because they were loyal to the emperor alone, hoping for their freedom after some years of loyal service. Many of the slaves serving in the imperial bureaucracy became fabulously rich because of their handling of imperial finances. Also, during the time Paul wrote, the expression “slave of Caesar” was often used for imperial ambassadors or representatives of various kinds. Such persons carried the majesty and power of the emperor with them as they represented him in foreign courts.” - Robert Jewett “Romans to Revelation” 1977 pp. 11-12.

Of course many slaves were laborers (as were many who were not slaves) while some slaves held teaching positions that were the equivalent of Ph.D’s. Thomas Sowell (an African American Scholar) points out in his book “Race and Culture” that every major world culture until the modern period has had slavery. If you look at different cultures, historically, slavery was due to military conquests - however it also serves as an economic function at peace time as a way of paying one’s debts (as there were no bankruptcy laws then). By selling oneself or one’s family into slavery one’s debts were discharged. In Jewish society under the law slaves were to be freed every seventh year.

The American slavery system of the south was very different in many ways to that of the historical slave social systems recorded in scripture - as such to conclude that the Bible condones slavery as that of the American south, not only suggests a misunderstanding of the different economic and social systems of slavery during biblical time but also irresponsibility as a Christian. Because the teachings of scripture condemns emphatically the mistreatment of one’s fellow man – and it was this teaching that was a major factor in the abolishment of the American slave system.

Carroll and Shiflett point out:

“Christianity’s importance to abolitionists may have been equaled only by its importance to slaves themselves, who were sustained by its message of hope and its assurance of a liberty that transcended their current bondage......the simple message of the brotherhood of Christ, of the equality of all believers and the fraternity of the life-hereafter sent a fizz through the slave quarters—and a cold chill through the slave-owning community....both religious belief and public commitment was common at all levels of the antislavery campaign. Robert William Fogel observes that even “the principal architects of the secular appeal—including John Quincy Adams, Joshua R. Giddings, and Salmon P. Chase—were deeply religious men” who also realized that “the evangelical movement was a major political constituency that could not be won the antislavery banner by purely secular appeals”. - Vincent Carroll and David Shiflett. Christianity on Trial: Arguments Against Anti-Religious Bigotry. pp24-53 2002.

As such, since scripture is fulfilled by Christ and it is He who stated in plain reading (among other things in reference to the historicity of Genesis).

“These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” John 15:11-14

It is such teachings that slavery in the form of the American south ended – the conclusion that scripture condones slavery is not only spurious but unsubstantiated. One could build a much more convincing argument of American slavery on the basis of evolution. Furthermore the conclusion that a literal reading of Genesis can be likened to the erroneous reading of scripture in support of the American slavery system is ludicrous - especially from a Christian.

 

[Critias]

Thank you Crusador. I have been trying to point out that the treatment the slaves received here in America was unjust and that you cannot equate slavery with how Americans treated slaves. They are two different things.

Obviously, I didn't present my case very well because no one understood that I was saying slavery and cruelty are not the same thing.

 

[Crusadar]

Your welcome,

I hear this strawman argument way too often by non believers (and TEs alike) when creationists attribute slavery to being more closely tied with evolution. It is a matter of historical fact that many in the antislavery movement of the south as well as in the modern American civil rights movement were influenced by biblically based teachings and Christianity. Martin Luther King Jr., Jessie Jackson, and others make it very clear that scripture is their source of inspiration and opposition to the many injustices committed for decades by the government and those against African Americans living in America.

To God be the glory.

 

[Calminian]

Hi shernren. Good issue, good questions. In my opinion, one of the most misunderstood issues in the Bible. In fact there are some theological movements that I think are misguided based on this very misunderstanding, particularly mishandling of slavery metaphors. That’s another issue, though.

Here's the question:

Does the Bible condone slavery?

Yes, a form of it.

If no, where does it specifically prohibit slavery?

There are forms it does condemn. I'd have to research the minor prophets and find some old material I had on the subject. American race based slavery would have definitely been condemned, though.

If yes, why don't you have a slave?

You need a little history to understand this. Slavery in ANE culture was often a matter of survival and was most often initiated by the would be slave, not the would be master. And then the Bible legislates further on the subject (see Exodus 21 or 22 or so). I have an excellent paper on this I'll try to find and post.

It is rather interesting to study how American history is related to the Bible. After all, the drafters of the Declaration of Independence (I hope I'm not touching any nerves) were surely Christians, and yet much of what they say can be "refuted" from the Bible. For example:

Really? The right to life I won't contest. But if man's unalienable right is to liberty then why were there regulations of slavery in God-given Laws?

Biblical slavery does not violate the right of liberty. Men were free to become bond-slaves and strongly desired to become slaves to preserve their lives. If you lived in that day it’s very likely you would have desired the same thing. It’s also important to note that many of the founding fathers did see a problem with american style slavery and looked forward the the day is was abolished. But slavery was rampant throughout the old and new world. It’s been well said, white anglo protestants didn’t start the institution, BUT they sure did end it. They just didn't have the power to end it at the time.

There's is actually a form of slavery America should never have abolished. Prison inmates used to work hard while doing their time. Now they watch TV and pump iron while we pay the bills for them. What a shame.

Don't governments derive their just powers from God?

But we are supposed to pray for governments, not alter or abolish them.

Except that our government directly commands us to do so. Our Caesar is the constitution.

 

[shernren]

Maybe I haven't really stated my case well either. How was it that Spirit-inspired, Bible-believing Christians could find support for their form of slavery in the Scriptures? I agree that looking back, in retrospect, the slavery of that time was in no way Scripturally supportable. How did the slavers of that time find Biblical support, then? By ignoring the contextual overtones of slavery and taking the Bible's literal acceptance (resignation to?) slavery as a condonement of it. Is it possible that YECism is making the same mistake, which might only be seen from the future and not from the past?

 

[Calminian]

Maybe I haven't really stated my case well either. How was it that Spirit-inspired, Bible-believing Christians could find support for their form of slavery in the Scriptures?

Not every early american was a slaver. You are forgetting that christians were at the forefront of the abolition movement. There were sincere christians that felt the bible supported it though. They were wrong as you and I both agree.

I agree that looking back, in retrospect, the slavery of that time was in no way Scripturally supportable.

And it's important to point out that a literal straightforward reading of the scripture does not support it. IOW, no figurative interpretations are necessary to condemn early american slavery.

How did the slavers of that time find Biblical support, then? By ignoring the contextual overtones of slavery and taking the Bible's literal acceptance (resignation to?) slavery as a condonement of it.

By lack of precision in understanding specific terms. There were many that sincerely didn't understand the issue. Reminds me of many christians today. But there were also many that did understand and they made a difference not only in america but in the entire world.

Is it possible that YECism is making the same mistake, which might only be seen from the future and not from the past?

Actually it's more descriptive of OECism and the desire to force meanings into words in order to get scripture to say what they desire it to. Slavery was big business and also essential to many small family businesses. Bias in interpretation would have been a big temptation.

Today many christians today are convinced that science somehow proves a naturalistic origin. They don’t seem to grasp the presuppositional issue which is strictly theological and philosophical. And in their zeal for scripture they offer alternative interpretations.

 

[shernren]

Good answers. nothing much more to ask.

 

[Calminian]

Good answers. nothing much more to ask.

Alrighty then.

BTW here's the paper I was speaking of earlier. Interesting reading:

...Does God condone slavery in the Bible?

Very informative if you're interested in the subject.