- Jun 29, 2019
- 652
- 170
- 60
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
The Old Testament recognizes slavery to a certain extent, but under the New Testament, slavery is generally not to be extended to those who are in Christ. It is decreed in John 3:17 that God wishes the world to be saved through His Son, and by a constructive reading of the Bible, it may be ascertained that God does not want slavery extended to or maintained among those who look forward to being saved through Christ.
Before going any further, consider the following: Prior to enactment of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution there was the Dred Scott Decision, a topic which, before the present era of political conflicts concerning what is taught in schools, was a subject in history exams in secondary schools across the country.
Dred Scott v. Sandford,[a] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held the U.S. Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and thus they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens. What this meant was that Dred Scott was to remain a slave, and as such, was property that could be returned to his ‘rightful’ owner.
This brings attention to Deuteronomy 23:15 which says, “You shall not give up to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you.” The Dred Scott decision effectively said this is exactly what you CAN do. This brings to attention another Verse in the Bible, Romans 13:1 which says “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Well...is the Dred Scott Decision one which God would have passed down, had he been one of the Supreme court Justices at the time? Was the government, through the Judicial branch, acting as an extension of God by decreeing that Scott remain a slave? To what extent does a judge in the U.S. take seriously the slogan “In God We Trust,” which is posted behind his bench?
If our government is one under God, you would think it is a government that rules with God in mind and would do what God would want to be done. Who is a slave under God, who can be a slave, and under what circumstances can a slave go free?
In the Bible, a slave is property, and like property, a slave can be bought and sold. Verses like Leviticus 25:44 makes this clear when it says, “As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you.” Safe to say that the nations God refers to at the time are those where His Chosen People, i.e. the Hebrews, didn’t live.
The Bible makes reference to “bondservants.” Does the Bible consider bondservants to be slaves? This may give us pause, since there seems to be no verses which mention selling bondservants. Under the definition of a slave, it might follow that bondservants are not slaves if the Bible doesn’t see them as being sold. Consider Leviticus 25:39-42 which says, “If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: he shall be with you as a hired worker and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own clan and return to the possession of his fathers. For they are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves.” In short, servants are not sold; slaves are. My point? In reading the Bible, we should not equate the term “bondservant” with the term “slave.”
To what extent does the Bible permit slavery among those who believe in God? Exodus 21:2-4 says, “When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.”
The New Testament, by virtue of Galatians 3:28-29 extends Exodus 21:2-4 to anyone who is in Christ, to the extent that those who stand as heirs to Abraham may also be heirs to the benefits accorded the Hebrews, including the length of years permitted for one to be a slave. One might wonder if, in the time of Columbus and after, Exodus 21:2-4 was used among Christians to promote the concept of serfs, to serve their masters for a limited number of years in exchange for their masters bringing them over to the New World, among other things.
Why was slavery abolished in the U.S.? Because among other reasons, it wasn’t economically feasible to the country to maintain this “peculiar institution.” Slave labor takes money away from those who expect to get paid for their work as well as from the people they work for, whose revenue needs to cover the cost of labor but who may not get the revenue they want if potential customers go to businesses who can charge less because their labor costs are free. Also, it cut into the economics of the nation, particularly the South, when slaves rebelled. The costs of putting down those rebellions could be better spent toward the promotion of commerce. Perhaps it was resolved that in this sense, abolishing slavery is what God would want as Romans 13:1 might entail when it says a governing authority who believes in God is one who would rule with God in mind, reaching back to Genesis when God commanded Adam and Eve to be “fruitful.” To that, you can add 1 Timothy 5:8 which discusses providing for one’s household. Here, one’s household extends to a nation.
Before going any further, consider the following: Prior to enactment of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution there was the Dred Scott Decision, a topic which, before the present era of political conflicts concerning what is taught in schools, was a subject in history exams in secondary schools across the country.
Dred Scott v. Sandford,[a] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held the U.S. Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and thus they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens. What this meant was that Dred Scott was to remain a slave, and as such, was property that could be returned to his ‘rightful’ owner.
This brings attention to Deuteronomy 23:15 which says, “You shall not give up to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you.” The Dred Scott decision effectively said this is exactly what you CAN do. This brings to attention another Verse in the Bible, Romans 13:1 which says “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” Well...is the Dred Scott Decision one which God would have passed down, had he been one of the Supreme court Justices at the time? Was the government, through the Judicial branch, acting as an extension of God by decreeing that Scott remain a slave? To what extent does a judge in the U.S. take seriously the slogan “In God We Trust,” which is posted behind his bench?
If our government is one under God, you would think it is a government that rules with God in mind and would do what God would want to be done. Who is a slave under God, who can be a slave, and under what circumstances can a slave go free?
In the Bible, a slave is property, and like property, a slave can be bought and sold. Verses like Leviticus 25:44 makes this clear when it says, “As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you.” Safe to say that the nations God refers to at the time are those where His Chosen People, i.e. the Hebrews, didn’t live.
The Bible makes reference to “bondservants.” Does the Bible consider bondservants to be slaves? This may give us pause, since there seems to be no verses which mention selling bondservants. Under the definition of a slave, it might follow that bondservants are not slaves if the Bible doesn’t see them as being sold. Consider Leviticus 25:39-42 which says, “If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: he shall be with you as a hired worker and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own clan and return to the possession of his fathers. For they are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves.” In short, servants are not sold; slaves are. My point? In reading the Bible, we should not equate the term “bondservant” with the term “slave.”
To what extent does the Bible permit slavery among those who believe in God? Exodus 21:2-4 says, “When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.”
The New Testament, by virtue of Galatians 3:28-29 extends Exodus 21:2-4 to anyone who is in Christ, to the extent that those who stand as heirs to Abraham may also be heirs to the benefits accorded the Hebrews, including the length of years permitted for one to be a slave. One might wonder if, in the time of Columbus and after, Exodus 21:2-4 was used among Christians to promote the concept of serfs, to serve their masters for a limited number of years in exchange for their masters bringing them over to the New World, among other things.
Why was slavery abolished in the U.S.? Because among other reasons, it wasn’t economically feasible to the country to maintain this “peculiar institution.” Slave labor takes money away from those who expect to get paid for their work as well as from the people they work for, whose revenue needs to cover the cost of labor but who may not get the revenue they want if potential customers go to businesses who can charge less because their labor costs are free. Also, it cut into the economics of the nation, particularly the South, when slaves rebelled. The costs of putting down those rebellions could be better spent toward the promotion of commerce. Perhaps it was resolved that in this sense, abolishing slavery is what God would want as Romans 13:1 might entail when it says a governing authority who believes in God is one who would rule with God in mind, reaching back to Genesis when God commanded Adam and Eve to be “fruitful.” To that, you can add 1 Timothy 5:8 which discusses providing for one’s household. Here, one’s household extends to a nation.
