The so-called "biblical" view on slavery ...

[Jok]

I has nothing to do with human nature, but on what the God of the Old Testament commanded. He literally commanded slavery through his laws.

I’m of the opinion that a command to end slavery would not have gotten off of the ground because it would have been too much too soon to throw at a world that would have laughed in the face at such a demand. Fast forward 1700 years post NT and it slowly but surely became a serious consideration of possibility in the world. But I think the major disconnect between Christians and non-Christians on this view is that the Christian says the world was far from being primed enough back then for such a push to take root, for such a push to gain serious consideration back then. Whereas the non-Christian is saying no you could have set the trend in motion back then.

So if you are God (and if my analysis is accurate) then an attempt to prematurely eradicate the practice of slavery would not only fail, but it would also completely overshadow the theological message of the Bible.

If anything, I would actually expect a NT push for abolishing slavery to be more of a practical possibility than the OT making a push for it. In the OT the Hebrews were merely trying to carve out their existence in a tiny slab of land, and they were merely trying to not trip over their own feet at worshiping neighboring gods (which they failed at). At least by the time of Jesus you had the pieces set up to where the worldview of Christianity was about to spread throughout the entire world. I know some would find it ironic because the anger is always geared towards the OT slavery laws, but I would actually expect it to be more likely that people complain about the NT not trying to speak out about slavery. However, IMO the undertow of slavery being written into the fabric of reality was still far too strongly entrenched even for a realistic push to be made against it in the 1st century.

 

[BNR32FAN]

... alright. Enough of the horse-hockey that so many non-Christians who come here keep proffering about slavery and the Bible.

Instead, I propose we watch an episode of an atheist podcast for an additional angle on the "biblical" slavery issue. The following video is a recent episode of SHANNON Q, an atheist, who recently had Old Testament scholar Dr. Josh Bowen and New Testament scholar Laura Robinson (a new scholar who is presently working on her PhD at Duke University) on her show to discuss and elaborate upon the issue of slavery in the bible, addressing what it is as a social problem in the biblical text(S) and providing some discussion that will perhaps unsettle some of my fellow Christians but also provide some insight into this topic for non-believers just passing through ....

Shannon Q - Biblical Views on Slavery

[Note: Laura Robinson has tech issues off and on during the first 35 minutes of the video, so bear with it and you'll find that things stream a bit better for her ...]​

[As an aside, I really don't care that the video is an hour and a half long. If you don't have time to watch it, then you don't have time to jibber jabber about this topic either, mainly because if you're consistent, then you don't have the time to have read up-teen hundreds of pages of academic work on the subject by which you'd have anything of any real substance or knowledge to say something ...]

Well I think the video offered some interesting perspectives but was mostly inconclusive since, even tho they’re academic scholars, 90% of what they said is speculation and they admit that in their statements. They began many of their statements with “well I think that, or it seems to me that, or I believe that”.

In the end this is what we can really take away from this. God allowed slavery. God is God. He doesn’t need anyone’s permission or acceptance to do anything. He’s the almighty, all knowing, omnipresent being, not us. Nobody in this world will ever have a better idea about how to do anything than God will. God has a plan, and He will calculate everything that is necessary to carry out that plan to accomplish the best possible outcome. Some people might suffer in this world in order for that plan to be executed correctly, but the ultimate reward is more than worth the temporary suffering. There will always be those who defy God and refuse to accept His message and His authority. We can pray for them but ultimately they have to make the choice for themselves. Majority of people will not accept the truth. The Bible says this and as Christians we have to accept that.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

oh, sure. And "epistemology" is a house-hold word, right? ..... NOT!!!!

Why do you think most Christians believe in Jesus?

 

[Caliban]

I’m of the opinion that a command to end slavery would not have gotten off of the ground because it would have been too much too soon to throw at a world that would have laughed in the face at such a demand.

So God can command people not to draw pictures, but not to have slaves. What kind of God can't accomplish this??? People would have laughed at him--is that what you really want to say. You see, it sounds different when you see your own words paraphrased by someone else. This is not convincing.

He’s the almighty, all knowing, omnipresent being, not us. Nobody in this world will ever have a better idea about how to do anything than God will. God has a plan, and He will calculate everything that is necessary to carry out that plan to accomplish the best possible outcome.

If this is true, and he still has laws which permit slavery, you are free to pray to such a god. But I'm good.

 

[Caliban]

Sorry. I meant "verbosity". Although now I look at it, "berbosity" is kind of a nice word. Maybe it could mean "burbling verbosity"?

Yes but burbling berbosity would have such nice alliteration.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Well I think the video offered some interesting perspectives but was mostly inconclusive since, even tho they’re academic scholars, 90% of what they said is speculation and they admit that in their statements. They began many of their statements with “well I think that, or it seems to me that, or I believe that”.

In the end this is what we can really take away from this. God allowed slavery. God is God. He doesn’t need anyone’s permission or acceptance to do anything. He’s the almighty, all knowing, omnipresent being, not us. Nobody in this world will ever have a better idea about how to do anything than God will. God has a plan, and He will calculate everything that is necessary to carry out that plan to accomplish the best possible outcome. Some people might suffer in this world in order for that plan to be executed correctly, but the ultimate reward is more than worth the temporary suffering. There will always be those who defy God and refuse to accept His message and His authority. We can pray for them but ultimately they have to make the choice for themselves. Majority of people will not accept the truth. The Bible says this and as Christians we have to accept that.

God can do what he wants becasue he can. But then we can judge his actions to see if they are moral or not. Much of what god did in the bible is immoral and He could have found other ways. If God is going to make people sinless in heaven, why not just start there and all can be saved and all this suffering can be avoided.

 

[Caliban]

God can do what he wants becasue he can. But then we can judge his actions to see if they are moral or not. Much of what god did in the bible is immoral and He could have found other ways. If God is going to make people sinless in heaven, why not just start there and all can be saved and all this suffering can be avoided.

I guess it's too much to ask that he just save everyone and say hello.

 

[Jok]

So God can command people not to draw pictures, but not to have slaves. What kind of God can't accomplish this??? People would have laughed at him--is that what you really want to say. You see, it sounds different when you see your own words paraphrased by someone else. This is not convincing.

A distinction needs to be made between laws given by God that admittedly may have low rates of personal adherence to them (but given nonetheless), and laws given that would have been a war cry against the paradigm of the elite. I don’t think one should underplay the difference between private moral instructions, and laws that would challenge the dominant political structures that are in place. Yes in theory God can definitely force any result that is desirable, but this reality is a balancing act between flawed human subjects, and corrupt world authority that the Bible doesn’t exactly pretend to be the model of morality.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I posted a lot of scripture with my commentary on what it says. I noticed the Christians here defending Gods actions do not refer to much scripture. So how is this moral in any way at any time?

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. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly. Lev. 25:44-46 ESV

 

[Caliban]

A distinction needs to be made between laws given by God that admittedly may have low rates of personal adherence to them

I thought this God was omnipotent--or do you guys not use that word anymore? Were there low rates of people non eating shellfish or pork? What other laws could God expect his people to not follow?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I thought this God was omnipotent--or do you guys not use that word anymore? Were there low rates of people non eating shellfish or pork? What other laws could God expect his people to not follow?

I think they use maximally powerful now. God gets less and less powerful as time goes on.

 

[Jok]

I thought this God was omnipotent--or do you guys not use that word anymore? Were there low rates of people non eating shellfish or pork? What other laws could God expect his people to not follow?

Maybe it wasn’t you but someone replied about how people constantly don’t follow God’s laws about murder, theft, etc, yet God still gives laws against that stuff, so why not also give laws against slavery as well even if people won’t follow that either, since they keep breaking the other ones so what difference does it make? So that is what my replies have been trying to get at, that with slavery it was more complicated because you’d be making a run at the structure of society itself, it would be different than those other examples. Yes I agree that God gave a bunch of laws that people don’t follow.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Why do you think most Christians believe in Jesus?

I wouldn't know unless I could sit down with each of them and hear what they have to say. In this case, I think the term "qualitative" supercedes "quantitative."

This is a debating forum, which means that there are winners and losers. If your arguments tend to be unconvincing, maybe you should rethink your ideas. Maybe the reason you keep being forced between losing an argument or ducking it is because your arguments are built on a flawed foundation.

Foun.......duh.....ay........shoon ???

What a silly word!!!

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Foun.......duh.....ay........shoon ???

What a silly word!!!

See? Dodging again.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

See? Dodging again.

As far as I know, I've neither lost an argument here on CF, nor have a I dodged one. Admittedly, I might have trailed off due to having my time unexpectedly truncated by outside forces, but I'll always deeply engage anyone who truly wants to do extensive, back-breaking, time-consuming, higher level, academic investigation.

So, do me a favor. Stop straw-manning my efforts, and I'll try to stop seeing you as a mere sniveling troll who shows up merely to barf out quick witticisms and comments of mis-direction.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I guess it's too much to ask that he just save everyone and say hello.

Yes, that is too much ask.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

See? Dodging again.

...and to my mind, "dodging" isn't usually accompanied by maniacal laughter. No, I'm laughing at the epistemological presumption that you're expressing on your part. It's quite telling, really, and quite comical to me.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

As far as I know, I've neither lost an argument here on CF, nor have a I dodged one. Admittedly, I might have trailed off due to having my time unexpectedly truncated by outside forces, but I'll always deeply engage anyone who truly wants to do extensive, back-breaking, time-consuming, higher level, academic investigation. activities in life that take me away from further engagement here from anyone who is truly vested and truly honest about getting to the nitty gritty of a topic.

So, do me a favor. Stop straw-manning my efforts, and I'll try to stop seeing you as a mere sniveling troll who shows up merely to barf out quick witticisms and comments of mis-direction.

(Shrug)
Say that if you like. Believe it if you can. Your actions speak louder than your words.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

As far as I know, I've neither lost an argument here on CF, nor have a I dodged one. Admittedly, I might have trailed off due to having my time unexpectedly truncated by outside forces, but I'll always deeply engage anyone who truly wants to do extensive, back-breaking, time-consuming, higher level, academic investigation. activities in life that take me away from further engagement here from anyone who is truly vested and truly honest about getting to the nitty gritty of a topic.

So, do me a favor. Stop straw-manning my efforts, and I'll try to stop seeing you as a mere sniveling troll who shows up merely to barf out quick witticisms and comments of mis-direction.

Oh, and by the way: forum rules. "Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue. Do not personally attack (insult, belittle, mock, ridicule) other members or groups of members on CF."
While the other things you said may come under the heading of "descriptions of another person's debating style," I think that "snivelling troll" actually counts as an insult.
We've had a long correspondenceship, and despite disagreeing on virtually everything, we have mostly managed to maintain a cordial tone. Let's keep it that way.

 

[BNR32FAN]

God can do what he wants becasue he can. But then we can judge his actions to see if they are moral or not. Much of what god did in the bible is immoral and He could have found other ways. If God is going to make people sinless in heaven, why not just start there and all can be saved and all this suffering can be avoided.

This is a prime example of what I was talking about. You think you have a better idea than God about how to do things but the only problem is you can’t see the results of your idea, He can. I can just picture God in heaven replying to your statement saying “yeah I could do it that way but then this and this and this will happen so just let Me do it My way because I know what I’m doing and you don’t.”