"Slavery" in the Bible

[POI]

Allow us readers to be very careful. We must make sure we identify the proper context here, to assure against hasty and/or self-serving conclusions.

Exodus 21:2-3:

"2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him." <-- Okay, this seems clear enough, if you are a purchased Hebrew, with a wife, you are both to go free in year 7.

Exodus 21:4:

"4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free." <-- Here is where things start to look sketchy for the modern-day believer. If the slave is provided with a wife, and they have kids, the wife and kids are to stay with the slave master. They are not to go free.

Exodus 21:5-6:

"5 “But if the servant declares, ‘I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,’ 6 then his master must take him before the judges.[a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life." <-- More uncomfortability for the Christian here. Without getting into the weeds, common sense suggests a special rule is made to trick the male Hebrew into remaining a slave for life.

Leviticus 25:44-46:

"44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." <-- More awkwardness for the believer, as the Bible reader clammers to find a rationale to make this passage not read the way it does.

Here is a basic definition of chattel slavery --> "Chattel slavery is full slavery in its traditional form whereby slaves are the complete property of their master, can be bought and sold by him and treated in any way that he wishes, which may include torture and other brutality, excessively bad working conditions, and sexual exploitation"

Looks like all the ingredients fit the given Bible description here, minus the torture. Wait a minute, this is covered in the rest of Exodus 21. (i.e.):

"20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property." <-- So basically, since the slave is your property, beatings with impunity are acceptable. Just don't kill them.

For debate:

By applying common sense, does/did the Bible ever, and/or currently still sanction chattel slavery?

Again, by using common sense, can a believer effectively use the Bible in support of breeding chattel slaves?

************************

Before you answer, consider this.... Since the NT does not mention the abolition of 'slavery', and yet the Bible makes further proclamation(s) and/or addendums (in favor of retaining 'slavery',) this means the Bible is not against chattel slavery either. Further, the Christian may want to introduce the importance of the 'golden rule'. However, the specifics outweigh the generals. The specifics of the rules for engagement of slavery are outside the 'golden rule'. Otherwise, the Bible would be a one-pager. 'Slavery' is an expressed exception to the general rule. Thus, anytime a specific scenario is not invoked, yes, 'golden rule.'

[1213]

...Well, God does not seem to have a problem with it...

By what I see, God don't want people to be treated wrongly. For example because of the rule "love your neighbor as yourself".

You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people; but you shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am Yahweh.
Lev. 19:18

Do you have some good reason to ignore that instruction of God?

I see you are responding to less and less. Probably in an attempt to wiggle your way out of this exchange....

I think I already have said enough. It is not useful to repeat what I have said, even if you try to twist it into something else.

Further, your response was already covered in the original post. Why are you moving backwards? (i.e.)

"the Christian may want to introduce the importance of the 'golden rule'. However, the specifics outweigh the generals. The specifics of the rules for engagement of slavery are outside the 'golden rule'. Otherwise, the Bible would be a one-pager. 'Slavery' is an expressed exception to the general rule. Thus, anytime a specific scenario is not invoked, yes, 'golden rule.'

************************************

You stated you agree with God's instructions. God's instructions for "slavery" include the sanctioning of chattel slavery and slave breeding. This means you do too, unless you now wish to retract your prior statement, and you really do not agree with chattel slavery and slave breeding (like God does)????

Why do you think "However, the specifics outweigh the generals"?

I think the general rules set the frame for specific rules. You can't use specific rule so that it would go against the general rule.

[1213]

Because they are all dealing with the treatment of others - fellow Jews or foreigners, servants or slaves. It makes sense that they are pointing up rules about treating Jewish slaves differently from foreign ones and hired servants differently from chattel slaves. What is inescapable is that the Bible says that Hebrews can own foreign slaves for life as property. That trumps any and all attempts to Interpret all those other passages.

One problem for me in this is, it was said that Jews should circumcise even those who they bought. And I have understood all in Israel should obey the law, which I think means makes them Jews, which then means, they should be treated equally and it would not be possible to actually have slaves that should not be allowed to have freedom.

He who is eight days old will be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he who is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner who is not of your seed. He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Gen. 17:12-13

That is why I think the question of, who is truly a Jew or a Hebrew is very important in this case. If one is a Hebrew only by blood line, then people who take the right to own slaves from the Bible, should first prove they are from the right bloodline. If it goes by circumcision and obeying the law, then also foreign slaves could be counted Jews. What do you say, which way it goes?

[1213]

...
The bottom line of course is as usual - finding some pretext to dismiss the clear tolerance of chattel slavery in the Bible is really so you can push away any doubts and questions. But the point is, those who do have doubts and questions will see that we are right - God does tolerate slavery and does not speak out against it. Or rather,the Bible does, and a god is nothing to do with it.

I don't deny that Bible gave for Jews the right to own slaves. However, I think it is wrong and dishonest to say the other rules like love your neighbor then don't apply. Why do you think people can just pick and choose words from the Bible for their own purposes and ignore everything that doesn't fit to their own desires?

[TRANSPONDER]

Because they are all dealing with the treatment of others - fellow Jews or foreigners, servants or slaves. It makes sense that they are pointing up rules about treating Jewish slaves differently from foreign ones and hired servants differently from chattel slaves. What is inescapable is that the Bible says that Hebrews can own foreign slaves for life as property. That trumps any and all attempts to Interpret all those other passages.

One problem for me in this is, it was said that Jews should circumcise even those who they bought. And I have understood all in Israel should obey the law, which I think means makes them Jews, which then means, they should be treated equally and it would not be possible to actually have slaves that should not be allowed to have freedom.

He who is eight days old will be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he who is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner who is not of your seed. He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Gen. 17:12-13

That is why I think the question of, who is truly a Jew or a Hebrew is very important in this case. If one is a Hebrew only by blood line, then people who take the right to own slaves from the Bible, should first prove they are from the right bloodline. If it goes by circumcision and obeying the law, then also foreign slaves could be counted Jews. What do you say, which way it goes?

interesting point, yet it doesn't alter the fact that Leviticus says that the slaves bought from foreigners were slaves for life and property and could be passed onto the children as property. So clearly making them wear a kippoh did not make then Hebrews or there would be no need for that passage in Leviticus. Remember that converting African Slaves to Christianity did not make them any the less chattel slaves.

...
The bottom line of course is as usual - finding some pretext to dismiss the clear tolerance of chattel slavery in the Bible is really so you can push away any doubts and questions. But the point is, those who do have doubts and questions will see that we are right - God does tolerate slavery and does not speak out against it. Or rather,the Bible does, and a god is nothing to do with it.

I don't deny that Bible gave for Jews the right to own slaves. However, I think it is wrong and dishonest to say the other rules like love your neighbor then don't apply. Why do you think people can just pick and choose words from the Bible for their own purposes and ignore everything that doesn't fit to their own desires?

Because I see Bible believers and apologists doing it all the time. But in any case, I already said that, even if Hebrews extended the rules on loving your neighbour to chattel slaves, they were still chattel slaves. Again, if any of the passages you lifted means that Foreign slaves of Hebrews somehow became Hebrews and non - slaves, there would be no need of that damning Leviticus passage that says foreign slaves are their property and can be passed onto the children.

There is no getting around it.

[POI]

even if you try to twist it into something else.

Please elluminate to me what you perceive I have 'twisted into something else'?

Why do you think "However, the specifics outweigh the generals"?

I think the general rules set the frame for specific rules. You can't use specific rule so that it would go against the general rule.

Well, let's take this particular case. If the 'golden rule' always applies, then why in the heck does there exists <God instructions> to keep slaves for life, or mentions virtual impunity for beating these slaves, and also gives instructions about how you can keep them as your property for life? You mean to tell me all the slave has to do is tell the Christian slave owner, "well sir, I do not want to be kept as property and beaten." And the slave owner will say, "okay, I'll just let you go.". Seriously?

[TRANSPONDER]

That made me smile. Yes, the idea than a general intent invalidates specific rules is ingenuous at best. When one has a football game it has better rules than 'Everyone play nice'.

[JoeyKnothead]

Anyone who kidnaps someone and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 21:16

The whole bible slaves thing aside, which wasn't your doings, you're a good vibe. I concede defeat, and having learned a little.

I wish you well in all your endeavors.

[TRANSPONDER]

Anyone who kidnaps someone and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 21:16

The whole bible slaves thing aside, which wasn't your doings, you're a good vibe. I concede defeat, and having learned a little.

I wish you well in all your endeavors.

However that may be, those passages appear to be given to the Hebrews and refer only to how they treat their fellow Hebrews. True, it says 'neighbour' and it may be arguable whether a foreigner living in their area is a neighbour or not, but that Leviticus passage remains. A Hebrew can buy a slave from the people around and they are his property for life. That appears to sort all ambiguity - the release after 6 years thing does not apply to non Hebrews. Bear in mind that even a Hebrew can be enslaved for life if he is given a wife and kids and elects to stay rather than take advantage of the 6 year rule,

If then he is a slave for life, how can it be suggested that foreign slaves benefit from a get - out that Hebrews don't?

You gave up too easy - the excuses to get the Bible off the slavery hook don't stand up to scrutiny.

[POI]

And while you are on the market, I think you should check are the merchandise kidnapped, because:
Anyone who kidnaps someone and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 21:16

This topic mentions nothing about kidnapping. If you re-read the original post, and the follow up questions I ask, you will see your provided verse does not address this debate topic in the least. But nice try

[Hawkins]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

The Bible mentioned 2 separate slavery systems, namely the Hebrew slave system and the secular slave system. God mentioned clearly that Hebrews are not allowed to enslave other Hebrews. So the Hebrew slave system is just a labor system to help out the poor fellow Hebrews, such that the poor won't sell themselves to the gentiles. Later this Hebrew system was abused and God called it off through Jeremiah.

Leviticus 25:42 (NIV):
Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves.

Jeremiah 34:8-9 (NIV):
The word came to Jeremiah from the LORD after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem to proclaim freedom for the slaves. Everyone was to free their Hebrew slaves, both male and female; no one was to hold a fellow Hebrew in bondage.

So all left is the secular slavery system which God allowed Moses to set up rules in order to settle the common disputes. Consider that back then the Egyptians could kill the children of Israelites on sight simply because the Israelites got over-populated, the rules set forth by Moses are much more civilized. Those rules serve as practical solutions to settle the common disputes between masters and slaves, such that both sides can be in peace with each other.