Slavery

[Malleus]

Hi there, Malleus here, long time reader, first time complainer. I am wondering, is the so called moral high ground that various religious groups seem to take warranted, having just read a section of the ten commandments, I came upon a passage thus:

(1) Then God spoke all these words: (2) I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; (3) you shall have no other gods before me. (4) You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. (5) You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, (6) but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments. (7) You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name. (8) Remember the sabbath day, and keep it holy. (9) Six days you shall labor and do all your work. (10) But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns. (11) For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and consecrated it. (12) Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you. (13) You shall not murder. (14) You shall not commit adultery. (15) You shall not steal. (16) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (17) You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
Exodus 20:1-17

As you can see, it first talks of how god has removed the followers from the house of slavery, yet seems to make it clear in the bolded sections that it is fine and dandy to own slaves. Opinions???

Question: Is the Bible a piece of Hate literature proposing double standards and endorsing slavery?

[Righteous Indignation]

I am not saying that slavery should be condoned. I do think though that even willing slavery should have some form of protection for the slave ( even if it is to save them from themselves as much as from their master ). Even in the context that it was written, it does not condone slavery. In the time that this was written, slaves were completely without rights or need for consideration. This statement actually states that a slave cannot be used for any purpose at any time. It actually humanises slaves in a way that was seldom seen before. There are other passages though that are completely appalling that I would not even attempt to defend.

Bible verse in question:

But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns." Exodus 20:10

I’m sorry Curious, I don’t see how this humanizes the slaves anymore than it humanizes the livestock. All this says is nobody works on Sunday, not even the slaves.

Even in the context that it was written, it does not condone slavery."

But, I’m afraid is does condone slavery. Suppose someone said, "You will not rape women on Sunday." Such a statement would imply that it was acceptable to rape a woman any other day of the week. By saying you will not work your slaves on Sunday, God is in effect saying slavery is OK any other day of the week. An exception to the rule implies there is a rule needing an exception.

[McCulloch]

[...]
Bible verse in question:

But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns." Exodus 20:10

I’m sorry Curious, I don’t see how this humanizes the slaves anymore than it humanizes the livestock. All this says is nobody works on Sunday, not even the slaves.

I agree with your argument. However, you have made one rather common factual error. The seventh day is called Saturday. Sunday is the first day.

[Curious]

Bible verse in question:

But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns." Exodus 20:10

I’m sorry Curious, I don’t see how this humanizes the slaves anymore than it humanizes the livestock. All this says is nobody works on Sunday, not even the slaves.

Even in the context that it was written, it does not condone slavery."

But, I’m afraid is does condone slavery. Suppose someone said, "You will not rape women on Sunday." Such a statement would imply that it was acceptable to rape a woman any other day of the week. By saying you will not work your slaves on Sunday, God is in effect saying slavery is OK any other day of the week. An exception to the rule implies there is a rule needing an exception.

A prohibition is not permission by omission. If I was to say to a child "You should not put your fingers in a fire", it does not mean it is alright to put them into an electric socket (or even put their feet into a fire for that matter). By saying that a slave should not work on the Sabbath states that a slave should not work on the Sabbath, nothing more. If the scripture stated that all slavery is wrong, then it would have met with the full force of human law. The passage appeals to the oppressed without risking offending the current rulers too much. A religion that attempts too much too soon is given very short shrift. There are passages that do seem to condone slavery, but this one, in my opinion, does not.
You are right that the passage does not appear to humanise slaves any more than it does livestock. What it does do is to give both a protection comparable to that of their master. Slaves are therefore that much closer to equality with their masters. Free time also encourages free thinking in humans. So it is not just the act of granting respite that humanises the slave, it is the opportunity to pursue a path that they choose themselves.

[Righteous Indignation]

Bible verse in question:

But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns." Exodus 20:10

I’m sorry Curious, I don’t see how this humanizes the slaves anymore than it humanizes the livestock. All this says is nobody works on Sunday, not even the slaves.

Even in the context that it was written, it does not condone slavery."

But, I’m afraid is does condone slavery. Suppose someone said, "You will not rape women on Sunday." Such a statement would imply that it was acceptable to rape a woman any other day of the week. By saying you will not work your slaves on Sunday, God is in effect saying slavery is OK any other day of the week. An exception to the rule implies there is a rule needing an exception.

A prohibition is not permission by omission. If I was to say to a child "You should not put your fingers in a fire", it does not mean it is alright to put them into an electric socket (or even put their feet into a fire for that matter). By saying that a slave should not work on the Sabbath states that a slave should not work on the Sabbath, nothing more.

But this is not a prohibition, a prohibition would be a statement like: "You shall not own slaves." The scripture above is an exception recognizing a difference between the Sabbath and the other six days of the week. Your statement about the child sticking his finger in the fire was a prohibition. It would have been an exception if you had stated, "You will not put your hand in a fire with green flames." Of course, this means that the child will believe he can stick his hand in any fire which is not green. A good father would make a clear statement to his child. He might say, "Son, fire is very hot. If you hold your finger in the fire, it will burn you. A burn is painful." In my opinion, God has not been this kind of father as his statements are not clear. There is almost nothing in the Bible that is not contradicted in another part. It seems like a waste of time to debate what the Bible says as it really doesn’t seem to say anything for sure. Maybe, it’s time to go to the source of the problem.

God! Yes you, the Christian God. We are a little confused down here on your beliefs regarding slavery. In fact, we are confused about many things in the Bible and it has been a source of much unnecessary suffering. It seems that the confusion, about what you want, has lead to many people hurting one another. Many innocent men, women, and children have been burned as witches, infidels, or blasphemers by good Christians believing they were doing your will. Many of our best intellectuals have been persecuted or imprisoned for contradicting what people believe the Bible is saying. Wars have been started over disagreement about this book. God, I’m sure you do not want to see innocent people harmed in your name. They say you are the most powerful being in the universe for which nothing is impossible. How hard could it be to give us some insight into these issues? How hard would it be for you to revise the Bible? I could do it for you, if you’d like. Better yet, why not just make the Bible go away. Without a Bible, everyone would just do the right thing and not make all these mistakes trying to figure out what you want.

[BAD_BRAD]

I think this is a hard topic to debate with!

What I belive is that GOD may have a different definition of slaves than us. See when we think of slaves we think of property as if ownership of a person but when got might think of a maid of some sort of fission. Well............ you know what... what I trying to say probably doesn't make since at all and it's probably because I don't know how to word it well enough.

Is slavery present day ok, though if god did mean slaves as in property of people. Well no, not in the U.S. for that matter. For it says obey the laws of the land. And a short phrase in our U.S. constitution says All men created equal which includes all races and women [/i][/quote]

[McCulloch]

I think this is a hard topic to debate with!

The easy topics are less interesting.

What I belive is that GOD may have a different definition of slaves than us. See when we think of slaves we think of property as if ownership of a person but when got might think of a maid of some sort of fission. Well............ you know what... what I trying to say probably doesn't make since at all and it's probably because I don't know how to word it well enough.

I cannot argue with that. Really. What does God mean by slave?

Is slavery present day ok, though if god did mean slaves as in property of people. Well no, not in the U.S. for that matter. For it says obey the laws of the land. And a short phrase in our U.S. constitution says All men created equal which includes all races and women.

I don't think that the US constitution is the arbiter of what is good and bad, do you? BTW, that phrase was in the constitution when US style slavery was still legal and women did not have equal rights.

[Righteous Indignation]

What I belive is that GOD may have a different definition of slaves than us. See when we think of slaves we think of property as if ownership of a person but when got might think of a maid of some sort of fission. Well............ you know what... what I trying to say probably doesn't make since at all and it's probably because I don't know how to word it well enough.

Brad it’s understandable when you or I can’t find the right words, we’re not perfect; but God is. In fact, he is supposedly the most intelligent being in the universe, so what’s his excuse. Any good communicator knows that you should always use words and language that will be understood by those to whom you are speaking. If your audience does not understand the word slave, the way you understand the word slave then you should use words your audience will understand. If God did not mean slave, then he should have used a different word or words. The only possibilities I can see are God said slave because he meant slave; the Bible was not written for us; or God didn’t write the Bible.

Is slavery present day ok, though if god did mean slaves as in property of people. Well no, not in the U.S. for that matter. For it says obey the laws of the land. And a short phrase in our U.S. constitution says All men created equal which includes all races and women

What if the laws of the land are wrong? Would you consider the people who helped slaves escape from the south to be criminals and sinners. They were nothing less than heroes even though they were breaking the laws of the land.

[MagusYanam]

If God did not mean slave, then he should have used a different word or words. The only possibilities I can see are God said slave because he meant slave; the Bible was not written for us; or God didn’t write the Bible.

Or... God was not inspiring the authors of the Bible in English, and in translation we don't have the appropriate term. Or, it was written at a time when 'slave' meant something different than it does now. When the word 'slave' was used by the authors of the books of the Bible, the popular understanding at the time would have been something akin to 'indentured servant' or 'tenant'. Unlike the Romans (and later the American South), the Hebrews did not have a cultural equivalent for chattel slavery. I think that's an important distinction to make, since our cultural understanding of the word 'slave' and its connotations has been shaped by our history with race-based chattel slavery, something the original authors would not have understood.

[Righteous Indignation]

If God did not mean slave, then he should have used a different word or words. The only possibilities I can see are God said slave because he meant slave; the Bible was not written for us; or God didn’t write the Bible.

Or... God was not inspiring the authors of the Bible in English, and in translation we don't have the appropriate term. Or, it was written at a time when 'slave' meant something different than it does now. When the word 'slave' was used by the authors of the books of the Bible, the popular understanding at the time would have been something akin to 'indentured servant' or 'tenant'. Unlike the Romans (and later the American South), the Hebrews did not have a cultural equivalent for chattel slavery. I think that's an important distinction to make, since our cultural understanding of the word 'slave' and its connotations has been shaped by our history with race-based chattel slavery, something the original authors would not have understood.

Genesis 11:5-7 (New International Version)

But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

According to the story of Babel, God created languages to confuse man. If God created language, then he would have given us all the words we need. When the Bible says slave, it means slave.

[MagusYanam]

God may have given us the ability to communicate with each other (or not, as the case may be), but to say that a word has a set meaning 'now and forever' is simply a denial of the way languages work. For example, the word 'nice' used to mean foolish or trivial, not 'good'. And the reason words change in their definitions has nothing to do with God, it has to do with the conventions on which people in the same language community agree.

'Slave' was originally a word reserved for thralls in Rome who were primarily of Slavic descent. Eventually it came to be used for all manner of servants - including prisoners-of-war, indentured servants, tenant farmers and eventually the victims of the American system of chattel slavery.

Scripture may have been inspired by God, but not to think of a religious text as a product of its times is not to take it seriously. And somehow, I don't think that the people referred to as 'slaves' in the Hebrew scriptures were people of Slavic descent who were held as domestic servants.