A Christian's Rationale For Owning Slaves...

[POI]

Taken from "1213" --> http://www.kolumbus.fi/r.berg/Owning_slaves.html

Notably, the quote below:

Owning slaves?

According to the Old Testament, peoples at least had right to own slaves. Many wonder, is that same right also valid for today’s disciples of Jesus.

1) Jesus didn’t directly deny owning slaves. So maybe it can be taught that it is valid right today also. However Jesus taught to do same to others that you want others to do to you. Therefore, if you don’t want yourself to be slave, don’t keep others in that position.

2) Therefore whatever you desire for men to do to you, you shall also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
Mat. 7:12

3) It is also good to notice that disciples of Jesus shouldn’t consider themselves superior to others. If we are all brothers and sisters, how could we keep other as a slave? Rather we should be servants to each other.

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

My response, thus far:

1) You are right, Jesus never tells humans that slavery is wrong. Instead, He looks to endorse the following two Bible passages A) and B):

A) Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, 24 since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. (Col. 3:22-24)

B) All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2 Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare[a] of their slaves. (1 Tim. 6:1-2)

A) This massage tells the slave to remain subservient, work as hard as one can; even when the master is away. This way, God will be proud of you, via the slave.

B) Respect your slave master. If the master happens to be a Christian, respect them even more.

As you can see, Jesus appears not to be against slavery at all. In fact, He condones such practices.

2) If this were the case for all humans, (the free and the enslaved), then Jesus would not have endorsed instructions for slavery.

3) Please remember the 'golden rule' was already expressed in the OT (i.e.) "you shall love your neighbor as yourself"(Lev. 19:18). Either never speak about the topic of slavery at all, or, tell the Bible readers that slavery is 'wrong'. Instead, the OT already instructs on how you may obtain slaves, how you may beat your slaves, and informs the reader that the slave master can own the slave for life, and also treat them as their property for life. The NT then merely reinforces such OT instruction.

Question(s) for debate:

Why didn't Jesus just abolish slavery practices, or never mention slavery at all? Seems rather confusing, to have left what He left in the NT Bible....?

Answer (post #401)

I'd say that the matter is clear. The OT does refer to chattel slavery - for foreigners. The Bible gives rules (attempting to be fair, no denial) for Jews enslaving others. It does not look like God, knowing that slavery is going to be a no- no in the age when his religion is user scrutiny, thought that he should make it clear that it was wrong. It looks like God thought it was ok, within limits. Paul gave it a thumbs -up and Jesus at least by not commenting, seems to be unaware that it is going to be one of the worst human crimes in modern times.

Thus, it is one more reason to believe the Bible, cover to cover...as the word of men of the time. And that's all it is. It is not even a valid guide to life- advice, morals or social conduct. It is, like any other book, judged by human moral standards, and I can prove it. If Christians did not judge the Bible by human moral codes, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

[TRANSPONDER]

God does not call an absolute prohibition on slavery because slavery is not always wrong.

...

You can also justify that lying and theft are not "ALWAYS WRONG" ...

Not biblically you can't , no.

But I should say that the prohibitions against stealing,. lying ... can also be made ok, ...

You may well say that ... but, are you God?

The point is, the question has been asked, why does the bible not offer a blanket condemnation of SLAVERY when it does for other things such as adultery, stealing or lying. The answer is simple : biblically blanket condemnations are reserved for the things that God (and I did say GOD not Joe Bloggs ... ) God considers always wrong.

I always feel a sense of eager anticipation when I see a response here "What is he going to come up with now?" I'm afraid this won't work. Killing is Blanket forbidden. except when YHWH says it's ok. I've no doubt that out OT experts can come up with a few other commandments that are blanket forbidden, but some varieties of it are allowed even in the OT. In the NT, commandments are even binned, like Sabbath observance, plus various OT rules like Clean Foods law. And yet at no time is there any declaration like: "Because of your harness of heart. Moses gave you rules for the treatment of slaves, but I tell you that the ownership of a person by another as property is an abomination, as are not all those foreigners also living souls and a bother?"

"You mean 'brother,' Lord."

"Yeah, that, too."

Not a word. Not a word - ever. And yet God should know how bad this is going to look. How much misery has been caused, just because slavery was not explicitly forbidden to Christians. How much of a problem this would be for Bible apologists later on. Not a word. Mind you, it gives you more compelling reasons to reject the Bible that you can wilfully deny and earn more brownie points with God. So long as He's not Catholic, you should be fine.

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm afraid this won't work. Killing is Blanket forbidden. except when YHWH says it's ok.

Killing is not forbidden in scripture; MURDER'(ie unlawful killing) is. For a more detailed analysis please see my earlier post : Did the Mosaic law prohibit killing or murder?
viewtopic.php?p=826591#p826591



COULD A SLAVE OWNERS MURDER HIS SLAVE?

Absolutely not. Murder was prohibited by law for all citizens and punishible by death.

NOTE : The Barbadian legislature enacted the first slave code in 1661, and it quickly spread throughout the British Atlantic island colonies. After 1750, the Barbadian slave code made its way to the British colonial mainland. Clause twenty of the Barbadian law gave masters the right to kill a slave who had run away or misbehaved. - source: Homicide Justified: The Legality Of Killing Slaves In The United Homicide Justified: The Legality Of Killing Slaves In The United States And The Atlantic World States And The Atlantic World by Mary Block

RELATED POST



Why is there no blanket condemnation of ALL forms if slavery when there are absolute prohibitions for other things?
viewtopic.php?p=1079935#p1079935

Is all slavery not wrong because most people hold that it is?
viewtopic.php?p=1079923#p1079923

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY , SLAVE BEATING and ...ABOLITION

[TRANSPONDER]

But that's a circular argument. Killing is always wrong - except when it isn't, so you call it something else. Murder seems to be something that isn't approved by God. So slavery is (morally) wrong except where God says it's ok. But that isn't morals. That's diktat. But it's worse because God doesn't say it's wrong. he does say that killing is wrong. So why not slavery, unless to God slaver isn't wrong? Blanket 'be nice to people' no more implies that slavery is wrong than killing is wrong. Unless God says that killing is wrong, which he does. This does not get over the lack of a Bliblical red pencil of slavery.

Thus you haven't made your case here nor before. So linking back to your previous failed attempts at refuting the problem is wasted effort.

[JehovahsWitness]

Murder seems to be something that isn't approved by God. ...

Yes , that is what I said. Thus there is blanket prohibition on MURDER but not on killing. Slavery is not biblically considered wrong so there is logically no such absolute prohibition on it.



JW

[TRANSPONDER]

Murder seems to be something that isn't approved by God. ...

Yes , that is what I said. Thus there is blanket prohibition on MURDER but not on killing. Slavery is not biblically considered wrong so there is logically no such absolute prohibition on it.



JW

Ah. I didn't get that before..if that's what you were saying before. You underline Biblically, but isn't that like saying morally slavery (and we are talking chattel ownership of foreigners, not in principle different from Atlantic passage slavery) is not wrong in God's view? Because the argument is that slavery is the second worst thing after genocide, but God never says anything about it other than 'this is how much they should sell for and this is how you should whup em'. And Jesus finds it more important to praise prostitutes than mention 'That centurion owns a slave, but God's people should not'. I'm sure I'm not being unreasonable here as, like the problem of evil or getting a starter - kit of creation on the Ark, this is a real problem for Bible credibility.

[JehovahsWitness]

...but isn't that like saying morally slavery (and we are talking chattel ownership of foreigners, not in principle different from Atlantic passage slavery) is not wrong in God's view?

I don't know what YOU'RE talking about but *I'm* talking about the slavery as practiced by the ancient Hebrews which is indeed very different from Atlantic passage slavery.


ISN'T ALL SLAVERY BY DEFINITION ABUSIVE AND THEREFORE MORALLY OBJECTIONABLE ?

If Slavery could ONLY be practised in a cruel abusive manner that denied the slave all human rights then no doubt there would have been a blanket prohibition on it. However, It's rather like there being no blanket prohibition on marriage even though some marriages are abusive. The fact that the Hebrew bible provided guidelines and legal limits on slavery as practiced in Israel proves that slavery does not HAVE to be abusive : thus the absence of an absolute prohibition.







JW



RELATED POSTS

Is it accurate to say the bible CONDONES slavery?
viewtopic.php?p=1029801#p1029801

Is it immoral to sell your children?
viewtopic.php?p=1060495#p1060495

Isn't slavery automatically abusive and thus morally objectionable?
viewtopic.php?p=1080087#p1080087

Does the bible say slave owners were allowed to beat their slaves to death?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 27#p764027

Why didnt Jesus simply abolish slavery practices?
viewtopic.php?p=1078415#p1078415

Why does Christian scripture not call for the abolition of Slavery?
viewtopic.php?p=1020929#p1020929

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY, CHATTEL SLAVERY and .... SLAVE BEATING

[TRANSPONDER]

...but isn't that like saying morally slavery (and we are talking chattel ownership of foreigners, not in principle different from Atlantic passage slavery) is not wrong in God's view?

I don't know what YOU'RE talking about but *I'm* talking about the slavery as practiced by the ancient Hebrews which is indeed very different from Atlantic passage slavery.

If Slavery could ONLY be practised in a cruel abusive manner that denied the slave all human rights then no doubt there would have been a blanket prohibition on it. It's rather there bejng no blanket prohibition on marriage even though some marriages are abusive. The fact that the Hebrew bible provided guidelines and legal limits on slavery as practiced in Israel proves that slavery does not HAVE to be abusive : thus the absence of an absolute prohibition.







JW

RELATED POSTS

What was CHATTEL slavery?
viewtopic.php?p=1079718#p1079718

Was chattel slavery as practiced under the American slave trade system, the same as the lifelong slavery legilsated in ancient Israel?
viewtopic.php?p=1079902#p1079902

Were foreign slaves considered chattel under the Hebrew system?
viewtopic.php?p=1079301#p1079301

What did being a man's "property" mean to the ancient Hebrews?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 01#p814401

Is the slavery that existed under bible law comparable to the European & American slave trade?[regulations]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 79#p811779

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY, CHATTEL SLAVERY and .... SLAVE BEATING

No. It's the same. Slavery of non Hebrews and slavery as practised from the 16th -to the 18th century by Christians who fought a bloody war so they could keep on doing it is the same. And I don't doubt that the OT writer thought he was being fair and just in His...sorry...his Rules or maybe didn't care tuppence about the slaves but what might irritate YHWH. I have no doubt that the Baptist Church in old Allabammie had some advice about how to treat the slaves too. That does not make it any different from what it was either in 19th c Arkasnsas, Iron age Israel or for that matter 1940's Channel Islands under occupation.

It only remains to mention as a ploy-counter that your denial doesn't matter; what matters is how others will see this. We already know that chattel slavery in the Bible is not a financial insurance initiative as Bible apologists try to lie to anyone who will listen. It is owning, selling and beating (non Hebrew) slaves, For Life. With God's acceptance if not approval. Attempts to deny this and claim it was something else, even if you could make it somehow different from the Guinea coast traffic, will just make you, your apologetics, religion and Bible look bad.

[JehovahsWitness]

No. It's the same.

No it was NOT the same. See post #255

... your denial doesn't matter..

Well then, neither does yours.

... what matters is how others will see this.

No, what matters is what is TRUE and what is not!

... It is owning, selling and beating (non Hebrew) slaves, For Life. With God's acceptance if not approval.

No BEATING and all abusive behaviour was not permissible under Hebrew law as has been aptly demonstrated.




SLAVE BEATING AND THE HEBREWS BIBLE



PERMITS

Does the Hebrew bible condone beating one's slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078537#p1078537

Does the Hebrew bible instruct owners to beat their slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078725#p1078725

Does the Hebrew bible say owners may beat their slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078598#p1078598

Does the Hebrew bible allow slaveowners to beat their slaves ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 27#p764027

Does the Hebrew bible instruct HOW to beat one's slave?
viewtopic.php?p=1078725#p1078725

Would Hebrew slaveowner be permitted to beat a slave from the back?
viewtopic.php?p=1079667#p1079667

ARGUMENTS FROM SILENCE

Can an argument from silence be made or slavebeaters?
viewtopic.php?p=1079578#p1079578

Is NOT demanding the death penalty for all beatings of slave "effectively" de facto permission to beat them?
viewtopic.php?p=1078846#p1078846

PUNISHMENT

Did God order absolute immunity for slavebeaters?
viewtopic.php?p=1079551#p1079551

Did slave owners in biblical times escape absolutely ALL punishment if unintentional manslaughter could be established?
viewtopic.php?p=1078563#p1078563

LAW OF LOVE

Does the bible indicate how God would have felt about slaveowners beatings their slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078599#p1078599

Did the principle of loving one's neighbour EXCLUDE foreign slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1079896#p1079896

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY , SLAVE BEATING and ...ABOLITION

JW

[TRANSPONDER]

All wrong. You refer to arguments that have been debunked. I explained why slavery was the same - owning people as property. I recall only that you tried to argue that a note on Chattel slavery was referring to American slavery and you tried to argue that only American slavery was chattel slavery. Debunked. Also I looked at a link and it was a strawman - nobody says that Hebrew OT slaving meant that owners could punish with impunity. The OT refers to punishments for wasting a slave who dies before 2 days. That was never the argument which is simply that slavery is owning another person as property. Punishing them legitimately (according to the owners' manual) is irrelevant. They should not own people as property and decide whether or not they merit punishment.

I won't risk getting personal, but your methods of argument and/or morality as regards slavery at least makes me glad I'm not like you.

[JehovahsWitness]

... I explained why slavery was the same - owning people as property.

And I explained the differences - retention of rights.

... I recall only that you tried to argue that a note on Chattel slavery was referring to American slavery and you tried to argue that only American slavery was chattel slavery.

You recall incorrectly; I made no such argument.

Your link above was an article specifically related to American chattel -slavery so of course it related to the enslavement of Africans.

RELATED POSTS

What was CHATTEL slavery?
viewtopic.php?p=1079718#p1079718

Was chattel slavery as practiced under the American slave trade system, the same as the lifelong slavery legilsated in ancient Israel?
viewtopic.php?p=1079902#p1079902

Were foreign slaves considered chattel under the Hebrew system?
viewtopic.php?p=1079301#p1079301

What did being a man's "property" mean to the ancient Hebrews?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 01#p814401

Is the slavery that existed under bible law comparable to the European & American slave trade?[regulations]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 79#p811779

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY, CHATTEL SLAVERY and .... SLAVE BEATING