"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.'

[POI]

God gave instructions to the Jews concerning slavery in the OT.

Seems more likely such instruction was human commanded alone. Makes more sense, doesn't it? See below...

Slavery was common in civilizations in ancient times.

So was/is many other actions in which many humans find 'sinful'. And yet, the Bible had no problem condemning some of these actions anyways, regardless of how common such action(s) were and/or if humans were still going to do them anyways - despite written commands which express condemnation for doing such action(s). Seems quite odd that one of the worst deemed actions in human history was not expressed as being against 'god's law' altogether. Instead, the Bible condones such action(s)?

As I told another, it is really no different than a modern-day Christian protesting in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The Planned Parenthood clinic condones abortion rather than expressing abolition for abortion. The Christian may not rest until abortion is expressed as being illegal.

What God commanded about slaves was right for the Jews in those days.

1) Commanding that humans may own other humans as lifetime property was/is right for humans? Why?
2) Instructing complete impunity for the master, for the beating of their chattel slaves, was/is right for humans? Why?
3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?
4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

[marke]

God gave instructions to the Jews concerning slavery in the OT.

Seems more likely such instruction was human commanded alone. Makes more sense, doesn't it? See below...

Marke: The instructions to the Jews recorded in the OT were instructions from God, not from mere men.

Slavery was common in civilizations in ancient times.

So was/is many other actions in which many humans find 'sinful'. And yet, the Bible had no problem condemning some of these actions anyways, regardless of how common such action(s) were and/or if humans were still going to do them anyways - despite written commands which express condemnation for doing such action(s). Seems quite odd that one of the worst deemed actions in human history was not expressed as being against 'god's law' altogether. Instead, the Bible condones such action(s)?

As I told another, it is really no different than a modern-day Christian protesting in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The Planned Parenthood clinic condones abortion rather than expressing abolition for abortion. The Christian may not rest until abortion is expressed as being illegal.

Marke: God does not instruct Christians to follow laws, but to follow Him by faith. God has led Christians to oppose the killing of unborn babies and to oppose slavery in America, whether anyone wants to find some NT law with specific commands for that or not.

What God commanded about slaves was right for the Jews in those days.

1) Commanding that humans may own other humans as lifetime property was/is right for humans? Why?
2) Instructing complete impunity for the master, for the beating of their chattel slaves, was/is right for humans? Why?
3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?
4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

Marke: God gave instructions to sinners in the OT and has given instructions to Christians in the NT. Why God said what He said and says what He says is not open for debate among sinners. Jesus never led NT Christians to buy or sell slaves, nor did God write instructions in the NT for protesting the killing of unborn babies. Christians are told to seek God's leading and to follow His leading. If sinners do not like that then tough and if Christians end up doing wrong while thinking they are right then God will judge them for that also.

[POI]

The instructions to the Jews recorded in the OT were instructions from God, not from mere men.

Prove it.

Alternatively, we know men exist. We know men write stuff. We know men condone(d) slavery practices. We know such slavery was widely accepted culturally. Such allowances more-so resemble the wishes and preferences of fallible mortals, verses alternatively asserting the wishes of an omniscience and omnibenevolent agency.

God does not instruct Christians to follow laws, but to follow Him by faith.

The Bible still instructs humans to follow "God's" moral principles and teachings, which are often expressed through laws. Sure, faith can be the foundation for this obedience. But, none-the-less, humans are instructed to abide by 'Commandments' and other instruction(s).

God has led Christians to oppose the killing of unborn babies and to oppose slavery in America

You missed my point entirely. Please re--read it again:

It is really no different than a modern-day Christian protesting in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The Planned Parenthood clinic condones abortion rather than expressing abolition for abortion. The Christian may not rest until abortion is expressed as being illegal.

Meaning, the Christian can rightfully criticize Planned Parenthood for not abolishing abortion, just like the skeptic can rightfully criticize the Bible for not abolishing slavery.

whether anyone wants to find some NT law with specific commands for that or not.

The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not express abolition for humans owning other humans as property. And again, if the OT never condoned such activities, then you would have some kind of a position. But you don't.

God gave instructions to sinners in the OT and has given instructions to Christians in the NT. Why God said what He said and says what He says is not open for debate among sinners.

Correct! The Bible condones humans owning other humans as property, then, now, and forever. This is not open for debate!

Jesus never led NT Christians to buy or sell slaves,

Again, this is NOT my position. My position is instead that the Bible condones such actions and never abolishes such actions. This means that slave owners are not breaking the law to own humans as property for life, just like such folks today can abort their unborn and unwanted babies without breaking the law.

Christians are told to seek God's leading and to follow His leading. If sinners do not like that then tough and if Christians end up doing wrong while thinking they are right then God will judge them for that also.

Great Then you, as a sinner, must reconcile that humans, owning other humans as lifetime property, is a-okay in 'god's' book.

2nd request:

3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?
4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

[marke]

The instructions to the Jews recorded in the OT were instructions from God, not from mere men.

Prove it.

Alternatively, we know men exist. We know men write stuff. We know men condone(d) slavery practices. We know such slavery was widely accepted culturally. Such allowances more-so resemble the wishes and preferences of fallible mortals, verses alternatively asserting the wishes of an omniscience and omnibenevolent agency.

God does not instruct Christians to follow laws, but to follow Him by faith.

The Bible still instructs humans to follow "God's" moral principles and teachings, which are often expressed through laws. Sure, faith can be the foundation for this obedience. But, none-the-less, humans are instructed to abide by 'Commandments' and other instruction(s).

God has led Christians to oppose the killing of unborn babies and to oppose slavery in America

You missed my point entirely. Please re--read it again:

It is really no different than a modern-day Christian protesting in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The Planned Parenthood clinic condones abortion rather than expressing abolition for abortion. The Christian may not rest until abortion is expressed as being illegal.

Meaning, the Christian can rightfully criticize Planned Parenthood for not abolishing abortion, just like the skeptic can rightfully criticize the Bible for not abolishing slavery.

whether anyone wants to find some NT law with specific commands for that or not.

The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not express abolition for humans owning other humans as property. And again, if the OT never condoned such activities, then you would have some kind of a position. But you don't.

God gave instructions to sinners in the OT and has given instructions to Christians in the NT. Why God said what He said and says what He says is not open for debate among sinners.

Correct! The Bible condones humans owning other humans as property, then, now, and forever. This is not open for debate!

Jesus never led NT Christians to buy or sell slaves,

Again, this is NOT my position. My position is instead that the Bible condones such actions and never abolishes such actions. This means that slave owners are not breaking the law to own humans as property for life, just like such folks today can abort their unborn and unwanted babies without breaking the law.

Christians are told to seek God's leading and to follow His leading. If sinners do not like that then tough and if Christians end up doing wrong while thinking they are right then God will judge them for that also.

Great Then you, as a sinner, must reconcile that humans, owning other humans as lifetime property, is a-okay in 'god's' book.

2nd request:

3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?
4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

Marke:
The wicked desperately want to brand Christians as hateful, violent, and racist. Sadly, many rebellious Christians are. However, godly Christians in America were the backbone of the abolitionist movement advocating the freeing of the slaves. Leftists and democrats who do not want to recognize that fact are evil and dishonest.

[POI]

[Replying to marke in post #614]

Dear Marke,

This is a debating arena. Rather than debate all my points, you respond with irrelevant replies. Please address what I stated in my last post to you, or everyone reading along will conclude that you have no argument to defend against my claims.

The ball is in your proverbial court now.

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #614]

Dear Marke,

This is a debating arena. Rather than debate all my points, you respond with irrelevant replies. Please address what I stated in my last post to you, or everyone reading along will conclude that you have no argument to defend against my claims.

The ball is in your proverbial court now.

Marke: I don't know what claims you are talking about. Could you be more specific?

[POI]

[Replying to marke in post #614]

Dear Marke,

This is a debating arena. Rather than debate all my points, you respond with irrelevant replies. Please address what I stated in my last post to you, or everyone reading along will conclude that you have no argument to defend against my claims.

The ball is in your proverbial court now.

Marke: I don't know what claims you are talking about. Could you be more specific?

Claim 1: The Bible is more likely human contrived alone. I gave my reasons in post 613.

Claim 2: The Bible still instructs humans to follow "God's" moral principles and teachings, which are often expressed through laws. Sure, faith can be the foundation for this obedience. But, none-the-less, humans are instructed to abide by 'Commandments' and other instruction(s). From post 613.

Claim 3: The Christian can rightfully criticize Planned Parenthood for not abolishing abortion, just like the skeptic can rightfully criticize the Bible for not abolishing slavery. From post 613.

Claim 4: The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not express abolition for humans owning other humans as property. And again, if the OT never condoned such activities, then you would have some kind of a position. But you don't. From post 613.

Claim 5: You are correct in that he Bible condones humans owning other humans as property, then, now, and forever. This is not open for debate! From post 613.

Claim 6: My position is instead that the Bible condones such actions and never abolishes such actions. This means that slave owners are not breaking the law to own humans as property for life, just like such folks today can abort their unborn and unwanted babies without breaking the law. From post 613.

Claim 7: You, as a "sinner", must reconcile that humans, owning other humans as lifetime property, is a-okay in 'god's' book. From post 613.

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

3rd request:

3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?
4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #614]

Dear Marke,

This is a debating arena. Rather than debate all my points, you respond with irrelevant replies. Please address what I stated in my last post to you, or everyone reading along will conclude that you have no argument to defend against my claims.

The ball is in your proverbial court now.

Marke: I don't know what claims you are talking about. Could you be more specific?

Claim 1: The Bible is more likely human contrived alone. I gave my reasons in post 613.

Marke: Blubbering nonsense.

Claim 2: The Bible still instructs humans to follow "God's" moral principles and teachings, which are often expressed through laws. Sure, faith can be the foundation for this obedience. But, none-the-less, humans are instructed to abide by 'Commandments' and other instruction(s). From post 613.

Marke: Christians are instructed to follow the living spirit of the law, not the dead letter of the law.

Claim 3: The Christian can rightfully criticize Planned Parenthood for not abolishing abortion, just like the skeptic can rightfully criticize the Bible for not abolishing slavery. From post 613.

Claim 4: The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not express abolition for humans owning other humans as property. And again, if the OT never condoned such activities, then you would have some kind of a position. But you don't. From post 613.

Marke: Jesus led early American abolitionist Christians to fight against slavery, not support slavery. Christians who supported slavery formed devient sects not followed by other Bible-believing, God-honoring believers.

Claim 5: You are correct in that he Bible condones humans owning other humans as property, then, now, and forever. This is not open for debate! From post 613.

Marke: God also instructs humans about divorce but He does not support, endorse, or encourage divorce. Jesus never encouraged Christians to buy or sell slaves.

Claim 6: My position is instead that the Bible condones such actions and never abolishes such actions. This means that slave owners are not breaking the law to own humans as property for life, just like such folks today can abort their unborn and unwanted babies without breaking the law. From post 613.

Marke: Christians like me do not agree with these takes on the Bible, but nobody will be answering to Christians like me but to God in the judgment.

Claim 7: You, as a "sinner", must reconcile that humans, owning other humans as lifetime property, is a-okay in 'god's' book. From post 613.

Marke: Jesus has never led me to support or participate in slavery.

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

3rd request:

3) Since this was/is considered a HUGE topic among humans, enough so to where many humans would dedicate their entire lives to try and abolish such practices, it seems kind of interesting that Jesus, not once, cared to express direct abolition for humans owning other humans as lifetime property? Don't you agree?

Marke: Jesus did not support or specifically condemn communism, Marxism, Naziism, totalitarianism, slavery, sex changes, gender confusion, abortion, or many other aspects of modern society, but tens of thousands of Christians have had the same leading from the Lord to oppose modern atrocities promoted by wicked servants of satan.

4) Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does and does not like. And yet, with the large topic of slavery, Jesus opts not to express abolition for such condoned activities. Why?

Marke: I am the last person to ask why God did not specifically spell out His opposition to hundreds of modern evils in great detail.

[POI]

Blubbering nonsense.

You are basically using the response of 'nuh-uh'. Yet again, here is why I can confidentially present my position that the Bible is the work of men alone:

We know men exist. We know men write stuff. We know men condone(d) slavery practices. We know such slavery was widely accepted culturally. Such allowances more-so resemble the wishes and preferences of fallible mortals, verses alternatively asserting the wishes of an omniscience and omnibenevolent agency.

If you have no debate counter argument, then I will take the win here.

Christians are instructed to follow the living spirit of the law, not the dead letter of the law.

This response is what we skeptics deem a 'deeptiy.' A phrase in which appears to be profound, but is instead, in reality, ambiguous and shallow. Again, the Bible is all written by fallible men. Nothing more.

Jesus led early American abolitionist Christians to fight against slavery, not support slavery.

Please provide the verse(s) which state Jesus expressing direct abolition for humans owning other humans as slave property?

Christians who supported slavery formed devient sects not followed by other Bible-believing, God-honoring believers.

Just like folks engaging in abortion who are not in violation of any law(s), the Christians who engages in the ownership of other humans as property, are also not in violation of any Biblical law(s).

God also instructs humans about divorce but He does not support, endorse, or encourage divorce. Jesus never encouraged Christians to buy or sell slaves.

I've already spoke about this exact topic with Tam. The Bible mentions that divorce is 'bad'. The Bible never mentions that owning humans as property is 'bad'. Hence, your argument fails miserably. The kicker here is that you and I agree that chattel slavery is way worse than divorce. And there exists many reasons which divorce would be permitted. And yet, the Bible goes out of its way to tell the reader that divorce is 'bad', but remains silent about humans owning other humans as being 'bad' or against the law. Hmmmm?

Christians like me do not agree with these takes on the Bible, but nobody will be answering to Christians like me but to God in the judgment.

I already realize you do not agree with it being okay for humans to own other humans as property. However, the Bible disagrees with you, and you must somehow reconcile that your own moral compass trumps the Bible's moral compass. Which ultimately begs the question you never answered prior (26 times and counting):

Why follow a book which does not align with your own moral compass?

Jesus has never led me to support or participate in slavery.

Your own moral compass surpasses that of the book you say you follow. So why not just release the dead weight, which in this case, is the Bible itself. Your own moral compass looks to be far superior to the book you say you follow. You express disdain for human property ownership. The Bible does not. Instead, the Bible condones such actions.

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

Jesus did not support or specifically condemn communism, Marxism, Naziism, totalitarianism, slavery, sex changes, gender confusion, abortion, or many other aspects of modern society, but tens of thousands of Christians have had the same leading from the Lord to oppose modern atrocities promoted by wicked servants of satan.

The vast difference here is that the Bible never comes out and condones communism, Marxism, Naziism, totalitarianism, sex changes, gender confusion, and many others. BUT, the Bible DOES condone humans owning other humans as property. Checkmate!

I am the last person to ask why God did not specifically spell out His opposition to hundreds of modern evils in great detail.[/b]

The answer is simple. The Bible was written by fallible men alone.

[marke]

Blubbering nonsense.

You are basically using the response of 'nuh-uh'. Yet again, here is why I can confidentially present my position that the Bible is the work of men alone:

We know men exist. We know men write stuff. We know men condone(d) slavery practices. We know such slavery was widely accepted culturally. Such allowances more-so resemble the wishes and preferences of fallible mortals, verses alternatively asserting the wishes of an omniscience and omnibenevolent agency.

If you have no debate counter argument, then I will take the win here.

Christians are instructed to follow the living spirit of the law, not the dead letter of the law.

This response is what we skeptics deem a 'deeptiy.' A phrase in which appears to be profound, but is instead, in reality, ambiguous and shallow. Again, the Bible is all written by fallible men. Nothing more.

Jesus led early American abolitionist Christians to fight against slavery, not support slavery.

Please provide the verse(s) which state Jesus expressing direct abolition for humans owning other humans as slave property?

Marke: Luke 6:31
And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

Christians who supported slavery formed devient sects not followed by other Bible-believing, God-honoring believers.

Just like folks engaging in abortion who are not in violation of any law(s), the Christians who engages in the ownership of other humans as property, are also not in violation of any Biblical law(s).

God also instructs humans about divorce but He does not support, endorse, or encourage divorce. Jesus never encouraged Christians to buy or sell slaves.

I've already spoke about this exact topic with Tam. The Bible mentions that divorce is 'bad'. The Bible never mentions that owning humans as property is 'bad'. Hence, your argument fails miserably. The kicker here is that you and I agree that chattel slavery is way worse than divorce. And there exists many reasons which divorce would be permitted. And yet, the Bible goes out of its way to tell the reader that divorce is 'bad', but remains silent about humans owning other humans as being 'bad' or against the law. Hmmmm?

Christians like me do not agree with these takes on the Bible, but nobody will be answering to Christians like me but to God in the judgment.

I already realize you do not agree with it being okay for humans to own other humans as property. However, the Bible disagrees with you, and you must somehow reconcile that your own moral compass trumps the Bible's moral compass. Which ultimately begs the question you never answered prior (26 times and counting):

Why follow a book which does not align with your own moral compass?

Jesus has never led me to support or participate in slavery.

Your own moral compass surpasses that of the book you say you follow. So why not just release the dead weight, which in this case, is the Bible itself. Your own moral compass looks to be far superior to the book you say you follow. You express disdain for human property ownership. The Bible does not. Instead, the Bible condones such actions.

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

Jesus did not support or specifically condemn communism, Marxism, Naziism, totalitarianism, slavery, sex changes, gender confusion, abortion, or many other aspects of modern society, but tens of thousands of Christians have had the same leading from the Lord to oppose modern atrocities promoted by wicked servants of satan.

The vast difference here is that the Bible never comes out and condones communism, Marxism, Naziism, totalitarianism, sex changes, gender confusion, and many others. BUT, the Bible DOES condone humans owning other humans as property. Checkmate!

I am the last person to ask why God did not specifically spell out His opposition to hundreds of modern evils in great detail.[/b]

The answer is simple. The Bible was written by fallible men alone.