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.

[POI]

Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery so there is no reason to believe he was against anything (including biblical slavery) in the Hebrew scriptures.

Great. So telling me -- (paraphrased) "Jesus allowed humans to govern themselves" would be irrelevant here. Why? Because it seems Jesus was pleased with human slavery already. Hence, there would be nothing here specifically for Jesus to 'abolish'.

Christian masters would naturally not mistreat their slaves.

But you just stated above "Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery". Here is what the Bible says:

“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." (Ex. 21:20-21)

“‘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." (Lev. 25:44-46)

This means Jesus is A-okay with beating your slaves with virtual impunity, as long as they do not die, or loose an eye or teeth. I guess this is why it was customary to beat your slaves from the back side?

Jesus is never depicted as being indifferent to the human condition and certainly expressed interest in various situations people faced, so no J dont believe Jesus was indifferent about slavery. He would, I believe, be FOR the Hebrew system of slavery and AGAINST any abuses whether under the Hebrew or the Roman system ; the latter of which certainly allowed for abuses of subbordinates.

If Jesus IS "recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery", then (He/Jesus) is FOR lifetime slavery, as property.

[POI]

.

It's one thing for you to argue that Jesus was powerless to make any changes, but it seems ...as though, in regards to slavery instruction, Jesus was A-OKAY with how such instruction was laid out, via the OT.

Would you agree?

Yes I do agree that Jesus fully supported the instructions was laid out, via the OT.

As for Jesus being "powerless", I do not believe that to have been the case. Jesus simply chose imo to submit to God's will that slavery whatever the form, be permitted to continue. I don't believe Jesus was happy slavery existed because slavery, even under the Hebrew system, does not represent the ideal. But all faithful people are happy to wait on God for true freedom.



Jesus expressed his intention to return; he would destroy all wickedness, wipe out greed, war and poverty (which are key factors in the existence of slavery) and put an end to all human suffering, including that caused by slavery .

Post #21

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery so there is no reason to believe he was against anything (including biblical slavery) in the Hebrew scriptures.

Great. So telling me -- (paraphrased) "Jesus allowed humans to govern themselves" would be irrelevant here. Why? Because it seems Jesus was pleased with human slavery already. Hence, there would be nothing here specifically for Jesus to 'abolish'.

I cannot respond to this as I cannot understand your point and can see no rationale to what seems to me a random collection of ideas strung together without any regard for logic. Perhaps if you rephrased?

[JehovahsWitness]

If Jesus IS "recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery", then (He/Jesus) is FOR lifetime slavery, as property.

Well the Jewish system was abolished with the death of Christ, so it would be more accurate to say (He/Jesus) was FOR lifetime slavery for (non Israelites), as property under the Hebrew system.

This means Jesus is A-okay with beating your slaves with virtual impunity, as long as they do not die, or loose an eye or teeth.

No, I disagree; I don't believe that's what it means.




RELATED POSTS


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

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

SLAVERY, SLAVE BEATING and ...THE MOSAIC LAW

[JehovahsWitness]

.

It's one thing for you to argue that Jesus was powerless to make any changes, but it seems ...as though, in regards to slavery instruction, Jesus was A-OKAY with how such instruction was laid out, via the OT.

Would you agree?

Yes I do agree that Jesus fully supported the instructions was laid out, via the OT.

As for Jesus being "powerless", I do not believe that to have been the case. Jesus simply chose imo to submit to God's will that slavery whatever the form, be permitted to continue. I don't believe Jesus was happy slavery existed because slavery, even under the Hebrew system, does not represent the ideal. But all faithful people are happy to wait on God for true freedom.



Jesus expressed his intention to return; he would destroy all wickedness, wipe out greed, war and poverty (which are key factors in the existence of slavery) and put an end to all human suffering, including that caused by slavery .

Post #21

Post #19

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

LOVE & SLAVERY, CHATTEL SLAVERY and .... ABOLITION

[POI]

Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery so there is no reason to believe he was against anything (including biblical slavery) in the Hebrew scriptures.

Great. So telling me -- (paraphrased) "Jesus allowed humans to govern themselves" would be irrelevant here. Why? Because it seems Jesus was pleased with human slavery already. Hence, there would be nothing here specifically for Jesus to 'abolish'.

I cannot respond to this as I cannot understand your point and can see no rationale to what seems to me a random collection of ideas strung together without any regard for logic. Perhaps if you rephrased?

Allow me to elaborate. The initial OP question was...

(Me) Why didn't Jesus just abolish slavery practices, or never mention slavery at all?

Your initial response was to the tune of...

(You) Because such slavery, even opporessive slavery, is a part of human rulership and God has authorised humans to self govern."

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

Why initially tell me Jesus was not here to govern???

If you accept that Jesus was A-okay with slavery, via the instruction given in (Ex.21) and (Lev. 25), then you should had lead with the response given above. Verses telling me Jesus was not here to govern.

In other words, just state... "Well, He didn't disagree. Thus, there would be nothing here for Him to regulate".

[POI]

If Jesus IS "recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery", then (He/Jesus) is FOR lifetime slavery, as property.

Well the Jewish system was abolished with the death of Christ, so it would be more accurate to say (He/Jesus) was FOR lifetime slavery for (non Israelites), as property under the Hebrew system.

Why would owning other humans, as property for life, for which you can also beat with virtual impunity, ever be okay?

This means Jesus is A-okay with beating your slaves with virtual impunity, as long as they do not die, or loose an eye or teeth.

No, I disagree; I don't believe that's what it means.

Well, then you would defy your own logic. You stated "Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery".

I already issued direct assertions/instructions from (Ex. 21 and Lev. 25.). Such passages condone/sanction/allow impunity for beating your slaves. Also, to treat then as property for life.

This is the defined 'slavery' which 'God" apparently thinks is A-okay.

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery so there is no reason to believe he was against anything (including biblical slavery) in the Hebrew scriptures.

Great. So telling me -- (paraphrased) "Jesus allowed humans to govern themselves" would be irrelevant here. Why? Because it seems Jesus was pleased with human slavery already. Hence, there would be nothing here specifically for Jesus to 'abolish'.

I cannot respond to this as I cannot understand your point and can see no rationale to what seems to me a random collection of ideas strung together without any regard for logic. Perhaps if you rephrased?

Allow me to elaborate. The initial OP question was...

(Me) Why didn't Jesus just abolish slavery practices, or never mention slavery at all?

Your initial response was to the tune of...

(You) Because such slavery, even opporessive slavery, is a part of human rulership and God has authorised humans to self govern."

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

Why initially tell me Jesus was not here to govern???

If you accept that Jesus was A-okay with slavery, via the instruction given in (Ex.21) and (Lev. 25), then you should had lead with the response given above. Verses telling me Jesus was not here to govern.

Okay... Well

* Jesus was not [intially] here to govern

* Slavery, even opporessive slavery, is a part of human rulership and God has authorised humans to self govern."

* " He didn't disagree [with the Hebrew system of slavery]. Thus, there would be nothing here for Him to regulate".

Take the above three in whatever order you wish.

[JehovahsWitness]

I already issued direct assertions/instructions from (Ex. 21 and Lev. 25.). Such passages condone/sanction/allow impunity for beating your slaves.

And I have already said I do not agree that is the case.




SLAVE BEATING AND THE HEBREWS BIBLE

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

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

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

SLAVERY, SLAVE BEATING and ...THE MOSAIC LAW

[POI]

Jesus is recorded as fully supporting God's law which allowed for slavery so there is no reason to believe he was against anything (including biblical slavery) in the Hebrew scriptures.

Great. So telling me -- (paraphrased) "Jesus allowed humans to govern themselves" would be irrelevant here. Why? Because it seems Jesus was pleased with human slavery already. Hence, there would be nothing here specifically for Jesus to 'abolish'.

I cannot respond to this as I cannot understand your point and can see no rationale to what seems to me a random collection of ideas strung together without any regard for logic. Perhaps if you rephrased?

Allow me to elaborate. The initial OP question was...

(Me) Why didn't Jesus just abolish slavery practices, or never mention slavery at all?

Your initial response was to the tune of...

(You) Because such slavery, even opporessive slavery, is a part of human rulership and God has authorised humans to self govern."

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

Why initially tell me Jesus was not here to govern???

If you accept that Jesus was A-okay with slavery, via the instruction given in (Ex.21) and (Lev. 25), then you should had lead with the response given above. Verses telling me Jesus was not here to govern.

Okay... Well

* Jesus was not [intially] here to govern

* Slavery, even opporessive slavery, is a part of human rulership and God has authorised humans to self govern."

* " He didn't disagree [with the Hebrew system of slavery]. Thus, there would be nothing here for Him to regulate".

Take the above three in whatever order you wish.

Please allow me to drive this point home. Jesus did not abolish "Biblical slavery," or abstain from mentioning "slavery" at all because He agreed with "slavery". Hence, there would be nothing for Him to 'govern' in the first place. "Biblical slavery" sanctions humans as becoming lifetime property -- for which you can beat with virtual impunity; via Ex. 21 and Lev. 25.