"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]

[Replying to POI in post #420]


I doubt it means the women and children were plunder-The gold and silver were plunder.

I'm sorry this is likely uncomfortable for you, but the Bible does not separate women and children from gold and silver, when speaking about what constitutes as plunder:

Deut. 20 - you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

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

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

[marke]

Does this mean you now concede that the Bible does actually grant permission to buy slaves? Nothing you offered below refutes my prior statement.

Whatever you buy or sell, ye shall not oppress one another. I agree with that command of God when dealing with others, whether slaves or free.

The verse you offered refers to land, not humans.

The given rules are also tribal. For instance, Leviticus 25:44-46 demonstrates this by telling the reader that the slave master is certainly not allowed to treat Israelites in the same way as the master can treat non-Israelites.

The area of the Bible you offered also states the following, which is yet another demonstration of tribalism:

14 "If you sell land to any of your own people or buy land from them, do not take advantage of each other. 15 You are to buy from your own people on the basis of the number of years since the Jubilee. (NIV)

God still owns the land of Palestine today that He gave the Jews the perpetual right of occupying.

And if you are not an Israelite, the Bible allows for a differing ruleset in slavery practices. And when Jesus later comes along, Jesus never rebukes the prior rules of his dad, even though Jesus has no problem telling folks what he does not like.

God allows Jews to sell themselves into bondage but still commands that the bond slaves be treated humanely.

I can see why a Jew might do so. The ruleset is completely different for them, versus the "non-Jew." It is both more-so voluntary and the treatment is also very different. However, if you are not an Israelite, then the rules differ, a lot. So much for God loving all of his human creation equally. It's almost as if the Israelites invented their own version of a God, just like the Hindus, and all the rest...

God did allow the buying and selling of slaves of heathen nations, whether taken as prisoners of war, as prisoners of crime, as prisoners of deep poverty, or whatever.

I agree with the part you stated in bold directly above. If you are not an Israelite male, both the OT God, as well as the NT Jesus, allow for all said slavery practices... (i.e.) a) lifetime chattel slavery and b) slave breeding.

Jews could sell themselves into slavery to the heathen as well. It seems the majority of slaves are enslaved for the purpose of survival from the ravages of poverty and starvation.

1) The Bible could think of no better way to combat poverty/starvation?
2) you stated 'the majority' above. What about all the ones enslaved against their will, like the ones bred into it, or any others, who are outside the 'majority' for instance?

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

10th request: Why follow a book where it's given moral compass does not align with your own?

For whatever reason God never gives any reason for anyone to believe He favors wealth over poverty.

This response, or lack there-of, is quite telling. Below is a recap of our discussion thus far:

* The Bible endorses/condones chattel slavery
* The Bible endorses/condones slave breeding
* The Bible grants permission to buy chattel slaves
* The Bible endorses/condones both a) chattel slavery and b) slave breeding as the best way(s) to combat poverty/starvation
* The Bible endorses/condones tribalism, just like other religion(s)

11th request: Why follow a book where it's given moral compass does not align with your own?

I see no conflict between what God said about modern servitude or ancient slavery and impeccable moral standards.

[servant1]

[Replying to POI in post #431]

God disguised many things in his bible. Women and children by righteous men are not plunder as in your view.

[1213]

...The 'golden rule' does not apply equally ...

That is not said in the Bible, so I have no good reason to accept that.

[tam]

Peace to you,

I feel like I need to remind you that you already admitted that you, YOURSELF, could not obey Christ in the NT AND at the same time, enslave another person against their will. Here are the questions to which you answered "no": viewtopic.php?p=1159060#p1159060

We are just going in circles here tam. Here was my response in post 338:

This was already address in my OP. My own view on these questions do not align with the Bible's view. I reckon your answer is exactly the same as mine. Which is NO! Based upon your pointed questions, you logically cannot. So now, please reconcile all of what the Bible endorses, for which YOU would not. Oh yea, you already did. 'Erring pens' and 'divorce allowances.' A recap has been issued in post 334.

POI, did you or did you not answer "NO!" to the questions I asked you in Post 337.

Here are the questions if you have forgotten them:

1 - Can YOU enslave another person if you are supposed to make yourself a LEAST one?

If your answer is 'no', then you cannot enslave another person against their will unless you disobey Christ. Because His command to His followers is to make ourselves least. If He commands us to be least, we cannot then force someone to be less than us.

2 - Can YOU enslave another person (or their children) if YOU are supposed to be serving THEM?

If your answer is no (and it was), then you cannot enslave another person (or their children) unless you disobey Christ. Because His command to His followers is for us to BE the servants; to serve OTHERS. If He commands us to serve others, we cannot force others to serve us. It just doesn't work that way.


3 - Can YOU enslave another person (or their children) if YOU are supposed to 'do unto others as YOU would have them do unto you?'

If your answer is 'no' (and it was), then you cannot enslave another person (or their children) unless you are disobeying Christ (assuming of course that you would not want to be enslaved against your will.) You cannot do the opposite of His commands and then legitimately claim that you are obeying those commands.


4- Did Christ force anyone to serve Him? <- to this question you gave a direct 'no', leading to the follow-up question: IF Christ never forced anyone to serve Him... and HIS followers are to follow His EXAMPLE... how can HIS followers then force others to serve them while also claiming to be following Christ and His example/commands?

To this, you simply restated your claim. But what else could you do other than concede? Because of course it is a logical impossibility to follow someone's example/command while doing the exact opposite of that example/command.

5 - Did Christ enslave anyone against their will? You answered no, and the follow-up is: If your answer is no, and it can only be no, how are you following His example if you enslave someone (and/or their children)? If you force others to be your slaves?

The answer is that you are not following His example if you enslave someone (and/or their children). If you force others to be your slaves. You seem to understand this because your response was 'contradiction and apologetics.' I am not sure if it should require apologetics to see the answer to that question, but it would require contradiction (disobedience) or ignorance (not knowing Christ or His commands) for someone claiming to follow Christ to do those things.

And yet, you, yourself, admit that you could not enslave someone against their will AND obey His instructions in the NT at the same time.

If I were a believer, I also could not fault a fellow Christian slave owner, as Jesus never abolishes such endorsed or condoned activities.

When you say 'also', this infers that you do realize you could not enslave someone against their will and obey Christ's instructions in the NT at the same time.

As for your claim that you could not fault a fellow Christian slave owner... of course you could. For the exact same reasons that you realize you cannot enslave someone against their will and obey Christ's instructions at the same time. Simply ask them the same questions I asked you (I would add love into the mix, and a few other things we've discussed, but for simplicity sake, the questions above should suffice.)

Paul also had no problem telling Philemon that the right thing for him to do was to free his slave Oneismus:

Therefore, although in Christ I could be bold and order you to do what you ought to do,

Note that Paul states that in Christ he could be bold and ORDER Philemon to do what he ought to do. So Paul quite disagrees with you.

9 yet I prefer to appeal to you on the basis of love. It is as none other than Paulan old man and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus 10 that I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains. 11 Formerly he was useless to you, but now he has become useful both to you and to me.

12 I am sending himwho is my very heartback to you. 13 I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. 14 But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do would not seem forced but would be voluntary. 15 Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever 16 no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord.


He wants Philemon to do the right thing (free Onesimus) out of love, rather than due to an order.

Post 334 does not address the fact that you cannot listen to Christ's instructions and also enslave another person against their will.

Yes you can. I've explained ad nauseum...

You admitted above that you cannot.

Is that all you have to support your statement? Because you have already conceded the point that if you were going to obey Christ's instructions in the NT, you would not be able enslave another person against their will.

If I were a Christian, and I decided to hold slaves, keep them for life, breed them, and whip them on the back, God/Jesus apparently thinks that is not wrong. I might think it is wrong, but not them. Otherwise, I would wonder why they did not say so?

Since you have acknowledged that you could not listen to those instructions from Christ that we have discussed and also enslave someone against their will, you cannot turn around and legitimately say that they have said nothing against such things.


Peace again to you.

[POI]

1 - Can YOU enslave another person if you are supposed to make yourself a LEAST one?

If your answer is 'no', then you cannot enslave another person against their will unless you disobey Christ. Because His command to His followers is to make ourselves least. If He commands us to be least, we cannot then force someone to be less than us.

Again, you are being picky and choosy. Again, Jesus said a lot of things. Again, Jesus had no problem telling folks what he does not like. Again, if the rule was the be-all-end-all, then many of Jesus's other given rules would all be redundant, So, why ignore the topic of slavery, which is a huge one? Instead, again, Jesus reinforces the slavery practices that his daddy issued.

2 - Can YOU enslave another person (or their children) if YOU are supposed to be serving THEM?

If your answer is no (and it was), then you cannot enslave another person (or their children) unless you disobey Christ. Because His command to His followers is for us to BE the servants; to serve OTHERS. If He commands us to serve others, we cannot force others to serve us. It just doesn't work that way.

Along with my answer to your last question, we can also add that all rules are not created equal for all (i.e.)

God > Jesus > free man > free woman > free children > Israelite male slave > Israelite female slave > all other slaves - (including bred slaves) > livestock > nature

3 - Can YOU enslave another person (or their children) if YOU are supposed to 'do unto others as YOU would have them do unto you?'

If your answer is 'no' (and it was), then you cannot enslave another person (or their children) unless you are disobeying Christ (assuming of course that you would not want to be enslaved against your will.) You cannot do the opposite of His commands and then legitimately claim that you are obeying those commands.

Again, already covered near the bottom of the OP, as well as again in post 334 near the top.

IF Christ never forced anyone to serve Him... and HIS followers are to follow His EXAMPLE... how can HIS followers then force others to serve them while also claiming to be following Christ and His example/commands?

Already answered above. You are being very picky and choosy.

5 - Did Christ enslave anyone against their will? You answered no, and the follow-up is: If your answer is no, and it can only be no, how are you following His example if you enslave someone (and/or their children)? If you force others to be your slaves?

The answer is that you are not following His example if you enslave someone (and/or their children). If you force others to be your slaves. You seem to understand this because your response was 'contradiction and apologetics.' I am not sure if it should require apologetics to see the answer to that question, but it would require contradiction (disobedience) or ignorance (not knowing Christ or His commands) for someone claiming to follow Christ to do those things.

Already addressed. You are being picky and choosy.

The rest is just more rinse/repeat....

[POI]

I see no conflict between what God said about modern servitude or ancient slavery and impeccable moral standards.

Then the following points below, are completely in line with impeccable moral standards????

* The Bible endorses/condones chattel slavery
* The Bible endorses/condones slave breeding
* The Bible grants permission to buy chattel slaves
* The Bible endorses/condones both a) chattel slavery and b) slave breeding as the best way(s) to combat poverty/starvation
* The Bible endorses/condones tribalism, just like other religion(s)

12th request: Why follow a book which moral standards do not align with your own?

[POI]

God disguised many things in his bible. Women and children by righteous men are not plunder as in your view.

You have offered nothing short of wishful thinking alone in this response. Again, I know it is uncomfortable for you, because you do not agree with the verse is Deut. 20, as it is written. But it is there, in black and white.

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

[POI]

...The 'golden rule' does not apply equally ...

That is not said in the Bible, so I have no good reason to accept that.

You already agreed that the rule is not equal. Hence, you contradict yourself.

[marke]

I see no conflict between what God said about modern servitude or ancient slavery and impeccable moral standards.

Then the following points below, are completely in line with impeccable moral standards????

* The Bible endorses/condones chattel slavery
* The Bible endorses/condones slave breeding
* The Bible grants permission to buy chattel slaves
* The Bible endorses/condones both a) chattel slavery and b) slave breeding as the best way(s) to combat poverty/starvation
* The Bible endorses/condones tribalism, just like other religion(s)

12th request: Why follow a book which moral standards do not align with your own?

Humans find fault with God because God does not condemn poverty, sickness, trouble, war, servitude, slavery, inequality, disasters, and more.