"Slavery" in the Bible

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
POI
Savant
Posts: 6125
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 2189 times
Been thanked: 1649 times

"Slavery" in the Bible

Post #1

Post by 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. :ok:

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.'
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 13597
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 519 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #481

Post by 1213 »

POI wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:08 am
1213 wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 1:33 am Also in that case the owner decides.
Women have no say in the matter. This is my point.
Ok, I think they can say they want to go, and then the owner can decide. Even if the woman can't decide it, it does not mean they have no say in the matter, nor that they could not be allowed to go.
My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view

Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 13597
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 519 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #482

Post by 1213 »

POI wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:02 am
1213 wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 1:33 am If no visible harm done, no punishment, which is the same in the case of slaves.
Nope. If you are free, the rules differ. Case/point:

Exodus 21:23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
As i said, if no visible harm, then no punishment.
POI wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:02 amAlso, you are not allowed to strike your parent, otherwise, you are sentenced to death (Exodus 21:15).
It would violate the ten commandments, honor your parents, which is why it is not the same.
POI wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:02 am...Whipping them kept them in line. It would be stupid to hurt them too badly. ...
It would be stupid to whip them in any case. But, I think this shows nicely why it is good that you are not a slave owner.
My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view

Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html

User avatar
POI
Savant
Posts: 6125
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 2189 times
Been thanked: 1649 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #483

Post by POI »

1213 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:30 am Ok, I think they can say they want to go, and then the owner can decide. Even if the woman can't decide it, it does not mean they have no say in the matter, nor that they could not be allowed to go.
Wrong:

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.

or

7 "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

User avatar
POI
Savant
Posts: 6125
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 2189 times
Been thanked: 1649 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #484

Post by POI »

1213 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:30 am As i said, if no visible harm, then no punishment.
You missed my point entirely. The rules differ between the free and the enslaved.

The slave master's eye(s) or tooth/teeth is/are instructed not to be removed for knocking out the slaves eye(s) or tooth/teeth. And no sane slave owner would remove a slave's eye(s) when this is their cheap labor, as they could no longer see. Further, I'm pretty sure the welts and/or bleeding to the back, from the given whippings, were quite visible. And it's pretty safe to say no punishment was issued to the slave master for doing so.
1213 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:30 am It would violate the ten commandments, honor your parents, which is why it is not the same.
The 10 commandments are exempt from the golden rule?
1213 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:30 am It would be stupid to whip them in any case. But, I think this shows nicely why it is good that you are not a slave owner.
LOL! I would not care to be a slave owner, or a slave. Especially under the Biblical law. If I was a slave under the Bible's law-set, as long as I was not killed from the beating I took, or as long as my eye did not popped out of my head from the beating, the slave master was specifically instructed to remain immune from punishment. Such a law would not logically be placed in the Bible if beatings were not a regular and accepted occurrence.
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 13597
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 519 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #485

Post by 1213 »

POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 1:08 am
1213 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 1:30 am Ok, I think they can say they want to go, and then the owner can decide. Even if the woman can't decide it, it does not mean they have no say in the matter, nor that they could not be allowed to go.
Wrong:

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.
or
7 "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.
Those doesn't mean the owner is not allowed to let them go, if he wants to let them go.
My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view

Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html

User avatar
POI
Savant
Posts: 6125
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:22 pm
Has thanked: 2189 times
Been thanked: 1649 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #486

Post by POI »

1213 wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 1:50 am Those doesn't mean the owner is not allowed to let them go, if he wants to let them go.
What it does mean is that the slave master does not have to let the slave go, if the slave asks. Why? Because the Bible grants permission for the master to keep slaves, and it is not up to the slave to decide.

I have an honest question for you....

Do you honestly think there exists some special kind of 'slavery' for Christians? As I already stated, in this context, the term 'slave' is really no different than the term 'turd.' Meaning, neither one can be effectively sugar-coated.
In case anyone is wondering... The avatar quote states the following:

"I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness."

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 13597
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 519 times
Been thanked: 517 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #487

Post by 1213 »

POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:26 am What it does mean is that the slave master does not have to let the slave go, if the slave asks.
Yes, he doesn't have to let the slave go. But, if he loves his neighbor as himself, he doesn't force the person to be his slave against the slaves will.
POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:26 amDo you honestly think there exists some special kind of 'slavery' for Christians? ...
I think there exists the rule "love your neighbor as yourself". If person goes by that, as he should, it limits what one can do.
My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view

Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html

benchwarmer
Prodigy
Posts: 2511
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 2347 times
Been thanked: 962 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #488

Post by benchwarmer »

1213 wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:53 am
POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:26 am What it does mean is that the slave master does not have to let the slave go, if the slave asks.
Yes, he doesn't have to let the slave go. But, if he loves his neighbor as himself, he doesn't force the person to be his slave against the slaves will.
You do realize that is the definition of a slave right?

If you simply work for someone, that is called an employee.

If you are forced to work for someone, that is called a slave.

So what you are saying is nonsensical.

If the Bible weren't riddled with contradictions such as rules for beating your slaves as well as treating others as yourself, then perhaps we could make some sense of the Bible as an entire work of documents. As it stands, it's pointless to try and reconcile everything in it. Apologists are welcome to try, but everyone watching can just read what's there and it's game over.

So while you try and make excuses as for why God/Jesus didn't simply abolish slavery (like other things were abolished with laws) we all know it's because humans actually wrote these documents and made these laws at a time when slavery was 'acceptable' to those making the rules. No loving gods/beings were involved in creating rules for beating slaves. If you can't see that, then we can't help you.

marke
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1079
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2025 1:42 am
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #489

Post by marke »

benchwarmer wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 8:09 am
1213 wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:53 am
POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:26 am What it does mean is that the slave master does not have to let the slave go, if the slave asks.
Yes, he doesn't have to let the slave go. But, if he loves his neighbor as himself, he doesn't force the person to be his slave against the slaves will.
You do realize that is the definition of a slave right?

If you simply work for someone, that is called an employee.

If you are forced to work for someone, that is called a slave.

So what you are saying is nonsensical.

If the Bible weren't riddled with contradictions such as rules for beating your slaves as well as treating others as yourself, then perhaps we could make some sense of the Bible as an entire work of documents. As it stands, it's pointless to try and reconcile everything in it. Apologists are welcome to try, but everyone watching can just read what's there and it's game over.

So while you try and make excuses as for why God/Jesus didn't simply abolish slavery (like other things were abolished with laws) we all know it's because humans actually wrote these documents and made these laws at a time when slavery was 'acceptable' to those making the rules. No loving gods/beings were involved in creating rules for beating slaves. If you can't see that, then we can't help you.
Your understanding of God and His Word is in clear contradiction to what modern and ancient Christians have taught.

marke
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1079
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2025 1:42 am
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: "Slavery" in the Bible

Post #490

Post by marke »

POI wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 5:26 am
1213 wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 1:50 am Those doesn't mean the owner is not allowed to let them go, if he wants to let them go.
What it does mean is that the slave master does not have to let the slave go, if the slave asks. Why? Because the Bible grants permission for the master to keep slaves, and it is not up to the slave to decide.

I have an honest question for you....

Do you honestly think there exists some special kind of 'slavery' for Christians? As I already stated, in this context, the term 'slave' is really no different than the term 'turd.' Meaning, neither one can be effectively sugar-coated.
God's understanding of 'slavery' is decidedly different than so many expressed opinions of His enemies.

Post Reply