The Bible does not condone slavery

[ding]

1. The Bible did not condone slavery.
2. Slavery during this time was indentured servitude. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families.
3. Both the OT and NT expressly forbid forced slavery. The penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16)
4. Indentured servants were treated pretty bad back in those days. Mosaic Law measurably raised the standards of treatment heads and shoulders above their contemporaries of the day.

 

[yiostheoy]

So now you are forcing someone to do a google search on slavery in the Old and New Testaments and easily prove you wrong, huh ?!

Dumb kid.

Slept through Bible Study.

 

[ding]

So now you are forcing someone to do a google search on slavery in the Old and New Testaments and easily prove you wrong, huh ?!

Dumb kid.

Slept through Bible Study.

Go for it. Growth filled communities explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth. Diversity of thought is critical to that process. When one has truth on his side he argues facts, when one has logic on his side he argues reasons, when one has neither, he does as you just did.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The Bible does not condone slavery

Tell that to the millions of Confederates who quoted the bible to condone slavery.

 

[Faun]

1. The Bible did not condone slavery.
2. Slavery during this time was indentured servitude. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families.
3. Both the OT and NT expressly forbid forced slavery. The penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16)
4. Indentured servants were treated pretty bad back in those days. Mosaic Law measurably raised the standards of treatment heads and shoulders above their contemporaries of the day.

Exodus 12:43-44

43 And the Lord said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof:

44 But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.​

Next nonsense . . . ?

 

[yiostheoy]

So now you are forcing someone to do a google search on slavery in the Old and New Testaments and easily prove you wrong, huh ?!

Dumb kid.

Slept through Bible Study.

Go for it. Growth filled communities explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth. Diversity of thought is critical to that process. When one has truth on his side he argues facts, when one has logic on his side he argues reasons, when one has neither, he does as you just did.

Do your own homework, child.

 

[irosie91]

So now you are forcing someone to do a google search on slavery in the Old and New Testaments and easily prove you wrong, huh ?!

Dumb kid.

Slept through Bible Study.

actually DING was accurate in his description of slavery as per biblical law. Some of the Gospel writers seem more accepting of chattel slavery than is actually allowed
by biblical law. They seem to be accommodating the Roman concept of slavery which was entirely of the chattel type

 

[aris2chat]

has been several post in the last week with quotes from the bible on this.

do catch up

 

[irosie91]

my impression is that it is SAINT PAUL----who is utterly content with the
institution of chattel slavery-------in fact MORE than theologians who
preceded him or followed him. Maybe it was the greek in him

 

[The Professor]

Contrary to popular belief, the Bible (particularly the Old testament) clearly approves of slavery, and in some cases treats slaves as permanent property of the owner, to be passed from father to son as any other chattel. There are different rules for Hebrew and Heathen slaves.

THE FOLLOWING VERSES APPLY TO HEBREW SLAVES:

“Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

“If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do” (Exodus 21:3-7, KJV, emphasis my own).

“And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to day” (Deuteronomy 15:12-17, KJV).

(NOTE: There appears to be a conflict between Exodus 21:3-7 which states that maidservants shall not be released as the menservants are and Deuteronomy 15:12-17 which says the woman slave shall also be set free after serving six years. However, Exodus seems to apply to Hebrew servants who are not related to the owner, whereas Deuteronomy refers to brothers and most likely sisters and other family members.)

THE FOLLOWING VERSES APPLY TO HEATHEN SLAVES:

“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour” (Leviticus 25:44-46, KJV, emphasis my own).

THE FOLLOWING VERSES SHOW THAT SLAVES WERE ALLOWED TO BE BEATEN TO DEATH AS LONG AS THEY SURVIVED A DAY OR TWO BEFORE DYING

The Bible allows slave owners to beat their slaves and several versions, including the KJV, provide that the slave owner will not be punished if the slave dies as the result thereof providing the death is not immediate.

“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money” (Exodus 21:20, 12, KJV).

"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property” (Exodus 21:20, 21, NIV).

“He that strikes his bondman, or bondwoman, with a rod, and they die under his hands, shall be guilty of the crime. But if the party remain alive a day or two, he shall not be subject to the punishment, because it is his money” (New Advent Bible).

However, other versions, such as the NIV, suggest that a slave owner is to be punished for beating a slave to death regardless whether the death was immediate or days later as long as the beating was the proximate cause of death. However, there was to be no punishment for beating a slave if the slave did not die as a result. Here is what the NIV says:

"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property” (Exodus 21:20, 21, NIV).

While the Bible does provide some sort of punishment for one who kills his slave, one thing is crystal clear: there is no punishment whatsoever for beating a slave – man or woman – within in inch of his or her life as long as they survive the beating.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

The New Testament does not address the status of slaves, that is whether or not they serve by agreement or are the property of their masters in perpetuity. Nor does the New Testament condone brutality against those in servitude, but it does provide that all servants are expected to be obedient to their masters, even enduring grief and suffering, since such obedience pleases GOD:

“Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed” (1 Timothy 6:1, KJV).

“Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things” (Titus 2:9, KJV).

“Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart” (Ephesians 6:5-7, KJV).

“Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God; And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Colossians 3:22-24, KJV).

“Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God” (1 Peter 2:18-20).

CONCLUSION: The Bible is not a book for the squeamish. Its pages contain the entire story of life including the good, the bad and the ugly. Within its tests are both poetry and pornography; tales of brutal mass murders and tales of human kindness. It is a story of the evolution of man's relationship with his fellowman and with his God. In the Old Testament slavery was accepted as a necessary way of life and slaves - at least some of them – were treated as mere chattel. In the New Testament, slaves were told to be faithful and loyal to their masters; however, there is nothing in the OT that suggests slaves served against their will and were forever the property of their masters. Even in the Bible it appears the rules changed. Of course, if the Old Testament were sufficient for all people and all times there would have been no need for a New Testament; however, the Bible specifically says, “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Hebrews 8:5-13, KJV).

 

[irosie91]

there is no way to actually know how slavery was treated without checking the Talmud-----Your interpretation of "beating a slave is ok" is actually wrong. The dying thing---two days later is, very simply, that the beating did not kill him. INJURING
a slave requires setting him free-------just drawing blood. Killing him is treated as a crime. Slavery is bad enough----you need not make it worse. My source tells me
that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones. As to the "seven" year sentence-----it is not entirely clear to me if everyone can claim freedom after seven years. Do not assume. IMO---the difference between the OT
attitude to slavery vs that of Saint Paul is------in the OT --the condition of being a slave is ALWAYS considered a negative. Saint Paul's approach seems to be ------
fatalistic-------once you got it---DON'T COMPLAIN. The OT approach is more like---
being a slave is so lousy that if one runs away--------there is little the owner can do about it

 

[The Professor]

there is no way to actually know how slavery was treated without checking the Talmud-----Your interpretation of "beating a slave is ok" is actually wrong. The dying thing---two days later is, very simply, that the beating did not kill him. INJURING
a slave requires setting him free-------just drawing blood. Killing him is treated as a crime. Slavery is bad enough----you need not make it worse. My source tells me
that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones. As to the "seven" year sentence-----it is not entirely clear to me if everyone can claim freedom after seven years. Do not assume. IMO---the difference between the OT
attitude to slavery vs that of Saint Paul is------in the OT --the condition of being a slave is ALWAYS considered a negative. Saint Paul's approach seems to be ------
fatalistic-------once you got it---DON'T COMPLAIN. The OT approach is more like---
being a slave is so lousy that if one runs away--------there is little the owner can do about it

I have quoted the Bible accurately and I can do no more. Your interpretation is not the same as mine and I will let others judge for themselves who is right. I will, however, take issue with one thing you said. You stated, “My source tells me that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones.” Your source is apparently referring to Leviticus 25:10 which provides:

“And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.”

However, the above quoted verse is in direct conflict with the scripture I quoted which provided that a heathen slave was his owner's property forever:

“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour” (Leviticus 25:44-46, KJV, emphasis my own).

So we have a dilemma. Either there is an obvious conflict within the pages of the Holy Bible or the two verses can be reconciled. I have no problem with this one. The verse I quoted deals with heathen slaves while the verse your source relies upon deals with Hebrew slaves. The jubilee also requires that real property (land) be returned to the original owner. When did the ancient Jews ever return conquered property to their heathen foes? The obvious answer is never. Clearly, the 50-year jubilee applied only to to the Jewish people and their Hebrew slaves.

There is an element of humor in what you said. If a person is placed into involuntary servitude one year following the 50-year jubilee, there is little comfort in the fact he/she will be free in 49 years. They can only pray that they should live so long.

Now I have done my best to tell members of this forum what the Bible says and I am done with this thread. You can fight it out among yourselves but as for me, I'm outta here.

Have a good night.

 

[ding]

there is no way to actually know how slavery was treated without checking the Talmud-----Your interpretation of "beating a slave is ok" is actually wrong. The dying thing---two days later is, very simply, that the beating did not kill him. INJURING
a slave requires setting him free-------just drawing blood. Killing him is treated as a crime. Slavery is bad enough----you need not make it worse. My source tells me
that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones. As to the "seven" year sentence-----it is not entirely clear to me if everyone can claim freedom after seven years. Do not assume. IMO---the difference between the OT
attitude to slavery vs that of Saint Paul is------in the OT --the condition of being a slave is ALWAYS considered a negative. Saint Paul's approach seems to be ------
fatalistic-------once you got it---DON'T COMPLAIN. The OT approach is more like---
being a slave is so lousy that if one runs away--------there is little the owner can do about it

I have quoted the Bible accurately and I can do no more. Your interpretation is not the same as mine and I will let others judge for themselves who is right. I will, however, take issue with one thing you said. You stated, “My source tells me that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones.” Your source is apparently referring to Leviticus 25:10 which provides:

“And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.”

However, the above quoted verse is in direct conflict with the scripture I quoted which provided that a heathen slave was his owner's property forever:

“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour” (Leviticus 25:44-46, KJV, emphasis my own).

So we have a dilemma. Either there is an obvious conflict within the pages of the Holy Bible or the two verses can be reconciled. I have no problem with this one. The verse I quoted deals with heathen slaves while the verse your source relies upon deals with Hebrew slaves. The jubilee also requires that real property (land) be returned to the original owner. When did the ancient Jews ever return conquered property to their heathen foes? The obvious answer is never. Clearly, the 50-year jubilee applied only to to the Jewish people and their Hebrew slaves.

There is an element of humor in what you said. If a person is placed into involuntary servitude one year following the 50-year jubilee, there is little comfort in the fact he/she will be free in 49 years. They can only pray that they should live so long.

Now I have done my best to tell members of this forum what the Bible says and I am done with this thread. You can fight it out among yourselves but as for me, I'm outta here.

Have a good night.

Again, you are ignoring the differences between forced slavery (which the Bible did not condone) and indentured servitude. You are ignoring the fact that no matter how harsh you think these passages were, they were still less harsh than what their contemporaries were doing. You are ignoring that there was ever an explicit endorsement of those actions indentured servitude. And you are ignoring that both the OT and NT forbid forced slavery.

 

[Mudda]

1. The Bible did not condone slavery.
2. Slavery during this time was indentured servitude. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families.
3. Both the OT and NT expressly forbid forced slavery. The penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16)
4. Indentured servants were treated pretty bad back in those days. Mosaic Law measurably raised the standards of treatment heads and shoulders above their contemporaries of the day.

You're a slave to the god of the bible.

 

[Votto]

The Bible does not condone slavery

Tell that to the millions of Confederates who quoted the bible to condone slavery.

The slavery in the South was different than slavery in the Bible.

Slaves in the South were viewed as subhuman and rounded up so rich plantation owners could exploit them so they could get even richer. Slaves in the Bible was largely a means by which people could survive when they would otherwise be unable to do so, and usually released after so many years.

 

[Votto]

Contrary to popular belief, the Bible (particularly the Old testament) clearly approves of slavery, and in some cases treats slaves as permanent property of the owner, to be passed from father to son as any other chattel. There are different rules for Hebrew and Heathen slaves.

THE FOLLOWING VERSES APPLY TO HEBREW SLAVES:

“Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them. If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

“If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do” (Exodus 21:3-7, KJV, emphasis my own).

“And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to day” (Deuteronomy 15:12-17, KJV).

(NOTE: There appears to be a conflict between Exodus 21:3-7 which states that maidservants shall not be released as the menservants are and Deuteronomy 15:12-17 which says the woman slave shall also be set free after serving six years. However, Exodus seems to apply to Hebrew servants who are not related to the owner, whereas Deuteronomy refers to brothers and most likely sisters and other family members.)

THE FOLLOWING VERSES APPLY TO HEATHEN SLAVES:

“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour” (Leviticus 25:44-46, KJV, emphasis my own).

THE FOLLOWING VERSES SHOW THAT SLAVES WERE ALLOWED TO BE BEATEN TO DEATH AS LONG AS THEY SURVIVED A DAY OR TWO BEFORE DYING

The Bible allows slave owners to beat their slaves and several versions, including the KJV, provide that the slave owner will not be punished if the slave dies as the result thereof providing the death is not immediate.

“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money” (Exodus 21:20, 12, KJV).

"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property” (Exodus 21:20, 21, NIV).

“He that strikes his bondman, or bondwoman, with a rod, and they die under his hands, shall be guilty of the crime. But if the party remain alive a day or two, he shall not be subject to the punishment, because it is his money” (New Advent Bible).

However, other versions, such as the NIV, suggest that a slave owner is to be punished for beating a slave to death regardless whether the death was immediate or days later as long as the beating was the proximate cause of death. However, there was to be no punishment for beating a slave if the slave did not die as a result. Here is what the NIV says:

"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property” (Exodus 21:20, 21, NIV).

While the Bible does provide some sort of punishment for one who kills his slave, one thing is crystal clear: there is no punishment whatsoever for beating a slave – man or woman – within in inch of his or her life as long as they survive the beating.

SLAVERY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

The New Testament does not address the status of slaves, that is whether or not they serve by agreement or are the property of their masters in perpetuity. Nor does the New Testament condone brutality against those in servitude, but it does provide that all servants are expected to be obedient to their masters, even enduring grief and suffering, since such obedience pleases GOD:

“Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed” (1 Timothy 6:1, KJV).

“Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things” (Titus 2:9, KJV).

“Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart” (Ephesians 6:5-7, KJV).

“Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God; And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Colossians 3:22-24, KJV).

“Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God” (1 Peter 2:18-20).

CONCLUSION: The Bible is not a book for the squeamish. Its pages contain the entire story of life including the good, the bad and the ugly. Within its tests are both poetry and pornography; tales of brutal mass murders and tales of human kindness. It is a story of the evolution of man's relationship with his fellowman and with his God. In the Old Testament slavery was accepted as a necessary way of life and slaves - at least some of them – were treated as mere chattel. In the New Testament, slaves were told to be faithful and loyal to their masters; however, there is nothing in the OT that suggests slaves served against their will and were forever the property of their masters. Even in the Bible it appears the rules changed. Of course, if the Old Testament were sufficient for all people and all times there would have been no need for a New Testament; however, the Bible specifically says, “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Hebrews 8:5-13, KJV).

Jesus was never asked about slavery, but he was asked about divorce. His response was that divorce was never what God intended, but was allowed due to the sinful nature of man. This is how I view slavery in the Bible.

Jesus only commented on slavery when discussing sin. He said that sin is what enslaves us and that he had come to set us free from it.

Moses was also sent to set slaves free from the Egyptians. Slavery in Egypt was more in line with slavery from the deep south in the 1800's. For you see, during the Mosaic era most human beings were either slavers or soldiers. Moses initiated some of the most revolutionary laws against slavery, other than just setting free the Hebrew slaves. Moses gave man the Sabbath, a day of rest that was unheard of in the ancient world, including slaves. We should be grateful to Moses, because with out the Sabbath, I dare say we would still be working 24/7. Also, Moses provided a way for various slaves to be set free after so many years of service. Again, this was a revolutionary act that rippled over the centuries to a time today where slavery seems absurd and immoral.

To ignore the ground breaking steps to end slavery in the Bible in disingenuous , even though there were still provision for it left in the Bible.

 

[irosie91]

The Bible does not condone slavery

Tell that to the millions of Confederates who quoted the bible to condone slavery.

The slavery in the South was different than slavery in the Bible.

Slaves in the South were viewed as subhuman and rounded up so rich plantation owners could exploit them so they could get even richer. Slaves in the Bible was largely a means by which people could survive when they would otherwise be unable to do so, and usually released after so many years.

there is no way to actually know how slavery was treated without checking the Talmud-----Your interpretation of "beating a slave is ok" is actually wrong. The dying thing---two days later is, very simply, that the beating did not kill him. INJURING
a slave requires setting him free-------just drawing blood. Killing him is treated as a crime. Slavery is bad enough----you need not make it worse. My source tells me
that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones. As to the "seven" year sentence-----it is not entirely clear to me if everyone can claim freedom after seven years. Do not assume. IMO---the difference between the OT
attitude to slavery vs that of Saint Paul is------in the OT --the condition of being a slave is ALWAYS considered a negative. Saint Paul's approach seems to be ------
fatalistic-------once you got it---DON'T COMPLAIN. The OT approach is more like---
being a slave is so lousy that if one runs away--------there is little the owner can do about it

I have quoted the Bible accurately and I can do no more. Your interpretation is not the same as mine and I will let others judge for themselves who is right. I will, however, take issue with one thing you said. You stated, “My source tells me that ALL slaves go free at the 50 year Jubilee------even those permanent ones.” Your source is apparently referring to Leviticus 25:10 which provides:

“And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.”

However, the above quoted verse is in direct conflict with the scripture I quoted which provided that a heathen slave was his owner's property forever:

“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour” (Leviticus 25:44-46, KJV, emphasis my own).

So we have a dilemma. Either there is an obvious conflict within the pages of the Holy Bible or the two verses can be reconciled. I have no problem with this one. The verse I quoted deals with heathen slaves while the verse your source relies upon deals with Hebrew slaves. The jubilee also requires that real property (land) be returned to the original owner. When did the ancient Jews ever return conquered property to their heathen foes? The obvious answer is never. Clearly, the 50-year jubilee applied only to to the Jewish people and their Hebrew slaves.

There is an element of humor in what you said. If a person is placed into involuntary servitude one year following the 50-year jubilee, there is little comfort in the fact he/she will be free in 49 years. They can only pray that they should live so long.

Now I have done my best to tell members of this forum what the Bible says and I am done with this thread. You can fight it out among yourselves but as for me, I'm outta here.

Have a good night.

good nite You did a really lousy job. For a discussion of just how the rules of Leviticus were applied--------do not ask "the professor" of islamo Nazi propaganda------ask a scholar of the Talmud.

 

[ding]

1. The Bible did not condone slavery.
2. Slavery during this time was indentured servitude. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families.
3. Both the OT and NT expressly forbid forced slavery. The penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16)
4. Indentured servants were treated pretty bad back in those days. Mosaic Law measurably raised the standards of treatment heads and shoulders above their contemporaries of the day.

You're a slave to the god of the bible.

Technically we all are.

 

[irosie91]

the history of slavery is sorta complex because the institution had RULES and
CUSTOMS. and was UBIQUITOUS thruout the world. -------no legal system
(that I know of) actually outlawed it in ancient times. Discussions tend to get
ethno-centric

 

[Mudda]

1. The Bible did not condone slavery.
2. Slavery during this time was indentured servitude. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families.
3. Both the OT and NT expressly forbid forced slavery. The penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16)
4. Indentured servants were treated pretty bad back in those days. Mosaic Law measurably raised the standards of treatment heads and shoulders above their contemporaries of the day.

You're a slave to the god of the bible.

Technically we all are.

And the bible condones it.