Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

The same to you, Mr. S.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Too much agreeing all around. Perhaps Frank can come back and remedy things.

Hummmmm!

0 Replies

Diane wrote:

But the most astounding pro-slavery statement in the Bible is made by Jesus himself in Matthew 10:24-25. Here he not only reminds slaves that they are never above their master, he actually recommends that they strive to be like him.

http://home.inu.net/skeptic/slavery.html

Hmmm.. The author of that page may have used a bit of creative interpretation. The actual quote from Mathew 10:24-25 is:

"The disciple is not above his teacher, nor the servant above his lord. It is enough for the disciple that he be like his teacher, and the servant like his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?"

Was "servant" referencing slaves? It's possible that it it does but it could mean a whole host of other things too.

0 Replies

Distinguish a bondservant (Greek: doulos), who was a slave, from a hired servant (Greek: diakonos), who was not a slave.

0 Replies

Actually, some Bibles use "slave" in that passage and some use "servant."

Not sure which is more appropriate.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

IZL, i do understand Frank's point, and have from the beginning. It does not, however, interest me much, because i long ago tired of Frank's favorite stalking horse. This topic only remains interesting to me because of the historical aspect, and certainly not because of Frank's eternal, self-righteous crusade against the evils of religion.

Okay. Anywhoo, this thread seems to have veered off in every possible direction other than the one intended. I too, am wary of Franks method. I would have gone about making his point in a different way.

As to your whole argument that this is 'interesting but irrelevant' because we do not know whether Jesus existed or Jesus was, in fact, the eternal moral leader of humanity: Frank is attempting to point out inconsistancies withen a particular belief system, therefore, it is a given that we are operating on the assumption that Jesus existed and that he is what most Christians believe he is. Thats all.

We do not have to prove anything about Jesus to point out the inner contradictions of the belief system and moral concept at hand. The two issues are completely independent of each other.

Ie- If the concept of slavery is wrong today, then it was wrong in Jesus time as well. If Jesus thought otherwise, then his morality cannot be eternal and all-encompassing. On the other hand, even if Jesus did think slavery was wrong but chose not to speak out against it, it goes to show the myopia of his supposed all-encompassing morality.

I'm leaving now, since I am convinced that nobody here actually understands the intention of the thread. Either that, or I am completely off base here.

0 Replies

Does God condone slavery in the Bible? pretty interesting - :

Quote:

the Covenant Community and its law was meant to demonstrate 'how it should be done' within ANE communities. The content of the Mosaic law was designed to show forth both the compassion of God (e.g. treatment of neighbor and the disadvantaged) and the holiness/purity of God (e.g. the sacrificial system and cleanness stipulations). One would therefore expect that intra-Hebrew dealings would reflect a much higher standard than the law codes of the surrounding nations (as indeed the historical record generally confirms).

"This points to a paradox at the heart of the slave system. Slavery is the most degrading and exploitative institution invented by man. Yet many slaves in ancient societies...were more secure and economically better off than the mass of the free poor, whose employment was irregular, low-grade and badly paid...It was not unknown for free men to sell themselves into slavery to escape poverty and debt, or even to take up posts of responsibility in the domestic sphere."

0 Replies

I don't think Jesus condemned slavery because so many individuals, just about every society, even from the beginning of mankind, had slavery.

When I consider the amount of work done by slaves for societies or people in history, I wonder if civilization could have developed as it has.

The amount of work required for civilizations and even individuals to prosper seems to be surmountable for just the members of a family or the members of a society.

Jesus did mention that slaves should be obedient and that word of wisdom might have been for the slave himself.

Quote:

Eph 6:5 "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;

There was just no way that mankinds history would listen if Jesus had outlawed slavery, so it is grace that man has gotten from Jesus, so all slave owners receive grace and not condemnation.

Now, we have a society that is not dependant on a sever heavy workload to support ourselves with just the daily necessities. Even though Lincoln did not primarily support a civil war to abolish slavery, that is still the outcome.

Jesus will bring a final end to Babylon which includes slavery. (Rev 18:13)

I don't think Jesus condemned slavery because so many individuals, just about every society, even from the beginning of mankind, had slavery.

When I consider the amount of work done by slaves for societies or people in history, I wonder if civilization could have developed as it has.

The amount of work required for civilizations and even individuals to prosper seems to be surmountable for just the members of a family or the members of a society.

Jesus did mention that slaves should be obedient and that word of wisdom might have been for the slave himself.

Quote:

Eph 6:5 "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;

There was just no way that mankinds history would listen if Jesus had outlawed slavery, so it is grace that man has gotten from Jesus, so some slave owners receive grace and not condemnation.

Now, we have a society that is not dependant on a sever heavy workload to support ourselves with just the daily necessities. Even though Lincoln did not primarily support a civil war to abolish slavery, that is still the outcome.

Jesus will bring a final end to Babylon which includes slavery. (Rev 18:13)

Huskers comments above are pretty accurate.

Slavery during the time of Jesus as in any time of mankind was used for prosperity. To ease a burden. It is probably true that many servants? or slaves were well taken care of.

As in the post :

Quote:

"Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess...such slaves
you may own as chattels, and leave to your sons as their
hereditary property, making them perpetual slaves." Leviticus 25:44ff

I can look for something positive in this quote. Here OT Hebrews are being told one thing which in turn produces a benefit for the slave. They can remain in a home, raise a family, receive benefits from not being sold.

0 Replies

I thought more on the topic. Jesus told his disciples that it is the duty to serve one another. He washed the feet of his disciples as an example of service, to be humble and not seek glory. Jesus stressed being a servant as a very important part of being in the Kingdom of God.

Quote:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: Phil 2:7

Quote:

John 13:14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to WASH one another's feet

Quote:

Matt 20:27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your SERVANT

Quote:

Colossians 4: 1 Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and EQUAL; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.

0 Replies

Excellent, Ruach.

0 Replies

Interesting, though, how aspects of Jesus' teachings were used later to attack the institution of slavery in Europe, no? (Well, at least in England! No doubt Setanta will be able to tell me what happened in Europe generally.)

I suppose, as we develop ethically, we focus on different parts of the Bible - and also as we regress or get stuck...

(Caveat - I KNOW develop and regress are relative terms!)

Damn book is, IMHO, a bluddy great Rorschach - and, also, a vessel for some astounding moral teaching (subjectivity again!) which has in some hands been able to transcend its time and place.

0 Replies

All very interesting so far.

Just as over at Abuzz when this topic was discussed...we have people who recognize the inconsistencies -- and who recognize that the inconsistencies CAN be used to judge the book.

And of course, we have others who take the other tack and attempt to "explain away" the issue.

I have respect for both groups -- and both are doing what they see to be appropriate. I thank everyone for their thoughts.

I will reiterate my guess: Jesus didn't think there was anything wrong with slavery.

And I'll add -- because the god he worshipped told him there is nothing wrong with slavery.

In any case, the discussion raises an even more fundamental question:

If there is a GOD -- and if the god of the Bible actually is GOD -- why do you suppose GOD considers trafficking in slaves and slavery itself to be okay -- to be ethical and moral?

I'll raise that question in another thread and I'll put a link to it here. I hope you all take the time to stop by and offer your opinions.

0 Replies

I'm not trying to cut this thread short -- and I hope people continue to post here...

...but here is a link to the new topic.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=532105#532105

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

You are right Steve. My post's tone was absurdly harsh. Perhaps even idiotically so. But that's just because I'm given to superlatives. And nothing personal.

Laptop, no harshness was meant. I am simply being as blunt as I can be because my every post here is either being misunderstood or poorly articulated.

For any harshness conveyed I apologize.

Incidentally I usually leave those who dislike blunt debate alone as there are others who, like me enjoy them.

So if you ever dislike my tone please call me on it. In fact I'd be offended if one weren't to do so.

No harm, no foul....I thank you for the apology but it's unnecessary. I'm in my late 40s and have over years of arguing/debating/discussing developed a thick skin. I sometimes get "over involved" and for that I apologise.

0 Replies

That's cool. I'm 8 and have 2 years of debating under my belt.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I see this as being several different questions.

1.) Did Jesus exist? Who knows. Most of us seem to think, yes, probably.

I think the evidence, scant as it is, tends to indicate he did exist.

0 Replies

Scant ?

Nonexistant . . .

0 Replies

For the people who think it more likely there was no person called Jesus than that there was, I am completely willing to change the question to:

Why do you suppose the people who invented Jesus and who put all that philosophy into his mouth...didn't have him condemn slavery?

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

That's cool. I'm 8 and have 2 years of debating under my belt.

Ah, bloody lippy kids, that's all I need after a hard day exploiting the masses!

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Scant ?

Nonexistant . . .

Not quite.

He gets a mention in Tacitus's annals (the 10th I think but it's been a few years since I read him). He also gets a brief mention in Josephus's History of the Jews.

Aye, I'm well aware that Josephus had a temdency to write what his audience wanted to read, but I'd like to hear the argument for why he would invent Jesus.

0 Replies

Why do you suppose Jesus never condemned slavery?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know