Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
When you hold a slave you are stealing his life and his labor.
Where does it say that?
As of the crucifixion, whomsoever shall believe in Christ is a brother Israelite because they are the spiritual seed of Abraham. And Jesus defined a neighbour as one who would show Christian charity. Therefore to love your neighbor as yourself means that you must do unto them as you would have done to yourself. Therefore no slavery to a brother Israelite neighbour and since most American blacks believe in Christ, they are brother Israelites.
I think you better do a little more research.
I have. Apparently much more than you since I'm having to explain this to you. This is Christianity 101.
There were rules for slaves who were "Israelites" spelled out quite explicitly.
In the old covenant. The old covenant ordinances died on the cross.
There were also rules for those who were slaves who were not Israelites. One can argue the unethical nature of slavery (that is that the current cultural and opinion does not accept it), but is very difficult to find it as immoral (that is that the Bible as an authoritative description of what is right and wrong, absent "culture").
Love thy neigbour as thyself. That rules out slavery. American blacks are brother Israelites and our neighbours.
In fact, the Newer Testament deals with the subject as well. Why, if as you maintain that slavery was biblically wrong, did Paul not admonish Philemon to set Onesimus free?
He did!
Phm 1:17 If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself.
Paul says to receive Onesimus as himself, that means not as a slave. Why?...Because of this:
Phm 1:16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?
Paul says Onesimus became a brother not only in the flesh but in the Lord. That means that he became a believer. Even so, Paul did not order Onesimus to be accepted as a free man because back then, a fellow Israelite became a slave due to misbahaviour. Onesimus had actually committed misdeeds to deserve his slavery. Paul asked for Onesimus' freedom due to the fact that Onesimus became a brother in the Lord. There's a big difference between enslaving a fellow Christian due to misdeeds and enslaving a fellow Christian due to heritage, as the Southerners wanted to do forever.
Why did he send the escaped slave Onesimus BACK to his master Philemon?
To be received as a free man.
No, Paul tells Onesimus to go back and to treat his master as his master.
Where? Paul asks Philemon to accept Onesimus as a free man due to his belief in Christ.
He tells Philemon to love Onesimus and to treat him rightly. But nowhere does he jump to your conclusions.
He says to treat Onesimus as he would treat Paul. You think Philemon would enslave Paul?
Just as the American Civil War, we must not instinctively apply OUR cultural perspectives to interpret events and positions that do not share them.
The bible is very clear. A fellow believer is a spiritual descendant of Abraham and therefore a brother and a neighbour and we are to treat them as we would treat ourselves. That means heritage-induced slavery is a no-no.