[ComtedeMaistre]

We can all agree that slavery is immoral. But does our society's rejection of slavery stem from the classic liberalism on which our nation was founded, or is there a Bibilical basis for it?

To the best of my knowledge, Muslim societies still tolerate slavery, and their Koran and religious leaders seem to have no objections to it.

Is our objection to slavery based on the Declaration of Independence, or on our religious heritage?

[VRWC_minion]

Gentiles no longer slaves
Gentiles, who were not under the Law of Moses, also become inheritors through Christ, so at this point Paul begins to use the word you again: "Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, `Abba, Father.' So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir" (4:6-7).

Since God had given the Holy Spirit to these gentile Christians, that was proof that they were his children, with the right to inherit the promise. They were no longer slaves under a restrictive authority. But what kind of slavery had Jesus redeemed them from?

Paul explains: "Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods" (4:9). They had been enslaved by pagan religions.

"But now that you know God--or rather are known by God--how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?" (4:9). The Gentile Christians, having been rescued from slavery, were thinking of returning to bondage. They wouldn't have put it in those words, of course, but Paul is pointing out that this is what it amounts to.

Apparently they were being tempted with a different sort of slavery than what they came out of. They were being told that they had to be circumcised and that they had to obey the Law of Moses (4:21; 5:2-4). They had come out of pagan principles but were in danger of going back into another set of rules--another nonfaith approach to religion.

(Paul uses the uncommon Greek word stoicheia here for principles of the Galatian heresy, the same word he used in 4:3 for the slavery "we" had under the old covenant "basic principles." The context of the letter makes it clear that the slavery the Galatians were falling back into was an obligation to old covenant customs.)

Paul then mentions one way they were falling back into servitude: "You are observing special days and months and seasons and years!" (4:10). In a heresy that involved circumcision and the Law of Moses, it is not difficult to figure out what sort of days, months, seasons and years were being advocated. The old covenant said a lot about special times.

But if Paul was talking about the Sabbath and festivals, why didn't he say so? It is because the Galatians were coming out of one religion and into another. Paul used words that applied to both religions to point out the similarities involved. Pagan religions had their special days, months, seasons and years; so did the old covenant. They have a different set of days, but it is a similar idea. The Galatians had come out religious bondage, and were going back into a religious bondage.

So Paul asks: How could you do such a thing? Can't you see how foolish this is? Don't you know that this can enslave you all over again?

Paul does not say exactly how they were observing these special days. He did not say they should observe them in a better way or a different way. He just said that the way they were observing them was a form of bondage, of feeling obligated to something that was not obligatory.

[shineon]

This reminds me of a scene from WC Fields.

A friend finds him flipping through the Bible. Shocked at the thought of WC contemplating conversion to the straight and narrow his friend asks. "What on earth are you doing?"

WC's reply?

"Looking for loopholes."

That slavery is condemned in the Bible for the Christian heart is without controversy.

However the Bible is gracious to the unsaved world, advising that by our Christian behavior we can win the lost.

So the Bible advocates first winning the slave owner through example, then it assumes after becoming a Christian the slave owner will of his own accord give up on treating his fellow man as a slave.

Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost. Not to add to or change the Mosaic law which already condemns slavery.

Do some research on Google about the abolitionist movement. Many whose leaders were preachers and learned theologins, some of them of African descent.

Then look into the darkness of your own heart, and ask God to send you the light one more time on this question. In other words - what would Jesus do?

Finally many of the early Christians were the lowest and downtrodden of the society of that day. Women and slaves made up the bulk of early Christianity.

Why? Because they spiritually found a friend in Jesus. And they truly were felt set free out of conditions they found themselves in.

And who is your friend you might ask...

Read the story about the good samaritan...

[Richard Kimball]

The term "slave" in the Bible is different from the term we use to mean slave today. In the OT, quite a few people entered into slavery willingly. The owner had as many obligations toward the slave as the slave had toward the owner. The owner was not to separate a family, and was responsible for clothing, feeding and caring for the family. After seven years of service, the owner was to give a slave the option of being set free, and if he was set free, the owner was obligated to also free his family and give him enough sheep, etc, to start his own herd (that's where the 40 acres and a mule came from). If the slave decided to remain a slave, he was the property of the owner for life.

In some respects, many of the "slaves" in the Bible were what you would consider an unpaid apprentice. After seven years, they were given the choice of striking out on their own, or staying with the company, so to speak.

Also, when the OT mentions slaves in many instances, remember that the fact that the Bible mentions something does not mean that God condones it. The accounts of David and Bathsheba and Lott and his daughters being prime examples.

[VRWC_minion]

After understanding the issue of what a slave is you need to understand that the bible is first about saving souls, not about social justice. Jesus said let the dead bury their own dead. His mission was much more urgent than worrying about the economic systems, which would change once hearts and minds are changed.

The above on slavery in Galations should put Pauls views on slavery in perspective. Slavery was not prescribed but a sense of being a slave to sin was and still is vastly more important.

the argument in a sound bite is that a slave can know and love Christ in the world while an aborted baby cannot.

[far sider]

For the most part Jesus addressed problems within the Jewish culture of his time, and did not mention problems of the Greco-Roman culture (such as slavery, homosexuality, and idolatry). As Paul and the apostles took the Gospel to the world, they addressed these "Gentile" issues based on the Old Testament and the teachings of Christ.

Read the book of Philemon in the New Testament, along with a good commentary. In this book (actually a letter written to a slave-owning, Greek named Philemon, who became a Christian under Paul's teaching), Paul says he has found Philemon's runaway slave (named Onesimus) and, praise the Lord, the slave has become a Christian. Paul sends the slave back, and says to Philemon "by the way, don't you dare punish him" (runways could be killed by their owners under Roman law), "in fact next time you have communion make sure you include Onesimus. I'll be by sometimne to make sure you treated him right." Can you imagine a slaveowner washing the feet of his own slave? That's what Paul was ordering Philemon to do.

Paul knew that slavery could not exist within a society that took Christianity seriously.

[twigs]

African slavery in this country gradually grew worse, particularly after the invention of the cotton gin, where their labor became an economic necessity for some (or so they thought). It didn't start out that way. A key factor in this creeping evil was the argument that Africans were not actually human. That is what is happening today in the debate regarding abortion. The pro-life forces hold that life begins at conception; pro-aborts do not. They are using the same argument that earlier generations of slave holders did--that the unborn are not yet human and do not possess souls, just as the earlier folks held that Africans did not posses them. We should see from our own history that that is extremely dangerous territory.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Jews-- like Jesus-- viewed taking a man's unborn child as a crime, but not on par with murder.

[wtc911]

Leviticus 25, 44-46 defines how one may obtain a slave, that the slave may be left as an inheritance or may be sold, that Hebrew slaves are to be treated more kindly than other slaves.

[george wythe]

Doctor testifies in abortion case that fetuses feel pain after 20 weeks

[biblewonk]

No

[Quix]

ALL, 100% of the early crusaders against slavery were strong Christians risking life, limb and property out of their faith filled love for others.

St Paul encouraged those who had a chance to get free from slavery honorably to do so.

Christ paid the ultimate price that we might be free from slavery to our own sins and share in His Abundant Eternal Resurrection Life.

LOVING OTHERS AS ONE LOVES ONE'S SELF and DOING UNTO OTHERS . . . would also indicate slavery's prohibition. And those are cardinal summaries of the Gospel according to Christ, along with Loving God wholly.

Christianity was certainly the source of efforts to end slavery.

[bmwcyle]

Oh good another Libertaian focused on nothing again. Go away.

[RobRoy]

Slavery comes in many flavors. It is not all immoral. Heck, we have two forms of slavery today in this country today. One is consumer debt and the other is welfare.

[TopQuark]

in the 10 Commandments, there is an explicit prohibition against killing.

It's a common misconception since the King James' version that erroneously translated "thou shall not murder" into "thou shall not kill."

[TopQuark]

But does our society's rejection of slavery stem from the classic liberalism on which our nation was founded, or is there a Bibilical basis for it?

I think you can answer that question yourself. Suppose that the rejection of slavery has Bibilical roots. Christianity was in existence for almost two millennia and Judaism even longer --- why did it take to free the slaves until 1860s in America and 1880s in Europe?

Pope after Pope, thinker after thinker appered on this earth for almost two thousand years. Many struggled with the essence of religion, the essence of G-d, and harldly any had any problem whatever with the instituion of slavery.

[dmanLA]

First off, I want to correct one thing. The Bible prohibits murder not killing. Many people have misinterpreted that commandment due to a bad translation. I think all can see what a big difference that makes.

Secondly, to address your question, there is no direct prohibition of slavery in the Bible. HOWEVER, the treatment of slaves is specifically addressed.

Question for you. Are we not 'slaves' to the government? How many months do we work just to pay our taxes? So, has slavery really been abolished?

Lastly, aren't Christians SERVANTS of God/Jesus? I am.