for the weak and ignorant it's no different than socialism(or 0bamamerica) no decisions no responsibilities... for the rest of us, it's NOT an option.
Assuming Judeo/Christian values and a Christian nation, slavery is wholly and completely evil and absolutely intolerable.
By extension, the weakening of the role of Judeo/Christian values in American society makes it entirely possible that slavery could return to America, albeit not in the form that we saw previously.
Jesus ever condemned the practice.
Same argument homosexuals who want to be priests and ministers use.
Well just off hand, there is that voluntary/involuntary thing to consider...
Being totally submissive to God is a world away from being forcibly owned by another human being.
Slavery is evil and this article is as bad as the moral relativism I hear every day from the hard left.
Every seven years all the Hebrew slaves were to be freed.
Morality is pretty black and white except at the very edges where few of us ever venture.
And for those of you who think the rules are "oh so gray" let me know what rules I don't have to follow when I DEAL WITH YOU.
Sounds like a debate that was settled in this country around April of 1865.
right off the top, we need to realize that the modern usage of the word “slave” is not the same as the old bible usage. There was no distinction between indentured servitude and a slave. Today there is.
Today we are slowly bit by bit being enslaved by our government. Is that evil?
Saying “Jesus never condemned slavery” is rather lawyerly. The entire NT is strongly subversive of the practice. “there is neither Jew nor Greek, nor slave nor free” implies no qualitative difference. Compare this to the Koran, which clearly approves of the practice.
It is not an accident that the abolition movement was entirely Christian in origin.
Google “black slave owners” - rather surprising.
You betchurass it is.
The Church in the West, not surprisingly, was the biggest proponent of slavery. In the 15th century, the pope signed a bull allowing hereditary slavery for all nonbelievers! Thus, western Christianity played a major role in advancing and perpetuating slavery.
Is Slavery Evil?
As long as your any color but WHITE !
While often presented as barbaric in contrast to the “liberating” but destructive (http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html) of the ethos of the 60’s+ sexual revolution/rebellion, the moral Mosiac law and its penalties, actually worked to promote stronger and happier families and prevent needless loss of life. Slavery was regualated an an established institution, and served to keep enemies in subjection, while providing a means to deliver the Israelites out of debt, as they sold themselves in slavery in such a case (imagine GM), but were given release with generous “severance pay” (if they wanted it) after 6 years, to get them back on their feet. They also got their original land back due to debt, in case they had sold it, on the 50th year. (Liberals have a different idea.)
Non-Israelites could actually own Hebrew slaves, but when bought as slaves it and their descendants were for life, but they rested on the 7th day and had less work on the 7th year, and were partakers in the covenant of Abraham, being circumscribed and being part of the religious observances. Loss of such as a tooth would win them freedom, and murder of them was a likely a capital crime, and it was forbidden to return an escaped slave. All of which made it conducive to fair treatment.
Under the New Testament, the primitive church as a model organic community had no slavery (Acts 2:41-47), but it grew within a society in which Christians had little to no political power to change laws and were in fact persecuted, and opposition would have made it worse for the slaves. But while slavery as an economic practice was tolerated (and keeping one servicefully employed is needful, and is better than indolence or poverty), it was required of Masters, “give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven” (Col. 4:1), and mistreatment was forbidden (Eph. 6:9), and even the escaped slave Onesimus was to be treated as a brother, not a servant, if indeed he should be required back at all (Philemon v. 16).
Moreover, slaves were encouraged to obtain freedom if they lawfully could get it (1Cor. 7:21).
Such requirements to masters to give unto slaves just and equal pay and good treatment in the fear of God, and to accept them as brothers — and all that such entails — effectively disemboweled classical slavery, and would reduce it to more of an employer - employee type relationship, with the liberty to obtain the freedom (which even non-Christian wives were allowed), as this what the apostle Paul exhorted (1 Cor. 7:21).
The requirements of slaves owners in the N.T. would disallow the harsh treatment so often associated with slavery, and the preference to gain freedom indicates the opposite of an advocation of bondage, and it seems incongruous that one could receive a Christian slave as a brother and yet not offer him freedom. As the practice of slavery seems so antithetical by nature to the second [[Great Commandment]], esp. at least as was common practiced, the regulation of it rather than an outright repudiation of it by the church - in which all races are spiritually one (Gal 3:28), and which as an organic community had no slavery (Acts 2:41-47)- appears problematic.
But the early tolerance of slavery by the infant church might be understood that realizing that unless a slave was not able to obtain freedom, applying the requirements of equal pay and fair and merciful Christian treatment enable slavery to morally exist without a radical change in the economic model or society, and that Christians existed within a society in which they had little to no political power to change laws, and were in fact themselves often persecuted, and opposition to slavery at that time likely would have made it worse for the slaves. Instead, the primitive church, much of which was made up of slaves, focused on freeing souls from spiritual bondage and being a “holy nation” themselves. Later, the church became more institutionalized, and the people largely Biblically illiterate, though officially most of her time the Catholic church did condemn slavery. The more modern influence of Christians in influencing the abolition of slavery was much a result of the outworking of the Reformation and the evangelical second Great Awakening and the freedom to effect political change, and statesmen who were likeminded toward abolition and even equality (which was seldom initially the same).
Such resulted in evangelical Christians being the driving force behind the abolition movement in America, while Christian William Wilberforce labored purposely to outlaw slavery in England. “American Christians took it upon themselves to reform society during this period. Known commonly as antebellum reform, this phenomenon includes reforms in temperance, women’s rights, abolitionism, and a multitude of other questions and problems faced by society.”
“The Second Great Awakening (1800–1830s) was the second great religious revival in United States history and consisted of renewed personal salvation experienced in revival meetings. Major leaders included Charles Grandison Finney, Lyman Beecher, Barton Stone, Peter Cartwright, and James B. Finley. It also encouraged an eager effervescent evangelicalism that later reappeared in American life in causes dealing with prison reform, temperance, women’s suffrage, and the crusade to abolish slavery.” — http://www.answers.com/topic/second-great-awakening
See also http://columba11.blogspot.com/2007/02/christianity-abolishes-slavery.html
But the greater bondage, freedom from which is to be the primary concern of a true church, is that of bondage to sin, which finally will make one far more miserable than physical slavery. Ultimately, “sin will take you were you did not want to go, keep you longer than you wanted to stay, and cost you more than you wanted to pay.”
And everyone serves something or someone. Jesus Christ, who served others selflessly and sinlessly day and night, and then took responsibility for our sins and paid for them with His own precious blood, and who now reigns in Heaven, is the only One that can save sinners from their master, the devil.
Depends on the type of slavery. Not all slavery is as brutal or race based as what we had in America. Classical Greek and Roman slavery was pretty much employment, not necessarily pleasant employment but basically a job, and with a path out. But once slavery became tied to some belief of superiority of one race over another it definitely became evil.
How can slavery be condemned when it can hardly be defined?
In a way, it is like prostitution, where two legal acts, sex and exchanging money, are combined to create an illegal act.
Every part of slavery could be involuntary or voluntary, despised or enjoyed, cruel or kind, exploitative or generous, negative or positive. It can be like prison, or it can be like employment.
Slaves are not exclusively unpaid, some are paid handsomely. Nor are slaves defined by their masters, as even other slaves may be their overseers or masters.
Ambrose Bierce defined “marriage” as: n: the state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress, and two slaves, making in all, two.
There is even a philosophy for slavery, as a form of proto-socialism. That holds slavery up as being the ideal state of the vast majority of mankind. The slave as free to lead a life unburdened by responsibility beyond following orders. Provided the necessities of life in exchange for servitude.
See George Fitzhugh’s book, “Cannibals All!: Or Slaves Without Masters”.
Mastery can be very different from Tyranny. A skilled and expert First Sergeant may be beloved by “his” privates, who are, in effect, his servants, even unto death.
And it has been noted that a tyrant cannot function without the willing cooperation of his slaves. If the slaves resist the tyrant, he must use so much of his strength to control them, that he is drained.
With so many dynamics, how can slavery be condemned? Easily!
The state and government know slavery well, because they maintain a monopoly over it. They can draft citizens as soldiers, and send criminals to prison, and confine the mentally ill and communicably diseased. They can take the wealth of their citizens through taxes. And most certainly, government can and will use force to get its way.
Children are legally slaves to both their parents and the state, and can be deprived of their civil liberties with the stroke of a pen. In effect, they are chattels.
Yet the government, and the citizenry, know slavery when they see it, and are not persuaded by rhetoric.
“Each year, an estimated 14,500 to 17,500 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States. The number of U.S. citizens trafficked within the country each year is even higher, with an estimated 200,000 American children at risk for trafficking into the sex industry. (U.S. Department of Justice. 2004. Report to Congress from Attorney General John Ashcroft on U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons in Fiscal Year 2003. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.)”
Try to enslave me before you disarm me, and I’ll give you my answer. You may survive to talk about it if your Bible is bulletproof.
for the weak and ignorant it's no different than socialism(or 0bamamerica) no decisions no responsibilities... for the rest of us, it's NOT an option.
Ask the libtards why they are having about ancient slavery when the arabs and muslims are currently supporting and conducting the modern version and no CRITICISM of it comes from them....