re: “The idea of a human being attempting to “own” another human being is abhorrent in a Christian view of humanity.”
“Not true, and ahistorical. Also, counter-Scriptural. When the Roman centurion asked Jesus to heal the centurion’s servant, Jesus did not rebuke the man for owning the slave. Slavery was common as grass in the Roman Empire, and slaves’ bones (as from Herculaneum) bore the same heavy-labor marks as those of the slaves exhumed and examined from 18th-century New York City cemeteries.”
I think Moore’s point was that the idea of “owning” another human being, like owning a car or a bike, has become abhorrent from a Christian perspective. When Paul said, “there is neither male, nor female, Greek nor Jew, slave or free, we are all one in Jesus Christ” - this theological view led to the eventual extinction of slavery in the Christian world. It took a while, but the abolition of slavery was based on that Christian world view.
It is quite true that slavery was common in the 1st century, and has been around almost as long as humanity itself. Yet, it is a bit disingenuous to say that Jesus was endorsing slavery as an institution simply because He didn’t rebuke the centurion because he owned a slave.
Jesus did not speak against crucifixion or the dictatorial Roman government either, yet I would not take that as an endorsement of those things. It wasn’t His mission to promote revolution against the Romans or their cruel methods. His mission was to die for guilty sinners, to provide salvation for us and to change us from the inside by His Spirit living within us.
yep, they hate and come together ... may one smile with a ‘frown’
No, it isn't. Nor is it disingenuous to point out that the ethics and morals of owning and working slaves was referenced in Numbers and Deuteronomy; likewise, Abraham's wife Sarah owned the slave-woman Hagar, a "woman of Egypt", and Sarah even pimped Hagar to Abraham as a vehicle for a child, when Abraham and Sarah were childless but after God had promised them that Sarah, who was very old, would bring forth the child would would be the progenitor of Israel.
Of course, that was a sin, but Abraham and Sarah sinned not in owning Hagar, nor even in progenerating on her (she bore Ishmael, whose descendants are the House of Araby), but in doubting God's word and proceeding as if He had not uttered His promise to Abraham.
Thank you. I make that point constantly. Christianity is the philosophical foundation for ending slavery in most of the world. Muslims do not share this foundational idea. Their society is a massive pecking order where people are not equal, they are all ranked from lowest slave up to Allah.
"Equality" is anathema to Islam. It is not just wrong, it is against Allah.
Without Christianity, we would still have slavery.