Why didn't Jesus condemn slavery?

Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

"He that sins is a slave to sin and I have come to set them free"

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

Because we are all held in bondage, it is something the human race did
to itself. He came to set us free from our bounds, condemning them wasn't
a priority destroying the bounds was.
Kelly

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

Isn't the larger question, "Why does the OT attribute God as condoning slavery?"

Actually Jesus very well may have condemned slavery. Just because the Bible doesn't depict Him as doing so, doesn't mean He didn't.

That said, Jesus is depicted as saying the following:

Matthew 22
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Seems like slavery would be excluded by the second commandment.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

The Bible does not approve of the kind of slavery your probably thinking of. This was just discussed a couple weeks ago in depth here.

Originally posted by galveston75
The Bible does not approve of the kind of slavery your probably thinking of. This was just discussed a couple weeks ago in depth here.

Actually it does. You can choose to live in denial, but facts are facts.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Actually it does. You can choose to live in denial, but facts are facts.

No it doesn't. It was only a slavery to repay a debt you could not repay but could be repaid with time and then you were set free. There were many laws set up by God to protect the slaves from any kind of cruelty of anykind. Read the Bible and learn.

Originally posted by galveston75
No it doesn't. It was only a slavery to repay a debt you could not repay but could be repaid with time and then you were set free. There were many laws set up by God to protect the slaves from any kind of cruelty of anykind. Read the Bible and learn.

Leviticus 25
44‘As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45‘Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. 46‘You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.


Clearly slaves can be kept permanently and even be passed down to the slave owner's sons

Exodus 21
20“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21“If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

Clearly beating a slave is allowed - just not so badly that he doesn't survive a day or two.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Leviticus 25
44‘As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. 45‘Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; th
Clearly beating a slave is allowed - just not so badly that he doesn't survive a day or two.

See if any of this helps.....


Slavery before the Common Era.

War, poverty, and crime were the basic factors that reduced persons to a state of servitude. Captives of war were often constituted slaves by their captors or were sold into slavery by them. (Compare 2Ki 5:2; Joe 3:6.) In Israelite society a person who became poor could sell himself or his children into slavery to care for his indebtedness. (Ex 21:7; Le 25:39, 47; 2Ki 4:1) One guilty of thievery but unable to make compensation was sold for the things he stole, evidently regaining his freedom at the time all claims against him were cared for.—Ex 22:3.
At times slaves held a position of great trust and honor in a household. The patriarch Abraham’s aged servant (likely Eliezer) managed all of his master’s possessions. (Ge 24:2; 15:2, 3) Abraham’s descendant Joseph, as a slave in Egypt, came to be in charge of everything belonging to Potiphar, a court official of Pharaoh. (Ge 39:1, 5, 6) In Israel, there was a possibility of a slave’s becoming wealthy and redeeming himself.—Le 25:49.

Laws governing slave-master relationships. Among the Israelites the status of the Hebrew slave differed from that of a slave who was a foreigner, alien resident, or settler. Whereas the non-Hebrew remained the property of the owner and could be passed on from father to son (Le 25:44-46), the Hebrew slave was to be released in the seventh year of his servitude or in the Jubilee year, depending upon which came first. During the time of his servitude the Hebrew slave was to be treated as a hired laborer. (Ex 21:2; Le 25:10; De 15:12) A Hebrew who sold himself into slavery to an alien resident, to a member of an alien resident’s family, or to a settler could be repurchased at any time, either by himself or by one having the right of repurchase. The redemption price was based on the number of years remaining until the Jubilee year or until the seventh year of servitude. (Le 25:47-52; De 15:12) When granting a Hebrew slave his freedom, the master was to give him a gift to assist him in getting a good start as a freedman. (De 15:13-15) If a slave had come in with a wife, the wife went out with him. However, if the master had given him a wife (evidently a foreign woman who would not be entitled to freedom in the seventh year of servitude), she and any children by her remained the property of the master. In such a case the Hebrew slave could choose to remain with his master. His ear would then be pierced with an awl to indicate that he would continue in servitude to time indefinite.—Ex 21:2-6; De 15:16, 17.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or Moses or Mohammad? Seems to me that directly led to 1900 years of slavery justified by the bible. GREAT religions you have there.

moses and mohammad were brutes and jesus was a peacenik who preached non interference in politics and acceptance of your station.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl2.htm

Paul and Jesus weigh in on the issue of slavery. Paul urged slaves to obey their masters; Jesus mentioned slavery in one of his parables: "And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes."

From the OT - how to sell your daughter as a sex slave, and other forms of sex slavery:

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

Originally posted by galveston75
Laws governing slave-master relationships. Among the Israelites the status of the Hebrew slave differed from that of a slave who was a foreigner, alien resident, or settler. Whereas the non-Hebrew remained the property of the owner and could be passed on from father to son (Le 25:44-46), the Hebrew slave was to be released in the seventh year of his serv ...[text shortened]... awl to indicate that he would continue in servitude to time indefinite.—Ex 21:2-6; De 15:16, 17.

hat did you do, paste this from the JW guidebook? Did you even bother to read it?

Among the Israelites the status of the Hebrew slave differed from that of a slave who was a foreigner, alien resident, or settler. Whereas the non-Hebrew remained the property of the owner and could be passed on from father to son (Le 25:44-46)

However, if the master had given him a wife (evidently a foreign woman who would not be entitled to freedom in the seventh year of servitude), she and any children by her remained the property of the master. In such a case the Hebrew slave could choose to remain with his master. His ear would then be pierced with an awl to indicate that he would continue in servitude to time indefinite

These parts simply affirm what I posted about keeping slaves permanently. Just because there were rules whereby Hebrew slaves could be freed, it doesn't mean that non-Hebrew slaves were.

What's more none of what you posted refutes Exodus 21:20-21 whereby a slave could be beaten - just not so badly that he doesn't survive a day or two.

You're kidding yourself.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Matthew 22
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, [b]Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Seems like slavery would be excluded by the second commandment.[/b]

It would seem so wouldn't it? Yet there slavery is, in the law of the prophets. Yet another clear contradiction in the Bible and in Jesus' words showing that neither is infallible.