Why didn't Jesus condemn slavery?

http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

Old Testament

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)


If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)


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)


When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

New Testament

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)


Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)


The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 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.

One need only compare the Roman treatment of slaves with your depiction of the
Biblical one to discern the difference, you never hear the materialist hordes cracking
up about the Romans, do you! despite the fact that their treatment of slaves was much
harsher.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
One need only compare the Roman treatment of slaves with your depiction of the
Biblical one to discern the difference, you never hear the materialist hordes cracking
up about the Romans, do you! despite the fact that their treatment of slaves was much
harsher.

The Roman treatment of slaves wasn't mandated by the Judeo-Christian God though?!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The Roman treatment of slaves wasn't mandated by the Judeo-Christian God though?!

given that it was much worse, one would think that it would be on the agenda, but no,
no mention of the evil Romans, only the evil Bible! why is that?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
given that it was much worse, one would think that it would be on the agenda, but no,
no mention of the evil Romans, only the evil Bible! why is that?

the romans are no longer with us and nobody follows their laws. they are no longer relevant to modern life, the bible on the other hand unfortunately is.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
given that it was much worse, one would think that it would be on the agenda, but no,
no mention of the evil Romans, only the evil Bible! why is that?

See my above post.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
One need only compare the Roman treatment of slaves with your depiction of the
Biblical one to discern the difference, you never hear the materialist hordes cracking
up about the Romans, do you! despite the fact that their treatment of slaves was much
harsher.

You really are out to prove your stupidity today...


Anyone keeping slaves is wrong and immoral which is why we have made it illegal.

The fact that the treatment of slaves as espoused by the bible might be less cruel than
others of the same era doesn't mean that your keeping of slaves was good or moral
just that it might have been slightly less bad or immoral. (and given that you could still
under the rules in the bible beat your slave to death as long as they survived for two days
after your beating the difference is really very slight)

Your argument is equivalent to Hitler saying "hey I'm not that bad, you should see the number
of people Stalin has killed".

Yes the Romans did bad things... But there are no Romans today. That civilisation has fallen and
no-longer exists. And even if it did you are not a Roman.

You are however a denomination of Christian, and thus it is perfectly valid to point out evils and
errors in your beliefs and holy books.


If there were Romans around, and on this forum, believe me I would happily condemn their slavery
practices. And I am more than happy to agree that the vast majority of slavery today is conducted
by a different offshoot of the Abrahamic faiths, Islam.

However the fact remains that the bible and scriptures you claim to adhere to not only don't condemn
slavery they actively support and encourage it.
The mythical god you claim to worship and to be a source of morality has never condemned, and has
actively promoted, slavery.

I see nothing unfair in pointing this out.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
the romans are no longer with us and nobody follows their laws. they are no longer relevant to modern life, the bible on the other hand unfortunately is.

more spiritual myopia, we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant, but that's not the real issue here, if the
people who posted against the Bible were truly interested in slavery and Christianity
they might have made mention of those Christians who were involved in the abolition
movement, primarily motivated by their religious belief, to abolish slavery, but no, all
we get are these one sided hypocritical points of view, fostered by anti religionists who
would be hard pressed to express any kind of unbiased opinion.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
more spiritual myopia, we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant, but that's not the real issue here, if the
people who posted against the Bible were truly interested in slavery and Christianity
they might have made mention of those Christians who were involved in the abolition ...[text shortened]... tered by anti religionists who
would be hard pressed to express any kind of unbiased opinion.

You're wittering on about 'unbiased opinion'. Let me just feel my bum to make sure i'm not dreaming. 🙄

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
more spiritual myopia, we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant, but that's not the real issue here, if the
people who posted against the Bible were truly interested in slavery and Christianity
they might have made mention of those Christians who were involved in the abolition ...[text shortened]... tered by anti religionists who
would be hard pressed to express any kind of unbiased opinion.

"we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant"

Was it or was it not the same god who authored, inspired, condoned, committed, the laws
and acts of the OT as the one talked about in the NT and that you still worship?

Because if it is the same god then it is perfectly valid and relevant to discuss what that god
did, ordered and condoned.


And the argument isn't that modern Christians support slavery (which would be both a baseless
and idiotic thing to claim) and certainly there were many Christians who were instrumental in helping
to end slavery in the west but the question here is why is it not condemned ANYWHERE in the bible.


Saying that lots of Christians opposed slavery doesn't answer the question of why the OT promotes
slavery and the NT says nothing about condemning or banning it.


You are trying very hard to be victimised by unreasonably opponents but you are in fact being asked
very reasonable questions and are getting upset because you have no answers.

And you have no grounds for criticising anyone for being biased.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The Roman treatment of slaves wasn't mandated by the Judeo-Christian God though?!

What reference or proof do you have that God mandated how slaves were to be
treated and that his will included making slaves as a good practice at all? Why
did God free the Hebrews from slavery under the Egyptians if He approved of
slavery?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
more spiritual myopia, we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant, but that's not the real issue here, if the
people who posted against the Bible were truly interested in slavery and Christianity
they might have made mention of those Christians who were involved in the abolition ...[text shortened]... tered by anti religionists who
would be hard pressed to express any kind of unbiased opinion.

if you follow a god that has at some has encouraged slavery then the point is relevant as people still follow his word. there is nothing myopic about stating facts. the romans have gone, the bible is still here, the bible still has sections that support slavery. even if god changed his mind he still at one point supported it. that makes him fallible and that opens up a whole can of worms.

maybe i am biased, but thats because no christian on this site will discuss the moral conundrums that the bible throws up. how could i possibly gain an understanding if certain issues are avoided or denied.

Originally posted by RJHinds
What reference or proof do you have that God mandated how slaves were to be
treated and that his will included making slaves as a good practice at all? Why
did God free the Hebrews from slavery under the Egyptians if He approved of
slavery?

http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

"Why did God free the Hebrews from slavery under the Egyptians if He approved of
slavery?"

Because the Hebrews were his own 'Chosen' people.

Not wanting your own tribe or 'chosen people' to be slaves is not the same as not approving of
slavery.

The Hebrews were not only allowed but encouraged to take and keep slaves.

of course you would know this if you had actually read your bible.

Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]"we are no longer under the Mosaic law with its ordinances and
practices, your point therefore is irrelevant"

Was it or was it not the same god who authored, inspired, condoned, committed, the laws
and acts of the OT as the one talked about in the NT and that you still worship?

Because if it is the same god then it is perfectly va ...[text shortened]... use you have no answers.

And you have no grounds for criticising anyone for being biased.[/b]

Yes the God of the Bible permitted slavery, what of it? its hardly a moral dilemma,
considering that slaves were to be granted rights, indeed, one could even voluntarily
become a slave, hardly a slave in the sense that you are attempting to depict is it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
What reference or proof do you have that God mandated how slaves were to be
treated and that his will included making slaves as a good practice at all? Why
did God free the Hebrews from slavery under the Egyptians if He approved of
slavery?

see!!! perfect example of illogical reasoning.

' Why did God free the Hebrews from slavery under the Egyptians if He approved of slavery'

so you are saying god doesnt approve of slavery, right?
the evidence of this - he save slaves.
continue that train of thought. god doesnt approve of slavery - he saves slaves.
if that is the case and god is prepared to get involved when it comes to slaves, why didnt he put an end to slavery!! why didnt he save all the slaves of the last 2000 years, why doesnt he save the slaves that live now.