Refuting Christians with their Own Bible

[Redbeard The Pink]

He never said everyone was your neighbor. Samaritans were, after all, still literally neighbors to the Jews. And again, this could've been interpreted as not including slaves because slaves were their own group according to these interpreters. Perhaps the lesson is that who you perceive as an enemy may be the one to show you mercy, so show mercy and love to them as well. But furthermore, even if this applied to slaves, it doesn't mean Jesus was moving them to stop owning slaves.

Examples of vague commandments are the ones listed in your quotes. What does it mean in full details to love God with all your heart, mind, and soul, in terms of action, and then love your neighbor as yourself? Does it mean "stop owning slaves"? Then why not say so? Does it mean "polygamy is ok or not"? Why not just make it clear if polygamy is strictly not ok? Is pirating Christian movies ok? When does talking about someone in their absence become gossip? Is abortion really wrong? Or is it wrong that we are not loving the women of this world enough to respect their bodily/reproductive rights? Is smoking sinful? etc.

You need to read everything together and you'll understand the message of Jesus was decidedly not conducive to slavery. Paul expounded on a lot of things (that was kind of his job).

Galatians 3:27 "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

I would argue that "love your neighbor as yourself" is incompatible with owning a slave so therefore teaches slavery is wrong. Polygamy not clear except that church leaders should be the "husband of one wife". Pirating movies is stealing. Proverbs deals harshly with gossip. Abortion falls under the murder prohibition so it trumps anyone's 'rights'. Smoking is harmful to the body and harming the body is sinful -- gray area. 

As I said above to Veritas-Vincit, we encounter many situations that are not found in the Bible, so basic principles of morality are extracted and used to apply to the new situation. Is that process flawless, no.

Playing fast and loose with the translation of vaguely-related passages might seem ok for subjects that aren't overtly covered by scripture, but slavery is not one of those subjects.


The ad hoc scriptural doctrine you've cobbled together is cute, even pleasant, and it might even pass muster if the rest of scripture had nothing to say about slavery. Unfortunately for you, that isn't the case, and your argument falls apart when we get to passages that say things like:

Your slaves are to come from the nations around you. From them, you may buy slaves.

If you enslave a fellow Hebrew, you are to release him after 6 years. If he had a wife when he became your slave, she is to go free with him. If, however, you gave the slave a wife, she and any children she may have are your property and must be left behind. If your slave does not wish to leave his family, he may stand at the door and say: "I don't want to leave my family. I will not go free." You may then pierce his ear, and he may be kept as your slave for life.

Slaves, obey your earthly masters just as you would obey Christ.

In light of all that, it's practically impossible to bend anything else in the Bible into being an implicit condemnation of slavery. You're simply making an out-of-context interpretation that flatly contradicts lines of actual scripture