Why the Bible Doesn't Condemn Slavery

[Esquilax]

Okay! I'm just gonna do a quick little rebuttal of each one of the points raised, as I don't need to do more than that; it's the same pathetic apologetic tripe that gets wheeled out every stupid time we have to have this conversation, and surprisingly, old crap doesn't become valid argumentation just because it's said more times.

The forms of servitude and slavery practiced in a biblical context bear little resemblance to the tyrannical type of slavery found in the American antebellum South and in other modern Western countries.

Every part of this is wrong, and every claim made in this section has to ignore a part of the bible to survive. Old Testament slavery wasn't the same as the modern kind? Bull! You could beat your slaves to death, trade them, buy them from other races unimpeded, their wives and children were your property- the bible explicitly uses the word "property," putting the lie to the claim this section makes that they weren't considered property- and pass them down to your family like chattel. That's basically a description of antebellum slavery; the writer is simply bullshitting here.

The institution of slavery was so deeply rooted in ancient culture that it could not be dismantled overnight.

So, does anyone remember that time the Old Testament god flooded the entire earth and killed everyone bar one family for not doing what he wanted? Does anyone remember Sodom and Gomorrah being destroyed for not doing what god wanted? Does anyone remember Lot's wife, who got killed for not doing what god wanted? Namely, you know, turning around when god didn't want her to?

You're telling me that that god, who wipes ancient cultures off the map entirely- overnight in some cases- for not obeying him, cares about whether or not those ancient cultures would want to get rid of slavery or not?

Unlike some ancient cultures, and certainly unlike the American South in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the slaves in the Old Testament were recognized as full persons who possessed human dignity and basic rights

Those basic rights did not include the right not to be beaten, the right not to be beaten to death, the right not to be sold, the right not to be passed on to others like chattel, and so on. Oh, and then there's that charming little instruction set about how to trick your temporary slaves into becoming permanent ones by getting them to fall in love and marry, so you can hold their wife and children hostage when it comes time for him to go free, so you can force him to submit forever.

You just remember that, before you start telling me about all the rights and basic dignity those Old Testament slaves had.

The New Testament indicates that in God’s sight there is “neither slave nor free” (Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11) and that both are part of Christ’s church and equally accountable to God (Ephesians 6:5-9).

"God doesn't care about your well being, but hey, he also doesn't care about your status in life once you've been worked to death by the master that bought you from kidnappers working under that same god's command!"

Gee, that's very big of him.

The likely reason that the apostolic authors of the New Testament did not categorically condemn slavery was because they placed the preaching of the gospel and the redemption of lost souls ahead of societal reform.

Thou shalt not participate in slavery.

There. How fucking hard was that? It's even in the same style as the other fucking commandments, you cadre of sociopathic bullshit artists!

God’s way of eliminating slavery was to allow the biblical teachings (the “Good News”) to spread throughout all cultures.

Ah, so that must be why he put in those unambiguous commands in favor of enslaving those of other races. I mean, he must have known that the bible would never be used by humans as an argument for the systematic slavery of other races down the line in history...

... Oh, wait...

Lek, this was just... gross. You really couldn't do better than this pile of warmed over cat shit?