Why Do We Think Slavery is Evil?

[Drich]

Speak for yourself.

So you are independently wealthy don't work and owe no one anything?

we in modern time simple relable our slavery into various sub catagories and then it becomes not only ok but expected in some instances.

Is this even English?

Again in modern time we rename certain aspects of slavery (employer/employee, lendor/debtor ect) all were aspects of biblical slavery in an eccomony where currency does not have the same effect as it does now. these aspects of slavery have been reclassified in modern times so the only mean of slavery left is oppression.

Now the word 'slavery' only means a black man in a field being worked to death, but in the time of Christ slavery meant being poor, and making a living for yourself and your family.

That's quite an assertion.  Have any evidence of that being the case, or are you speaking out of your ass... again?
Again, understand this before you rant off topic, The word slavery also included the pop culture's understanding of the word, but it also included social economic/trade practices that we have separated out as mention above.
The book of Philemon
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=ERV
this article explains quite well the Christian view point on slavery citing examples:
http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201104/2...lavery.cfm

Roman examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome
Nexum was a debt bondage contract in the early Roman Republic. Within the Roman legal system, it was a form of mancipatio. Though the terms of the contract would vary, essentially a free man pledged himself as a bond slave (nexus) as surety for a loan. He might also hand over his son as collateral. Although the bondsman could expect to face humiliation and some abuse, as a legal citizen he was supposed to be exempt from corporal punishment. Nexum was abolished by the Lex Poetelia Papiria in 326 BCE, in part to prevent abuses to the physical integrity of citizens who had fallen into debt bondage.

Roman historians illuminated the abolition of nexum with a traditional story that varied in its particulars; basically, a nexus who was a handsome but upstanding youth suffered sexual harassment by the holder of the debt. In one version, the youth had gone into debt to pay for his father's funeral; in others, he had been handed over by his father. In all versions, he is presented as a model of virtue. Historical or not, the cautionary tale highlighted the incongruities of subjecting one free citizen to another’s use, and the legal response was aimed at establishing the citizen’s right to liberty (libertas), as distinguished from the slave or social outcast (infamis).[47]

Cicero considered the abolition of nexum primarily a political maneuver to appease the common people (plebs): the law was passed during the Conflict of the Orders, when plebeians were struggling to establish their rights in relation to the hereditary privileges of the patricians. Although nexum was abolished as a way to secure a loan, debt bondage might still result after a debtor defaulted.[48]

Got to remember the world did not have the same dependence on currency we do now

Yeah, man, those Romans knew nothing of currency.

Not what I said sport.
I did not say rome did not have a form of currency I said they did not depend on it as we do now.
After all they did not have hundreds of millions of coins in circulation. So trade, and barter was still a major part of their eccomony. When one does not have the coin to pay a debt and nothing elses of value how else is a debt to be paid?

As in the article above slaves (some) were indeed compensated. the point being not all were beaten and broken.

Or, perhaps, you don't understand and are merely regurgitating the hand waving that Christians employ all the time to make their heinous religion seem better than it actually is to modern sensibilities.

Or I do infact see the truth, and am trying to get you to see past your prejudice to see the truth as well..