Why Do We Think Slavery is Evil?

[Rhondazvous]

Slavery is a non issue in Scripture because we are all slaves to something or someone. we in modern time simple relable our slavery into various sub catagories and then it becomes not only ok but expected in some instances. What we don't rename draws a picture of what slavery was in the 17th and 18th century on plantations in the US. 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. Got to remember the world did not have the same dependence on currency we do now, and a lot of what was done was on barter. 10 years of slvery= 10 years room board for you and your family. This is the biblical picture of slavery that many of you don't seem to get. not just a white man beating a black man in a cotton field.

I find it unacceptable that a book which purports to be a moral guide is silent on an issue of moral values just because it was a non issue for the society in which it was written. You and your god have to do better than that.

[KevinM1]

Slavery is a non issue in Scripture because we are all slaves to something or someone.

Speak for yourself.

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?

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?

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

Yeah, man, those Romans knew nothing of currency.

10 years of slvery= 10 years room board for you and your family. This is the biblical picture of slavery that many of you don't seem to get. not just a white man beating a black man in a cotton field.

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.

[Rhondazvous]

Why am I not the least surprised that it's the Christians who are defending slavery?

[Mr.wizard]

Owning people as property is wrong, I don't care how much room and board you get, it's still immoral! You are talking about people sacrificing their humanity and becoming a persons property just to fulfill basic human needs.

[dyresand]

Why am I not the least surprised that it's the Christians who are defending slavery?

don't be because you know why they say its fine because god said its fine. I'm glad were not in the bad old days.

Everything theists on the inside now: Myeh i can't own another human being fuck you liberals.

[robvalue]

Slavery is fine and doesn't hurt anyone important!

Works out just fine for the people who own the slaves, and since by definition they are the ones with all the power, only they get a say in it. It was only when we started viewing everyone as an individual with value that this kind of disgusting practice could be halted. And boy, did certain people not want that to happen. Having a nice book from God which condones it did not help.

We're given the privelige of being born in a time where slavery is "obviously wrong". But I wonder what proportion of people would have just gone along with it had they been born in an earlier time. Statistically, a lot more thank people would like to think I guess! (This is a general statement about the population as a whole and not aimed at anyone in particular on this forum of course.) This is the view I take with my own morality. I try to assess everything as best I can, not just settle for what people generally think is OK. I don't want to be the guy they look back on in the future as an immoral dumbfuck who didn't know any better.

[Drich]

Slavery is a non issue in Scripture because we are all slaves to something or someone. we in modern time simple relable our slavery into various sub catagories and then it becomes not only ok but expected in some instances. What we don't rename draws a picture of what slavery was in the 17th and 18th century on plantations in the US. 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. Got to remember the world did not have the same dependence on currency we do now, and a lot of what was done was on barter. 10 years of slvery= 10 years room board for you and your family. This is the biblical picture of slavery that many of you don't seem to get. not just a white man beating a black man in a cotton field.

I find it unacceptable that a book which purports to  be a moral guide is silent on an issue of moral values just because it was a non issue for the society in which it was written.  You and your god have to do better than that.

You seem so blinded by hatred for a word, that you cant see past it to any other point beside the one that supports what you feel.
So again I will say, the reason God does not outlaw slavery is because the definition of that word has changed. Not over thousands of years but to western society in one or two generations.
What if you grandkids and their peers change the meaning of the word 'blue' to represent what you understand the word slavery to mean? then what if they want to question youre moral values/put you on trial based on your acceptance/the fact you never spoke out about 'blue' and the 2015 meaning of that word?
Again the same thing is true here. Slavery was the fundamental key to all 'modern' society at that time. without it (then as well as now) nothing gets built, nothing grows, products do not come to market city life fails. In the west, our last two generations change the meaning of the word slavery to only mean a beaten broken, unpaid black man being oppressed by a white man. From that meaning it is applied to other situations, and everytime that word is used in the bible or in life you have been 'trained' to only see that. when in fact slavery of the first century did not always mean that. It was a general term that described everything from a live in servant, to a contract worker, to a share cropper, to a personal physician who's education was paid in exchanged for so many years of service to the beaten unpaid and broken. In the bible the decernment of slavery is found in conext. Something closed minded people are not interested in.
Just because a 'hot button word' is used in the bible 2000 years ago does not mean it takes the same meaning you have been taught to understand. free yourself from the emotional ques and triggers society demands of you and be your own person. Do you own research, and come to your own understandings.

[Cato]

You seem so blinded by hatred for a word, that you cant see past it to any other point beside the one that supports what you feel.
So again I will say, the reason God does not outlaw slavery is because the definition of that word has changed. Not over thousands of years but to western society in one or two generations.

The definition of slavery has not changed. What has changed is the widespread conclusion that the practice is immoral. Guess your god didn't see that one coming. It also destroys the idea of the existence of immutable objective morals.

[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..

[Drich]

Why am I not the least surprised that it's the Christians who are defending slavery?

Because you mind seems to be closed to only your idea of what slavery is... (wait to we get to modern day slavery and your support of it, then we will see who supports what)