Slavery

[joy4Him2day]

I wonder why Paul didn't try to abolish slavery, rather than exhort the slaves to obey their masters........
couldn't he have established slavery as an ungodly thing, the same as he made statements about singleness, dividers of believers, unrepentant sinners?
why wouldn't God establish this freedom of slaves back then? Or am I missing something........is there a place where God addresses this?
thanks,
Joy

[antsinmypants]

The only thing that i can think of Joy, is that YHVH dealt with slavery in the Torah, saying how slaves were to be treated, and what happened in the year of jubilee, etc; and since this was something more of the government, and Paul had been speaking of obeying those in charge, so long as it wasn't contradictory to The Scriptures-- he was well within G-d's for-ordained order by not calling for it to be abolished.

Remember, we are called to be bondservants to YHVH. :wave

p.s. the only one via blueletterbible.org that I was able to find is Leviticus 25.. but I do know there are more. for some reason they aren't using the word slave/slavery... but servant :confused

[Joyful One]

Exodus 21:1
Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.

21:2
If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

21:3
If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

21:4
If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

21:5
And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

21:6
Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.


The way I understand it is there were three ways to become a slave .
1- you sold yourself into service
2- parents sold their children into service
3- you were being punished for a crime - likened to being in jail .

On all three of these accounts freedom was just 7 years away . Unless one wanted to stay . I realize that Exodus and Jeremiah deal with Hebrews . Perhaps someone else a little smarter than myself can answer better . I know that there are other mentions of servant/slavery in the Bible , but am not sure if it is condoned or the Bible is just conveying history - as in this is what happened ... I will offer this ... the instructions given about the Hebrew slaves look nothing like what you and I today know slavery to have been in the past . No instructions there to go and kidnap a people and drag them across oceans - do what you want to the women , kill , seperate families . Oh the evil that mankind was capable of and is capable of .
Below in the Scripture of Jeremiah God is not happy at all that his directions concerning Hebrew slaves were not folowed . Imagine what he thought about how we as a country mistreated our slaves ... Plus no freedom ever in sight there for the longest time .






Jeremiah 34:8
This is the word that came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, after that the king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people which were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty unto them;

34:9
That every man should let his manservant, and every man his maidservant, being an Hebrew or an Hebrewess, go free; that none should serve himself of them, to wit, of a Jew his brother.

34:10
Now when all the princes, and all the people, which had entered into the covenant, heard that every one should let his manservant, and every one his maidservant, go free, that none should serve themselves of them any more, then they obeyed, and let them go.

34:11
But afterward they turned, and caused the servants and the handmaids, whom they had let go free, to return, and brought them into subjection for servants and for handmaids.

34:12
Therefore the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying,

34:13
Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; I made a covenant with your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondmen, saying,

34:14
At the end of seven years let ye go every man his brother an Hebrew, which hath been sold unto thee; and when he hath served thee six years, thou shalt let him go free from thee: but your fathers hearkened not unto me, neither inclined their ear.

34:15
And ye were now turned, and had done right in my sight, in proclaiming liberty every man to his neighbour; and ye had made a covenant before me in the house which is called by my name:

34:16
But ye turned and polluted my name, and caused every man his servant, and every man his handmaid, whom he had set at liberty at their pleasure, to return, and brought them into subjection, to be unto you for servants and for handmaids.

34:17
Therefore thus saith the LORD; Ye have not hearkened unto me, in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother, and every man to his neighbour: behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith the LORD, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine; and I will make you to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.

34:18
And I will give the men that have transgressed my covenant, which have not performed the words of the covenant which they had made before me, when they cut the calf in twain, and passed between the parts thereof,

34:19
The princes of Judah, and the princes of Jerusalem, the eunuchs, and the priests, and all the people of the land, which passed between the parts of the calf;

34:20
I will even give them into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of them that seek their life: and their dead bodies shall be for meat unto the fowls of the heaven, and to the beasts of the earth.

34:21
And Zedekiah king of Judah and his princes will I give into the hand of their enemies, and into the hand of them that seek their life, and into the hand of the king of Babylon's army, which are gone up from you.

34:22
Behold, I will command, saith the LORD, and cause them to return to this city; and they shall fight against it, and take it, and burn it with fire: and I will make the cities of Judah a desolation without an inhabitant.

[Daisy Cutter]

I'm not sure that slavery is forbidden in the bible, just that there are indeed rules about slave treatment.

[Mindenite]

Slavery is always wrong and God knows this. However, God knows how bad people can be. If we live out lives for God and accept the freedom that Christ died to give us, we are slaves to nothing. No earthly master of any sort be it sin or a physical person can do anything to us. We may be in physical or emotional bonds but we are free in Christ and that is what matters. How can one be a slave when one is free through the blood of Jesus?

[antsinmypants]

How can one be a slave when one is free through the blood of Jesus?

We are free from sin.. that is all.

we are called to be Bondservants for Him.

www.m-w.com says that a Bondservant is :

one bound to service without wages; also : SLAVE

[HeIsEnough]

I wonder why Paul didn't try to abolish slavery, rather than exhort the slaves to obey their masters........
couldn't he have established slavery as an ungodly thing, the same as he made statements about singleness, dividers of believers, unrepentant sinners?
why wouldn't God establish this freedom of slaves back then? Or am I missing something........is there a place where God addresses this?
thanks,
Joy
I suppose I don't feel it was time. Going by what Christ said about having more than one wife, the same could apply to this.

[HeIsEnough]

We are free from sin.. that is all.

we are called to be Bondservants for Him.

www.m-w.com (http://www.m-w.com/) says that a Bondservant is :

one bound to service without wages; also : SLAVE
He also says He no longer calls us servants, but friends. Because we know the will of the One who sent Him.

[antsinmypants]

He also says He no longer calls us servants, but friends. Because we know the will of the One who sent Him.

Ah, Yes, which takes us to the NEXT step.

How are Bondservants dealt with according to the bible?
They remain a part of the family.... annnnnnnnd?

[HeIsEnough]

.... annnnnnnnd?
They will never surpass their Master. The reference to friends that God makes, to me, is that of relationship, not ownership. Since everything is owned by God, this is never in question. Yet, we are conformed to His will because it is perfect. Anything other than that is imperfect, thus not worthy to emulate. In either case, we are much more than servants.

[antsinmypants]

I think we are still missing the point.

When one becomes a bondservant, they do not leave the family until death, and even then- are considered family, and held dear.
They literally become family and friends- not just "oh him, that's my servant/slave!"...

[joy4Him2day]

I suppose I don't feel it was time. Going by what Christ said about having more than one wife, the same could apply to this.

so........that as people got more of the Spirit of God within, they realized that slavery was ungodly?

so, would the act of "purchasing" a human for servitude, be considered the rule of what slavery would be? For instance, after serving, they willingly stayed on as help, making the "slavery" part null and void, and transferring them to "bondservants"?

It just seems that Christ saying, "No man can serve two masters" somehow nullifies having mastery over any other human being..........so, in essence, when Paul admonishes the slave to "obey his master" , it is just giving advice to a situation that is not necessarily right........just like, being jailed and obeying your jailer.......(for Paul, that is, who was jailed unjustly).

(just tossing stuff around, looking at it...... :): )

[HeIsEnough]

I think we are still missing the point.

Well, then we should spell out our point more clearly.

[HeIsEnough]

so........that as people got more of the Spirit of God within, they realized that slavery was ungodly?

No, that man being a hard-hearted creature was not capable to recieve this enlightenment yet. Unlike that of only having one wife. As you said, just tossing it out....


so, would the act of "purchasing" a human for servitude, be considered the rule of what slavery would be? For instance, after serving, they willingly stayed on as help, making the "slavery" part null and void, and transferring them to "bondservants"?

Not sure what rules that could apply, other than those laid out in scripture already. In either case, if those same rules were followed, it is doubtful slavery would be viewed as it is today.


It just seems that Christ saying, "No man can serve two masters" somehow nullifies having mastery over any other human being..........so, in essence, when Paul admonishes the slave to "obey his master" , it is just giving advice to a situation that is not necessarily right........just like, being jailed and obeying your jailer.......(for Paul, that is, who was jailed unjustly).

That verse is contextually tied to money, no? We know it definitely is true, as far as money goes, I have lived it. I'm not sure it can be extrapolated further though.

[Brad MetalMan]

I wonder why Paul didn't try to abolish slavery, rather than exhort the slaves to obey their masters........
couldn't he have established slavery as an ungodly thing, the same as he made statements about singleness, dividers of believers, unrepentant sinners?
why wouldn't God establish this freedom of slaves back then? Or am I missing something........is there a place where God addresses this?
thanks,
Joy

Paul was out to preach the gospel, and that was his first most important priority. Social reform came second. Keep in mind slavery in ancient Rome was not like ante bellum slavery in America. It was not based on race, whereas in America, only blacks could be enslaved. American slavery was a racist institution, Roman slavery was not as much.

In Rome, a family that could not pay off debts would sell themselves into slavery for a period of time to have their debts erased. Not all slaves worked menial jobs either. Many Roman slaves were doctors and teachers who worked for very well to do families in Rome. They would educate the children and care for the sick.

We need to be careful not to judge ancient society by modern standards. Paul in several of his letters shows he was somewhat progressive on the subject. He exhorts masters to treat their slaves right.

The problem is there is no real support from the Bible to say that slavery itself was a sin. Mistreatment of slaves and making a racist institution are sinful, for we can clearly see in the scriptures that racism is a sin. It was the inherit racism of Ante Bellum slavery that made it such as evil, and along with the few cases where slaves were mistreated by their masters. (Despite what you may think, most American slaves were not beaten, to badly mistreated by their masters. A badly hurt slave was a piece of property that had to be taken care of, which cost money, but could not put out any labor. It was not in the best interests of Southern plantation owners to badly harm their slaves).

[antsinmypants]

Keep in mind slavery in ancient Rome was not like ante bellum slavery in America. It was not based on race, whereas in America, only blacks could be enslaved. American slavery was a racist institution, Roman slavery was not as much.

Blacks were not the only ones enslaved.
There were white slaves, and Native slaves. My family were of the white slaves come by way of the UK-- Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England... and they served their full terms.

[antsinmypants]

Well, then we should spell out our point more clearly.

How about this for an example.

Paul, when speaking of the Torah being a "schoolmaster" (as the KJV puts it), uses a word that means a young person that is skilled, who is a butler/bodyguard/nanny/friend to the person he/she is bringing up and protecting. This person was considered a slave-- yet-- family.

Making sense?

[HeIsEnough]

How about this for an example.

Paul, when speaking of the Torah being a "schoolmaster" (as the KJV puts it), uses a word that means a young person that is skilled, who is a butler/bodyguard/nanny/friend to the person he/she is bringing up and protecting. This person was considered a slave-- yet-- family.

Making sense?
Ants,
I really don't want to discern what you are implying, I would rather you just say it. This thread was not really towards that concept, and I'm sure it is great, but my mind is not working all that well lately. I buried my father a couple of days ago, so I am trying to stay focused, ya know?

[Ciscokid]

Slavery is always wrong and God knows this. However, God knows how bad people can be. If we live out lives for God and accept the freedom that Christ died to give us, we are slaves to nothing. No earthly master of any sort be it sin or a physical person can do anything to us. We may be in physical or emotional bonds but we are free in Christ and that is what matters. How can one be a slave when one is free through the blood of Jesus?


If slavery is always wrong then why did God not only allow it but regulate it?
God allowed his people to purchase slaves and hand them down like pieces of property...they were slaves for life.

Leviticus 25:44-46 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

[Ciscokid]

Does anyone read this verse and feel completely comfortable with it?

Exo 21:20 And if a man shall smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he shall die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
Exo 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he shall continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his money.

So if the slave eventually dies....from these severe injuries....the master is not held accountable because he lost a slave anyway...so really he only shot himself in the foot by beating him so bad. :twitch

[Brad MetalMan]

Blacks were not the only ones enslaved.
There were white slaves, and Native slaves. My family were of the white slaves come by way of the UK-- Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England... and they served their full terms.

I did forget that part....yes many came to America as indentured servants, which was basically like slavery except it was for a specific length of time, often 7 years long. When that time was up, they were released. I would not be surprised if some of my ancestors were indentured servants since they came from British Isles.

My main point is that Ante Bellum slavery was different than what ancient Roman slavery was like, and that we Americans often read the American experience into the passages of the Bible that talk about slavery, without understanding what Roman slavery was really like.

[joy4Him2day]

BradMetalMan:
I did not know there was a difference in slavery.....never talked about it with anyone before....it just was something that came up when I was reading...
it does make a difference when comparing what the different cultures meant, and the fact that racism was involved in the slavery that I was aware of...
it's amazing the stuff one needs to know to discern scripture......
I am glad for this message board...... :):

HeIsEnough:
It is interesting that you discuss the word "Enlightenment" . I think you are saying that man had to "evolve" to a certain "understanding?" then?

I think of Jesus saying to the disciples, that He had many things to discuss with them, but they were not ready yet to be shown.........so, could some understandings be left for the last days? Is that possible?

I like that you pointed out that the "master" verses regarded the money discussion.....I had forgotten that....

:):

[joy4Him2day]

HeIsEnough:

This intrigues me:

No, that man being a hard-hearted creature was not capable to recieve this enlightenment yet.

could we talk about this?

:):

[blitzkreig]

God effectively puts each person into their station in life. All a part of the order of God.

But to be sure... we were all slaves. Slaves to sin and death. Our bonds were effectively broken or we would not have been able to believe.

[HeIsEnough]

HeIsEnough:

This intrigues me:

No, that man being a hard-hearted creature was not capable to recieve this enlightenment yet.

could we talk about this?

:):
Yes :):

[joy4Him2day]

Okay, I will take a swing at it.

Here is what I am looking at.
I have discovered that there are lots of words in translating scripture that we either did not have words that correlated, so we (guessed, chose the closest to our understanding, picked one that seemed like what the Author was trying to say)........
in light of that........could we have chosen words that did not fully express the meaning of the text? For instance, words also change meanings in the course of time....the dictionaries have to be updated all the time....and cultural things change..........
I believe the Bible, in and of itself to be inerrant.......but in the interpreting, could we have interpreted according to our prejudices, when a word was in question, rather than what God was really trying to say?
Look how the comentators alone differ with the exact same texts as they stand now...........

so, your comment about enlightenment has me perked up.........
we know that prophecy is somewhat closed, as it unravels......could not other scripture, in a sense, be closed, until "the enlightenment?"

just throwing stuff on the table...... :):

[HeIsEnough]

Okay, I will take a swing at it.

Here is what I am looking at.
I have discovered that there are lots of words in translating scripture that we either did not have words that correlated, so we (guessed, chose the closest to our understanding, picked one that seemed like what the Author was trying to say)........
in light of that........could we have chosen words that did not fully express the meaning of the text? For instance, words also change meanings in the course of time....the dictionaries have to be updated all the time....and cultural things change..........
I believe the Bible, in and of itself to be inerrant.......but in the interpreting, could we have interpreted according to our prejudices, when a word was in question, rather than what God was really trying to say?
Look how the comentators alone differ with the exact same texts as they stand now...........

so, your comment about enlightenment has me perked up.........
we know that prophecy is somewhat closed, as it unravels......could not other scripture, in a sense, be closed, until "the enlightenment?"

just throwing stuff on the table...... :):
Look at what you left on the table!

Certainly, we know this to be true in regards to prophecy. Other areas have this application as well, Hebrews 5 for example. Jesus Himself constantly guarded His words, purposely to the many, by speaking in parables. That is a little different, but has many parallels. We could say that God alone decides who moves on to spiritual maturity, not by our own effort.

Perhaps He shields His blessing, that truly is what we have recieved i.e understanding etc, from those who He knows would profane it.

[joy4Him2day]

Perhaps you are referring to this verse:

The secrets of the Lord is with them that fear Him: and He will show them His covenant. Psalm 25:14

For the froward is an abomination to the Lord; but His secret is with the righteous. Proverbs 3:32

according to Strong's, it looks to mean "a secret counsel" "intimate consultation"

Eliaphez says to Job: Chapter 15:8, Hast thou heard the secret of God? And dost thou restrain wisdom to thyself?

the same word is used for secret, that is used in the Psalm......interesting......

same word in Psalm 64:2 , hide me from the secret counsel of the wicked.....

Job refers to the secret (same word) in 29:4, when the secret of God was upon my tabernacle.

and then in Amos 3:7,
Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

okay, your turn........ :):

[Ciscokid]

Does anyone read this verse and feel completely comfortable with it?

Exo 21:20 And if a man shall smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he shall die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
Exo 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he shall continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his money.

So if the slave eventually dies....from these severe injuries....the master is not held accountable because he lost a slave anyway...so really he only shot himself in the foot by beating him so bad. :twitch


:bump

[HeIsEnough]

Perhaps you are referring to this verse:
In a way yes, but I am now pondering it a little differently. Speaking of ponderin, she better get back soon, I will lose heart without her around here. Pearls before swine.....what applications could this have....and how could it relate to one who refuses, or is unwilling, to apply spiritual matters to life....more pondering...


p.s. Sorry if I offended you Ants...my father was a godly man and my grief will have to work itself out, unfortunately, it comes out in the wrong ways at times.

[joy4Him2day]

HeIsEnough:
I am sorry about your father........Godly men, are hard to come by, and absence of his counsel and prayers a great deficit, I am sure.
What greater wealth on earth than a Godly parent?
:hug to you

I will not be on the computer til Sat nite or Sun....so, I won't be ignoring any response,....I just won't be online. :):

I can see that we have lots to discuss.........
:):
JOY

[Hootmon]

Originally Posted by Ciscokid
Does anyone read this verse and feel completely comfortable with it?

Exo 21:20 And if a man shall smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he shall die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
Exo 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he shall continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his money.

So if the slave eventually dies....from these severe injuries....the master is not held accountable because he lost a slave anyway...so really he only shot himself in the foot by beating him so bad. This would seem to be a matter of 'intent'. We make a similar distinction today. For instance, 2nd Degree Murder vs. Manslaughter.

[antsinmypants]

I have a reply, just haven't gotten where I can finish typing it yet to submit.
:wave

[HeIsEnough]

okay, your turn........ :):

1 Corinthians 3:2
I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready

Matthew 13:13
This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.


Ezekiel 20

Rebellious Israel

2 Then the word of the LORD came to me: 3 "Son of man, speak to the elders of Israel and say to them, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Have you come to inquire of me? As surely as I live, I will not let you inquire of me, declares the Sovereign LORD .' .....

8 " 'But they rebelled against me and would not listen to me....

31... Am I to let you inquire of me, O house of Israel? As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD , I will not let you inquire of me.

Matthew 13:44
"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.

Mark 4:11
He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables



1 Corinthians 14:8
Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?

okay, your turn........ :):

[joy4Him2day]

HeIsEnough:

Okay, I'm back.

Spiritual discernment is the grace to see into the unseen. It is a gift of the Spirit to perceive what is in the spirit. Its purpose is to see into the nature of that which is veiled. But the first veil which must be removed is the veil over our own hearts. We must see ourselves and the measure of our need. For the capacity to see into that which is outside comes from Christ revealing that which is inside.

Jesus demands we understand our own need of His mercy so that, out of the grace which we have received, we can compassionately minister to others. In this process, we will discover the depravity and selfishness of our carnal nature. We will know thoroughly that the gift of discernment is not a faculty of our minds.

We must ever be conscious that Christ's goal is to save, not judge. We are called to navigate the narrow and well-hidden path into the true nature of men's needs. If we would truly help men, we must remember, we are following a Lamb.
Francis Frangipane

I thought this was interesting....... :):

[Pooch]

I wondered myself about the slavery issue in the Bible and have satisfied my spirit to accept 2 explanations.

1. When I read the old Testament, I get frustrated alot by the mention of slavery, wars, etc..it seems like a barbaric society. Then, I stop and think about it. It WAS (think of the flood). Imagine a world pre-Jesus, pre-Holy Spirit, in which the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, had not been a part of. Imagine millions of people living day to day based on thier own needs, no Holy Spirit to guide them. Sure, God poured out His spirit on some people, but the people for the most part had no idea of rightousness. The Jewish people had the 'law', and that was it. It was barbaric then, and it will even be MORE barbaric when the church is removed during the rapture. We are 'spoiled' today because we have a sense of right/wrong, even non-believers. Imagine a world without that...slavery would be the least of thier worries. Just staying alive for the day would've been hard enough.

2. If you gave your life to God BC or give your life to Jesus AD, you would NOT have slaves. Period. How can anyone who professes to follow God, who says "Love your nieghbor as yourself" and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" even consider slavery? Paul wasn't talking about Christians having slaves, he was talking of how to be a Christian even if you were a slave. The masters Paul was talking about were not Christian masters. Maybe it's just me, but that's the way I read it..

Pooch

[Whosoever]

People seem to be forgetting something. Today, slavery = bad. Democracy in the sense that we understand it (read: democracy within a Republic, not the demokratia of ancient Greece) is a fairly new concept, and with it comes the idea that all races are created equal. In ancient times, slavery wasn't good or bad, it just was. That's how cities and kingdoms got along in daily economic life, through the use of slaves. They were cheap labor, they were a status symbol, they were walking furniture. Not a pretty life in any sense of the word, which is why the "freedom" that Yeshua introduced was something the lower classes hungered for. Remember that in most ancient religions, only heroes went somewhere beautiful upon death; slaves were pretty much guaranteed to remain slaves on the other side, if they survived death at all. Being freed from the chains of sin had a very real meaning to slaves, whereas today we consider it a metaphor, and the idea of eternal life as a free man was more than enough to bring a tear to any slave's eye.

But Yeshua didn't come to earth for political reasons. He didn't wave the red flag and cry "down with Rome, free the slaves" as he ran through the streets. That would have drawn attention to him for all the wrong reasons. He knew men were evil, and even though God didn't create slavery He knew man would always be a slave, to each other and to Satan, until Yeshua died for us. While on Earth Yeshua said, "you will always have the poor," and that included slaves. To this day the slave trade is still alive and kicking in parts of Africa and Asia, and even in the black market in America. It will continue until Yeshua returns, because even though we have the choice to accept Him, man's fallen nature still prevails in the world; that's why it's still filled with sin, evil, and bondage.

Folks today ask why God didn't just abolish slavery then, and I'm reminded of the people who got upset when Yeshua told the cripple his sins were forgiven. As Yeshua told them, which is easier to say, "get up and walk" or "your sins are forgiven"?