The Christian Bible condones slavery explicitly in numerous passages. One of those reference often by slave owners in the Antebellum South comes from the story of Noah.
Genesis 9:24-27
9:24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
9:25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
9:26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
9:27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
The book of Joshua also demonstrates the Christian god’s support of slavery:
9:27 And Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation, and for the altar of the LORD, even unto this day, in the place which he should choose.
In fact, there are numerous biblical instructions on how to acquire slaves, making it clear that buying people for money is perfectly acceptable.
Exodus 21:2-7
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.
21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
Leviticus 22:10-11
22:10 There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing: a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant, shall not eat of the holy thing.
22:11 But if the priest buy any soul with his money, he shall eat of it, and he that is born in his house: they shall eat of his meat.
Or slaves can be taken in war.
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
20:10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.
20:11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.
20:12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:
20:13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
20:14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
Leviticus goes on to make it clear that slaves are inheritable possessions.
25:44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor.
There are also many biblical instructions on how to treat slaves. Genesis 16:6-9 says that angels will force slaves to return to their owners.
16:6 But Abram said unto Sarai, Behold, thy maid is in thine hand; do to her as it pleaseth thee. And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled from her face.
16:7 And the angel of the LORD found her by a fountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur.
16:8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai’s maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai.
16:9 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands.
Beating slaves as long as they don’t die immediately is perfectly fine.
Exodus 21:20-21
21:20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21:21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
Leviticus shows that slaves are property, not covered by the laws protecting other people.
19:20 And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.
The New Testament doesn’t fare any better. Slavery is explicitly condoned in many places.
Luke 12:46-47
12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Luke 17:7-9
17:7 But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat?
17:8 And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink?
17:9 Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.
1 Corinthians 7:21-22
7:21 Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
7:22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.
Ephesians 6:5 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.
Colossians 3:22 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.
1 Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
Titus 2:9-10
2:9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;
2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
Nowhere in the Christian Bible is slavery explicitly condemned nor are any of the verses that explicitly support the practice repudiated. Of course, numerous verses are interpreted to be anti-slavery. The fact that both slavery proponents and abolitionists were able to quote scripture in support of their views demonstrates clearly that the bible is, at best, ambiguous. Surely a book intended to provide moral guidance could have found room in the Ten Commandments for “Thou shalt not own slaves.”
The rational conclusion is that the bible is an amalgamation of writings by many different men, each with his own political goals and views on morality. It is only those who hold it to be the inerrant word of their god who find themselves in the position of attempting to defend the odious passages that clearly support slavery. That attempted defense is a blatant and appalling demonstration of religious belief overriding common decency and empathy.
I don’t judge anyone to be morally superior unless they have made some great sacrifice for another person, something beyond my ability to imagine myself doing.
And I don’t judge anyone to be morally inferior unless I have certain knowledge that they enjoy hurting other people, or regularly do so for personal gain.
I have no knowledge of anyone posting at this forum who qualifies in ether regard.
I do see people who seem to be smarter than myself, and people who are more knowledgeable of many topics. I also see people who have what I consider to be silly beliefs and silly ideas. I don’t consider that relevant to morality.
There are also people I consider to be jerks. I’m afraid I fit that category, although I try to minimize it. I do worry about it, and sometimes stop before posting something I’ve typed.
LOL! Yeah…well…there’s THAT too, but not what I was getting at…
😉
The older was named Oholah, and her sister was Oholibah.
We have election years like that. Choose one…
No
If valid my syllogism conclusively demonstrates that there is no Biblical sanction for slavery. You are ignoring this and acting as no argument has been given.
Simply repeating verses is not an answer to the argument unless you can demonstrate that your personal interpretations of the text are more accurate and authoritative than those of Jesus Christ.
Good luck with that one
peace
1) These are questions not contradictions. You do know what a contradiction is don’t you?
2) If you were to prove that the Bible contradicted itself it would defeat your argument that the Bible clearly condoned slavery.
Why am I’m reminded of this?
peace
No, it does not. At best the verses you quote show that some parts of the bible can be interpreted to contradict the passages that sanction slavery by giving instructions on how slaves may be acquired and treated. Nothing you have presented explicitly condemns slavery or explicitly denies the validity of the the slavery sanctioning passages.
You’re stuck on the horns of a dilemma. Either your bible is contradictory, and therefore not inerrant, or it means exactly what it says when it sanctions slavery.
That is a deliberately obtuse response. Apparently you know the contradictions I’m referring to, but here are the details:
1) What is the order of creation of plants, animals, and Adam and Eve?
From The Skeptics Annotated Bible:
In the first creation story, humans are created after the other animals.
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
In the second story, humans were created before the other animals.
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. Genesis 2:18-19
In the first creation story, the first man and woman were created simultaneously.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
In the second account, the man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man’s rib.
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them…. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. Genesis 2:18-22
2) How did Judas die?
Judas hanged himself: Matthew 27:5
Judas fell down and died: Acts 1:18
3) What happened to the money Judas was paid?
He bought a field. Acts 1:18
He threw it down in the temple. Matthew 27:5
4) How did Saul die?
Saul committed suicide: Samuel 31:4-6, 1 Chronicles 10:4
Saul was killed by an Amalekite: 2 Samuel 1:8-10
Saul was killed by the Philistines: 2 Samuel 21:12
Saul was killed by God: 1 Chronicles 10:14
5) Do hares chew the cud?
Your bible says yes:
Leviticus 11:5-6
And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
And the hare, because he cheweth the cud , but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
(Repeated in Deureronomy 14:7)
Reality says no.
No, it simply demonstrates that your bible is not inerrant. The passages sanctioning slavery are quite clear. They don’t disappear just because you refuse to address them directly.
Are you saying that slavery is not explicitly inconsistent with loving your neighbor as yourself
Claiming that it is a loving act to own another human being is long way to go just to hold onto your I hate God hobby horse.
1) So you agree that if your claim that the Bible is contradictory is correct your claim about it clearly condoning slavery is false
2) The alternative to your “horns” is of course is to simply not assume that twentieth century apostates are a better judge of the meaning and content of the Old Covenant than Jesus himself.
peace
No errors would demonstrate that the bible is not inerrant contradictions would prove that the bible is not clear.
Is it your claim that the Bible is clear in what it says or contradictory? You can’t have it both ways
peace
How do you know this? Are origin stories required to be in strict chronological order? ever heard of flashback?
the word for created is not even in the second story.
I could easily go on but I hope you get the point.
These alleged contradictions are nothing short of laughable, They demonstrate a primary school level of reading comprehension.
They evaporate instantly if you give the text the half the benefit of the doubt you would give any other writing.
peace
No, I said exactly the opposite and I explained why.
In other words, your alternative is to simply ignore the passages that clearly sanction slavery.
I notice you carefully elided the actual text under discussion:
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
Does that look like a flashback to you?
Here’s the text:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them…. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. Genesis 2:18-22
“made he a woman”. After the beasts which came after man.
I get the point that nothing, including the clear words from your own holy book, will ever sway you from your indoctrinated position that said book is inerrant.
Nonetheless, please do go on. Address the other contradictions I documented above.
you do know that annotated means interpreted don’t you?
These are not contradictions in the text but interpretations of the text that present it as contradictory. There is a big difference.
It’s the difference between avoiding a chair with a “wet paint” sign and peeing on it.
😉
peace
Since Patrick does not believe in the divinity of Jesus , your appeal to authority fails.
It could very well be it is in past tense after all and it does not say God created the plants and “then” Man.
It says “and” God created the plants “and” God created Man.
“Made” is not the same as create.
I made my bed this morning I did not create it
Come on Patrick use your head.
There you go again claiming it’s clear while you are arguing it’s contradictory.
Can you make up your mind please?
peace
no
In order to disprove my argument he needs to disprove my premise.
I’ll grant that if Jesus is not divine then the Bible is not true and good but Patrick must assume that Jesus is not divine in order to conclude the Bible is not true and good.
We are at the same old Mexican standoff we have always been. Irreconcilable presuppositions…….and wasted time.
That is why I repeatedly say Bible study with apostates is a worthless endeavor.
peace
A text can contain a contradiction by clearly asserting incompatible claims.
No, it means that commentary has been added.
No, they are clear contradictions in the text. The passages that supposedly describe the same events are in conflict with each other.
It reads as an ordered description:
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
It would make no sense to say “and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle” etc. if those things didn’t exist yet.
Note also the use of “let them”, making it clear that man and woman are being created together.
That is a red herring. The second passage clearly specifies a completely different order:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them…. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. Genesis 2:18-22
Man, beasts, woman.
Each verse is clearly written. They also clearly contradict each other.
So let’s hear about Saul, Judas, and hares. There are plenty more contradictions after those.
No, I simply need to point to passages in the bible that sanction slavery. I have done so, repeatedly. You have avoided addressing them, repeatedly.
He could show other examples of contradictions of the golden rule in the Bible, he could show your conclusion does not follow, that you have a logical fallacy. There are many way to attack your argument.
Certainly Jewish scholars conclude the Bible is true and good without the divinity of Jesus. Certainly Christians have held beliefs that contradict your position and believe the Bible is true and good.
Metaphors can reveal the truth but metaphors are not literally true.
It is the journey ,fifth. But personally I would find a discussion of the best Western ever more interesting than the Bible.
For someone who believes that God can reveal things so you are certain, now you seems to be saying He can only do it if you already believe. It seems to me the apostates need revelation more than believers. Then I tend to believe all religions are both true and false.
1) Everyone already believes that God exists.
2) Knowledge does not require certainty
3) There is a difference between what God can do and what he does do
I agree, It’s not me who is insisting on wooden “literalness” in the Bible it’s the other guys.
In fact when it comes to metaphors the literal truth is not the woodenly literal reading of the text.
I completely understand.
I feel the same way about Bible study with the unregenerate. Bible study for you must be like reading someone else’s personal mail.
On the other hand intense deep discussions with fellow believers about God’s word are the most fascinating and rewarding intellectual endeavor I could think of.
It all depends on your perspective.
I’d like to see someone like that defend the text from that perspective.
I’ve never seen any kind of convincing case for the bible made that begins by conceding the point at issue.
peace
1 ) The command to love your neighbor as yourself is not the Golden rule
2) There are no other contradictions of that command in the Bible according to Jesus. So any apparent contradiction must be the result of misinterpretation unless you are more qualified than Jesus to make that judgement
I agree that would do it. I’m looking forward to seeing if he can come up with something
Why don’t you give it a go.
It would be much more interesting than still more of the he-man God haters Bible club.
peace
Again these passages only sanction slavery if your interpretation skills surpass those of the very Logos of God.
Do your interpretation abilities surpass those of Jesus when it comes to the Bible?
Well do they Patrick?
peace
perhaps but then the text’s position on the claim in question would not be clear. It would be the opposite of clear
If I said
“Turn left but don’t turn left.”
You could say I contradicted myself but you couldn’t claim I “clearly” told you which way to turn.
peace
You do know that the Bible is a text and not an out of context collection of verses don’t you?
peace
If you are interested there are mountains of resources explaining each and every apparent contradiction you could ever possibly bring up. They are only a google search away. Better yet go visit with a Bible believing Christian friend.
If you don’t have any Christian friends go make some Christian friends.
Whether in the end you find those explanations convincing will depend on your presuppositions.
I for one have neither the time nor the desire to engage in biblical wack a mole with someone with a gargantuan axe to grind and a king kong sized bias against the things of God.
peace
This gets old
quote;
verb
past tense: annotated; past participle: annotated
add notes to (a text or diagram) giving explanation or comment.
“documentation should be annotated with explanatory notes”
synonyms: comment on, add notes/footnotes to, gloss,…………. interpret,……… mark up
“annotate the text in Chapters 4 and 5”
end quote:
from here
https://www.google.com/search?q=annotated+synonym&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
peace
Tom,
You’re mixing me up with Patrick in that comment. You really have a hard time reading and comprehending texts, don’t you?
In this thread, you’ve confused my comments with Patrick’s; you’ve cited Reuven Hammer’s commentary without understanding what he wrote, not realizing that it contradicted your own claim; you’ve incorrectly taken the editors of the volume to be the authors of the chapter you cited, even though the text puts Reuven Hammer’s name at the top of each page; and you’ve continued to deny your mistake regarding slavery in the Bible when the text of Leviticus 25:44-46 makes it obvious and undeniable.
Not even close, because you’re still sticking to your erroneous claim:
What’s truly bizarre is that you concede my point while still trying to pretend that your claim was right:
You’re contradicting yourself. To say that the verse intended ownership to be permanent is incompatible with claiming that ownership was never intended to per permanent.
Surely even you can see this. No?
fifth:
Fixed that for you.
Case in point.
KN, could you address this?
Mung:
KN:
keiths:
No, they sanction slavery by describing in some detail how to acquire and treat slaves. They make it very clear that it is acceptable.
Since there is no evidence for an historical Jesus, I’d have to say yes.
Even if someone remotely resembling your Jesus actually existed, that wouldn’t change the clear meaning of the words in your bible.
The evidence doesn’t seem to support so strong a claim, no.
But you said you were able to address them. Tell me, what did Judas do with his 30 pieces of silver?
I have several. None so ignorant as to claim the bible is inerrant, though.
You’re partially right. Only those with certain presuppositions are willfully blind to the clear contradictions.
I’ll take that as a concession then. You have failed to support your claim that the bible is inerrant.
Is that right? Do tell me more about how I already believe God exists.
Fifth is an atheist. He just doesn’t know it.
Agreed. I can only imagine the accumulation of cognitive dissonance will at some point cause a ruption in his reality-matrix.
FMM,
There are no contradictions in the bible and I’m a believer in your god? If you navigate much further from reality there may be no road to follow back!
FMM, one question. How does a man who is hanging by the neck fall headfirst to the ground?
There is no mixing you and Patrick up, Patrick is always the gentleman. It is unclear which of my posts you are referring to. Would you care to cite where you think that mixup is indeed occurring?
Yes – you are correct on the editor bit… so what?! I took the trouble of reading Hammer in detail – where you have not. I took the trouble of quoting Hammer and explaining how Hammer’s citations agree with my interpretation, you have not. I challenge you to quote any of my citations and explain how they are mistaken.
Ah… I now see the problem. It is in fact YOU who has the reading comprehension problem! Which part of this exchange do you not understand?
So far we are in agreement. So far no contradiction, yes?
Here is the problem – In your original OP you create a straw man argument.
I replied as follows
What part of this do you STILL not understand? ! Really – you brought up the issue of “reading comprehension”!
“Surely EVEN YOU can see” that therein lies no contradiction!
This does not constitute Apologia – this constitutes a correct understanding of what happened during the compilation of the Bible over time. This also constitutes a correct understanding of what Hammer wrote.
Patrick understands – I wonder when you will catch up. Really, there is no mistaking you two.
um lets see
The rope might break,
The tree might fall,
falling headfirst might be a metaphor for the spiritual process he underwent at death..
I can easily think of all kinds of explanations it only requires giving the bible the same benefit of the doubt you would give any other writing
A quick question for you
Do you think really think that the compilers of the NT and the scribes who copied it down were so stupid as to not catch a blatant contradiction that could have been discovered by third grader?
peace
Maybe Judas used a Bungee Cord.
This is becoming a colossal waste of time and effort…
quote:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
(Rom 1:18-20)
end quote:
peace
So there you go.
There is simply no way I can discuss the meaning of any text with someone who would put his own interpretations above the author of said text.
It would be like me unilaterally declaring that Patrick’s victory declaration is actually an acknowledgement of defeat
sort of like that 😉
peace
It’s been a waste of time since the beginning. It’s simply a way to keep the obsession of the God haters here from bleeding into other discussions that might actually be interesting.
peace
If the rope broke, it’s still feet first.
If the tree fell, it’s stil feet first.
If it’s a metaphor, what does bursting open when hitting the ground represent metaphorically?
And yet the odd thing is that presumably there is only one interpretation, the correct interpretation.
And you don’t know what it is.
I don’t hate god. I can’t hate what does not exist. If such a being did exist and acted as described in the bible I’d certainly hate it. I’d work to destroy it through time and space in it’s totality.
But rather I hate the mindset that portrays certain people as second class (women, slaves) and then defends the indefensible.
heh
1) who said I don’t know what it is?
2) how does you knowing which of the many possible explanations is the correct one effect your life in the slightest?
3) The important thing to remember is that this “contradiction” is anything but
peace
I would agree,
and that mindset is not found in me or Christians or the Bible
peace
No one claims Moby Dick is the inerrant Word of God