There are a great many things that followers of Biblical Literalism take as the (forgive) Gospel truth as spelled out on the pages. But while they will take great pains to justify eschewing scientific facts in matters of evolution or pick and choose parts of the Bible to condemn homosexuals or be against abortion, there doesn’t seem to be a movement of any consequence demanding that we return to the good old days of enslavement even though slavery was far more pervasive and less ambiguous in the Bible than any of those other things.
It seems to me that if someone is a Biblical literalist, it’s damn near impossible to take the view that slavery is bad since the Bible goes into some detail as to how one should treat their slave but never once says that slavery itself is immoral.
So where are all the pro-slavery fundamentalists?
And since there ain’t many, if any, how do the rest of them manage to rationalize the fact that the Bible got slavery wrong?
The Bible tells us how to treat slaves, it does not require us to own slaves. The Lord recognized that slavery was an important part of the economy at the time the Bible was written, but I am sure He is very happy that we no longer feel the need to keep slaves. Besides, anyone who has studied their Bible History knows that slaves back then were more like what we called indentured servents or prisoners of war being used as labor, and NOT very similar at all to the chattel slavery as practiced against our African brethren in the American South.
I’m not a Biblical literalist, but I don’t think the Bible requires slavery. Just like the verses about giving Caesar’s coins back to Caesar as taxes doesn’t mean we should reinstate the Roman Empire, verses about how to treat slaves doesn’t mean we should reinstate slavery.
No, what he is saying is entirely accurate, if we are talking about Torah-authorized slavery. Now, the slavery practiced in the Roman Empire was another thing, closer but not identical to the chattel slavery practiced by Euro-Anglo-American civilization.
Who, me? When have I ever posted in anything but utmost sincerity?
expanding: It bears remembering that a Literalist will, literally, strain at gnats and swallow camels depending on what they personally believe about a question of Bible interpretation. You have seen the nit-picking hoops they jump through to justify verses that they disagree with, while accepting without a second thought verses that match their prejudices.
I can’t concur that “slaves back then” were all under Torah authorization, and the sorry lot of slaves outside the narrow range we recognize as “indentured servitude” is well documented throughout history.
I’m sorry, but this reasoning contravenes the Christian spirit, in my opinion. I don’t think mundane alibis can justify breaking sacred principles. Why not allow cannibalism or incest then? Humbly yours.
Okay. What verses condone “cannibalism or incest”? Because I don’t see any verses that tell you how to handle these situations, therefore we must accept that God did not believe they were appropriate for His people at any time in their history. Slavery, however, was practiced and had given expectations as to how the slaves could be treated.
I also do not expect Leviticus to reflect “the Christian spirit,” as it was written well before the time of Christ. (I have severe reservations about many things Paul said as well, but that is a different issue.)
Are there arguments yours or are you answering the question? If it’s the latter, there’s no need to be too critical. If it’s the former, I have some follow-up but that would involve defending these notions rather than just presenting them.
I don’t know if I qualify as a “biblical literalist,” since I do believe in evolution and such. But I think the biblical case for slavery is considerably stronger than the biblical case for a 144-hour creation, and therefore must conclude, as uncomfortable as it may be, that while Scripture very much condemns the abuse of slaves, it permits the institution itself.
This doesn’t mean I want to make it legal again. It does mean, however, that if a fellow Christian wants to reinstitute slavery so that he can become a loving and benevolent master, I can call his plan extremely imprudent, but I cannot call it heresy.
Are school children allowed to leave their desk? Children are meant to run and play. What happens in a school child when a child trieds to do this??? Are they not chained to their desk as slaves are chained?
Also look at those who are slaves to their jobs, also those who are slaves to drugs and alcohol.
If you think the issue as to how we should treat slaves is not a modern day issue God bless your solitary existence on the moon.
Now the issue of how to treat slaves, the bible as I ready it, gives 2 options, one that you can abuse them within defined limits, or you can love them unconditionally - your choice and your destiny.
