Comment

Yes and the bible reflects that.

That’s my point.

Enough for what? Enough for it to take 1500 years for Christians to realize that beating people to death for insolence is wrong

No. I’m only referring to enslavement here.

Ephesians 6:9

Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him.

Colossians 4:1 (NRSVUE)

Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, for you know that you also have a Master in heaven.

Exodus 20:13

You shall not murder.

Sure, but didn’t the advocates of perpetuating slavery use the bible to justify themselves, because the bible doesn’t take a clear position against slavery?

You can misuse anything in the Bible to advocate for anything. I’ve seen people try and use to to advocate in favour of homosexuality, to execute homosexuals, to advocate transphobia, to advocate abortion, a devil’s advocate argument was used regarding murdering infants as well, against the trinity, universalism, etc.

All of which fall apart if it’s read in it’s proper context and Catholic* interpretation.

I mention it because it is excluded from the protestant canon.

The books referred to by Protestants as the “Apocrypha” are still valuable documents, just not viewed as infallible.

Although, reading Sirach… You can go either way with it.

Sirach 33:25-33

Fodder and a stick and burdens for a donkey; bread and discipline and work for a slave. Set your slaves to work, and you will find rest; leave their hands idle, and they will seek liberty. Yoke and strap will bow the neck, and for wicked slaves there are racks and tortures. Put them to work in order that they may not be idle, for idleness teaches much evil. Set them to work as is fitting for them, and if they do not obey make their fetters heavy. Do not be overbearing toward anyone, and do nothing without deliberation. If you have but one slave, treat him like yourself, because you have bought him with blood. If you have but one slave, treat him like a brother, for you will need him as you need your life. If you ill-treat him and he leaves you and runs away, which way will you go to seek him?

You seem to be in denial about how okay with slavery Christianity was.

It was society, the way the Bible was written was just addressing slavery as an established fact. The abolitionists were driven by their Christian faith.

Do you prefer the work of impartial scholars to that from people that think it’s important to protect the reputation of Christianity?

“Impartial scholars” there is no such thing.

*Please note, I am not using the word “Catholic” to refer to the Roman Catholic Church, but to refer to the universal and historically grounded Christian church and denominations as opposed to spin-offs. So think more Anglican, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Methodist and Presbyterianism as opposed to non-denominationals and most Baptists

source

Sort:hotnew top

m0darn@lemmy.ca ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

Enough for what? Enough for it to take 1500 years for Christians to realize that beating people to death for insolence is wrong

No. I’m only referring to enslavement here.

Yeah I thought it was obvious I was referring to a subset of the behaviours of enslavers.

Exodus 20:13

You shall not murder.

The bible is pretty clear that it isn’t murder to kill your own slave

You can misuse anything in the Bible to advocate for anything.

Doesn’t that strike you as an argument against the utility of the bible as a moral guide? Don’t you think it would be better if it was harder to use the bible to defend slave ownership? Like if it took a clearer stance against slavery. If instead of saying “treat your slaves justly and fairly” if it said “the truly righteous free their slaves and trust in the lord to provide, those that hold slaves will not inherit the kingdom of heaven” wouldn’t that have hastened the end of slavery within Christendom?

“Impartial scholars” there is no such thing.

Sure, but there are ways that scholars can try to diminish their bias, and it isn’t through legally binding faith commitments.

source
- Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  
  The bible is pretty clear that it isn’t murder to kill your own slave
  
  No, it’s not. It doesn’t say that. It clearly states man is made in God’s image, being a slave doesn’t lessen or change that.
  
  Doesn’t that strike you as an argument against the utility of the bible as a moral guide?
  
  No, because any moral guide can be misused if you randomly take verses out of context.
  
  Sure, but there are ways that scholars can try to diminish their bias, and it isn’t through legally binding faith commitments.
  
  Diminish, possibly, but if you had a scholar say “Christianity help ended slavery and here’s why”, wouldn’t you just accuse them of trying to defend the reputation of Christianity?
  
  source
  - m0darn@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    When the bible said it’s okay to beat your slaves so severely that they die, as long as you they survive a few days before they die, it was wrong for me to characterise that as murder, I was hasty. But the bible clearly says that slavery is legitimate when the enslaved weren’t treated the same as the free by the law. The fact that they’re both made in God’s image was clearly not relevant.
    
    No, because any moral guide can be misused if you randomly take verses out of context.
    
    I don’t think I’m taking these verses out of context, the context was that slavery was common and Christianity didn’t really have a problem with that, you’re the one applying a modern morality and reading into the text things that the author didn’t mean. Your position is “it wouldn’t matter if the bible was more clearly opposed to slavery” and I think that’s delusional.
    
    if you had a scholar say “Christianity help ended slavery and here’s why”, wouldn’t you just accuse them of trying to defend the reputation of Christianity?
    
    No I wouldn’t, I would consider their argument. I’m not dogmatically committed to believing Christianity is bad. Are you dogmatically committed to believing Christianity is good?
    
    Christianity did help end slavery, but it also defended it. Christianity saw slavery for 1500 years and said “meh”, and then for almost 400 years Christians argued with each other about whether it was okay or not, and now you say Christianity was against slavery the whole time, and you’re wrong.
    
    source
    Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    When the bible said it’s okay to beat your slaves so severely that they die, as long as you they survive a few days before they die, it was wrong for me to characterise that as murder, I was hasty. But the bible clearly says that slavery is legitimate when the enslaved weren’t treated the same as the free by the law. The fact that they’re both made in God’s image was clearly not relevant.
    
    The Bible isn’t a legal document, this was regarding a law for an ancient nation that doesn’t exist anymore that was built on compromises with people who have hard hearts.
    
    No I wouldn’t, I would consider their argument. I’m not dogmatically committed to believing Christianity is bad. Are you dogmatically committed to believing Christianity is good?
    
    Depends on what our definition of Christianity is - I wouldn’t define enslaving people as a Christian practice.
    
    Christianity saw slavery for 1500 years and said “meh”
    
    You have a misconception here that Christianity was popular for the first 1500 years. For the first few centuries of its existence, Christians were persecuted quite severely. Then for the next millenia, it was a religion for rulers generally, and the general populace often held on to pagan beliefs.
    
    In the middle ages, slavery did naturally fizzle out in western Europe, the debate was generally started again whenever the whole translatlantic slave trade started in the 1500s. In 1772, a British court ruled that it was impossible for a man to be property of another man Lord Mansfield (note: dated language):
    
    The state of slavery is of such a nature that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political, but only by positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasions, and time itself from whence it was created, is erased from memory. It is so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from the decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged.
    
    so at least by this point it was already seen as not legal in mainland UK. Eventually the UK banned it in the whole empire in 1833.
    
    Revelation 18:10-17
    
    They will stand far off, in fear of her torment, and say, “Alas! Alas! You great city, you mighty city, Babylon! For in a single hour your judgment has come.” And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for her, since no one buys their cargo anymore, cargo of gold, silver, jewels, pearls, fine linen, purple cloth, silk, scarlet cloth, all kinds of scented wood, all kinds of articles of ivory, all kinds of articles of costly wood, bronze, iron and marble, cinnamon, spice, incense, myrrh, frankincense, wine, oil, fine flour, wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and slaves, that is, human souls. “The fruit for which your soul longed has gone from you, and all your delicacies and your splendors are lost to you, never to be found again!” The merchants of these wares, who gained wealth from her, will stand far off, in fear of her torment, weeping and mourning aloud, “Alas, alas, for the great city that was clothed in fine linen, in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold, with jewels, and with pearls! For in a single hour all this wealth has been laid waste.” And all shipmasters and seafaring men, sailors and all whose trade is on the sea, stood far off
    
    The abolitionist movement was primarily driven by Christians. A notable figure was William Wilberforce who become one after converting to Evangelical Christianity. The hymn “Amazing Grace” was written by a former slave-trader turned abolitionist, who upon conversion to Christianity, penned the lyrics “… That saved a wretch like me; I once was lost, but now I’m found; was blind, but now I see!” out of repentance. William Wilberforce eventually proposed the ban on the transatlantic slave trade which was equated to piracy in 1807.
    
    In the USA, slavery was essentially ended by the Great Awakening which was a time marked by mass conversion to Christianity among the peasantry.
    
    Christianity was definitely a major, if not an essential factor, towards ending the slave trade.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments