Did God Condone the Slave Trade?

by Kenneson 14 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Kenneson

  That is the title of one of the current topics at watchtower.org. While the slave trade may not have been condoned by God, article doesn't really answer the question as to why God did not condemn slavery outright. It seems to me that the Bible takes a neutral stand towards slavery, accepting it as a social fact. The New Testament, in particular tells slaves to be obedient to their masters but that masters should be kind to their slaves (Eph. 6:5-9; Col. 3:22-4:1; 1 Tim. 6:1; 1 Pet. 2:18)

  There is no attack on the institution of slavery directly. At best, the principle of inequality is addressed. (1 Cor. 7:21-23) There is no distinction between slave and free in Jesus (1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). If one adheres to Christian love and unity, then how can one regard another man as property?

  In this country, the only effective destroyer of slavery was not the Bible or the churches, but the Civil War and man's laws. The churches got on the bandwagon after the fact, with perhaps one exception, the Quakers.

  We also must not forget that slavery still exists in some countries. And it probably won't be the churches or the Bible that will bring its demise there, either.
• 

  Beck_Melbourne

  Hi Kenneson

  Really interesting thread. God tolerated slavery in bible times....so do you think slavery will be re-introduced in the new order since it is a socially accepted practice? I would be interested to see how the WT talks their way through this one.

  If it was a social practice in bible times, why would God change his views in modern times? If God has a tendancy to change his views as time moves on...then why can't brothers wear beards?

  Beck

  edited to correct grammar

  Edited by - Beck_Melbourne on 3 July 2002 20:30:36

  Edited by - Beck_Melbourne on 3 July 2002 20:31:8
• 

  Francois

  Smile Becky Baby smile. You've got a lot to smile about. Lemme see those pearly whites.

  Francois
• 

  Beck_Melbourne

  I'll be smiling when I get that phone call from the airport! Even your plaid socks won't shut me up!
• 

  Incense_and_Peppermints

  When you really think about it, a person working in a small cubicle 8 hrs a day for little wages for a billion dolar company is IMO a form of slavery.

  that person is free to just walk away if he wants to. so it's not slavery. i think calling that a form of slavery diminishes what real slavery is somehow...it's like a really fat person saying "i'm starving". i mean, children in famine-ravaged countries are starving... (i know, i know, it's all semantics. don't get upset.)
• 

  dungbeetle

  The issues rests on translation. As everybody knows, the Bible was not originally written in English. So, it falls on the translators to try and find an English equivalent for a Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic word. Looking around, many translators decades ago chose to use the word 'slave' when 'employee' or 'worker' would be better for us today.

  Regarding God's/Biblical attitude toward slavery, it seems to me that God recognized that it should be up to a person to decide his own fate..."to die on his feet rather than serve on his knees" is not something that God condemned, otherwise the Hebrews would have been out of existance before Jesus was born. The bible recognizes that some people WOULD rather live in 'slavery' than die. For those that make that choice, the Bible holds no condemnation.

  By the time that what we know as the biblical canon was complete, it should be obvious to any student of history that all nations and systems of government have their appointed time. None of them last forever, so it makes no difference whether slavery was practiced or not, ALL of those governmental systems are either gone or changed so much they are not the same governmental system. Therefore, you can see why inidividuals were NOT encouraged to try and change their governments; this change would occur as the natural selective process of human development--give or take a few centuries.
• 

  Beck_Melbourne

  I agree Dung and very well put btw. I think there are a lot of issues that rest on translation.

  I don't know if I am going off on a tangent all on my own here...but earlier cultures would capture and enslave those of other nations by force. Would this not indicate that the words 'slave' and 'employee/worker' both existed and were options for translators at that time? I am just wondering why they would substitute that word as it changes the whole meaning....which of course is why we have so many diverse interpretations of the bible today. I have always been curious about God's tolerance towards slavery...it never could quite fit in with my ideals. But if it all comes down to translation...then I might just go back to the troof LOL - just kidding!

  Beck
• 

  dungbeetle

  A favorite example of mine was the treatment Jesus meted out to the prostitues of his day. He did not condemn them; rather, he ate with them and spent time with them.

  Why?

  Prostitution was a form of slavery, for those women (and men) who had no other way to make a living. Jesus recognized that it was the fault of the governmental system of that day. There no doubt would have been women who would rather have died than be prostitutes---Jesus did not condemn them. And of course there were those who would rather have been prostitutes than die.

  Jesus did not condemn them either.

  Jesus was not the first to take this stance. Please recall back to the days of Solomon, and the two prostitutes fighting over the one living child. Did Solomon condemn either one for their 'choice' of occupations? No, rather, his statement of judicial decision in favor of the prostitute who would rather lose her child than see it killed, can be interpreted as a rebuke against the other prostittue---as her attitude toward a living child WAS something over which she could exercise a choice.
• 

  Beck_Melbourne

  That's interesting stuff...I didn't know that the two women with the babies in Solomon's time were prostitutes....I guess I wasn't paying attention at the meetings LOL.

  I kinda got lost in your comments somewhere along the track...I'm not that bright and it takes a while for things to sink in...which is why I don't connect the reasoning between tolerance to prostitution and tolerance to slavery.

  Maybe I should email you perhaps?

  Beck
• 

  dungbeetle

  I think you would like a book called "the age of reason" by Thomas Paine. I adore the book, it is online and was written almost 200 years ago.

  I agree with the author's premise that Christianity (including the JW's) have done a terrible job of presenting God and the Bible to us. When I started rereading the bible (once per year) I not only had to cast off the JW version but also Chrisitanity version in general.

  I'm still learning. And my email is always open.