Slavery. Religious or secular phenomena.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think it has always been outside the central remit of religion and has always been a secular,temporal socio economic phenomena and still is.

[Brownie]

I copied and edited this post from the 'Deity' thread on Christian discussion.

There is a wealth of information on the internet regarding translation and definition of the word, "Slave", as used in the Bible, giving background and context, if anyone cares to have a look.  I was going to post extracts and links but there are so many of them I leave it up to fellow posters to decide if they are sufficiently interested.

Regarding slavery here and now:
There is slavery here in the UK, even though it is illegal.  Young people 'shipped' here with the promise of work and made to work as prostitutes, badly treated if they object, closely guarded.  Children brought to the UK from other countries to be servants to relatively well off people, again not well looked after, not allowed to go to school or go out and often cruelly punished for the slightest thing.  These practices, and others, are outlawed but they happen.

[Walter]

fuck me now I AM lost

[Nearly Sane]

I copied and edited this post from the 'Deity' thread on Christian discussion.

There is a wealth of information on the internet regarding translation and definition of the word, "Slave", as used in the Bible, giving background and context, if anyone cares to have a look.  I was going to post extracts and links but there are so many of them I leave it up to fellow posters to decide if they are sufficiently interested.

Regarding slavery here and now:
There is slavery here in the UK, even though it is illegal.  Young people 'shipped' here with the promise of work and made to work as prostitutes, badly treated if they object, closely guarded.  Children brought to the UK from other countries to be servants to relatively well off people, again not well looked after, not allowed to go to school or go out and often cruelly punished for the slightest thing.  These practices, and others, are outlawed but they happen.

I would be interested in the links, Brownie, particularly anything that covers the idea of there being a 'right' amount of beating a slave as covered in the OT.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I would be interested in the links, Brownie, particularly anything that covers the idea of there being a 'right' amount of beating a slave as covered in the OT.

OT? OK hold it right there.
Gentiles are only bound to noachite laws aren't they. I don't believe the beating of slaves is included in that. Secondly we know that gentile Christians were excused Jewish observance in the NT so that's a double whammy on the innuendo here.

[Nearly Sane]

OT? OK hold it right there.
Gentiles are only bound to noachite laws aren't they. I don't believe the beating of slaves is included in that. Secondly we know that gentile Christians were excused Jewish observance in the NT so that's a double whammy on the innuendo here.

I need to have my gutters cleaned, can you pop round with your cherry picker?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I need to have my gutters cleaned, can you pop round with your cherry picker?

More innuendo.
I have acknowledged that there was no Christian socio economic revolution in the first century which abolished slavery...but there was one in the Eighteenth century.

Secondly someone who is prepared to ignore noachite law and the NT dispensation from Jewish observance to focus on a passage on how to beat a slave frankly isn't qualified to lecture on cherry picking.

[Nearly Sane]

More innuendo.
I have acknowledged that there was no Christian socio economic revolution in the first century which abolished slavery...but there was one in the Eighteenth century.

Secondly someone who is prepared to ignore noachite law and the NT dispensation from Jewish observance to focus on a passage on how to beat a slave frankly isn't qualified to lecture on cherry picking.

Is innuendo your new word to misuse? Was the beating of slaves OK for your god and then not? If he was chatting to Abraham and Moses, was he unable to say 'look lads, don't beat slaves, don't even have slaves, in fact drop the whole coveting asses stuff and I will give you some new tablets?'

[floo]

St Paul urged slaves to honour their masters, so he can't have thought there was anything wrong with owning slaves, and therefore not frowned on by god.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Is innuendo your new word to misuse? Was the beating of slaves OK for yourgod and then not? If he was chatting to Abraham and Moses, was he unable to say 'look lads, don't beatvskaves, don't even have slaves, in fact drop the while covering asses stuff and I will give you some new tablets?'

Well he God did give a range of laws and some religions did major on commandment and book obedience. One of those religions figured that Gentiles were only subject to a handful of the rules.

One religion majored in the spirit of the law. That was Christianity Christianity has then the spirit of the law.

You've put your finger on the wrong religion through a singular contorted atheist conception of the story. The religion you need to be interrogating is Judaism. Unfortunately they, as far as this forum is concerned, seem to have voted with their feet.

Now that you have been disavowed of the notion of Christians being slave owners and beaters so commanded by God perhaps we can now focus on the fact that today slave owning and beating has secular provenance.

[Nearly Sane]

Well he God did give a range of laws and some religions did major on commandment and book obedience. One of those religions figured that Gentiles were only subject to a handful of the rules.

One religion majored in the spirit of the law. That was Christianity Christianity has then the spirit of the law.

You've put your finger on the wrong religion through a singular contorted atheist conception of the story. The religion you need to be interrogating is Judaism. Unfortunately they, as far as this forum is concerned, seem to have voted with their feet.

Now that you have been disavowed of the notion of Christians being slave owners and beaters so commanded by God perhaps we can now focus on the fact that today slave owning and beating has secular provenance.

Aw it's a tiny Marcionite, happy to claim JC as not a Jew, despite his not changing a tittle of the law, happy to throw out the 10 commandments, any prophesy claims in the NT because that would be cherry picking, happy to try a tu quoque.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

St Paul urged slaves to honour their masters, so he can't have thought there was anything wrong with owning slaves, and therefore not frowned on by god.

I would say God,s prime aim was the demonstration of the new life in Jesus Christ rather than to stage another violent and futile slave rebellion, yes.

[Nearly Sane]

I would say God,s prime aim was the demonstration of the new life in Jesus Christ rather than to stage another violent and futile slave rebellion, yes.

So your boy, Wilberforce was wrong? Or was Paul wrong?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Aw it's a tiny Marcionite, happy to claim JC as not a Jew, despite his not changing a tittle of the law, happy to throw out the 10 commandments, any prophesy claims in the NT because that would be cherry picking, happy to try a tu quoque.

Not really. Where is the injunction from Jesus that Thou shall have slaves.Ive never had them, because of Wilberforce and I don't want em......some people have em now because of secular factors.
Will it stop or will life become so secularly awful that our approach to slaves will become a whistle and a walk quickly by and be relieved that for now it has nothing to do with us.
Look at the amount of internships for goodness sake.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So your boy, Wilberforce was wrong? Or was Paul wrong?

No, Wilberforce was right and being a slave in a hyper capitalist society must have been world apart from having a master spiritually and apostolic ally exhorted to treat a slave like a brother.

Unfortunately Paul and the leadership would have been given the responsibly of choosing between a Christian revolution of demonstrating the new life or trying to change society by force. They chose the former authentically Christian choice.

[Nearly Sane]

Not really. Where is the injunction from Jesus that Thou shall have slaves.Ive never had them, because of Wilberforce and I don't want em......some people have em now because of secular factors.
Will it stop or will life become so secularly awful that our approach to slaves will become a whistle and a walk quickly by and be relieved that for now it has nothing to do with us.
Look at the amount of internships for goodness sake.

BTW the title of the thread is a false dichotomy, and should be phenomenon.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

BTW the title of the thread is a false dichotomy.

And ungrammatical too.

Surely though the whole misguided effort is just yer basic, common-or-garden post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy isn't it? We live in a secular society; there is evidence for some people living in slave conditions. Just put the words "secular" and "slavery" in the same sentence therefore and hope some are daft enough to see the former as causal of the latter.

Funnily enough he doesn't bother though with putting "secular" and "high literacy rates", or "secular" and "more than 50% of cancers are cured" together, or even for that matter "secular" and "I can post whatever bollocks I like on a public forum like this one".

Odd eh?   

[Brownie]

I would be interested in the links, Brownie, particularly anything that covers the idea of there being a 'right' amount of beating a slave as covered in the OT.

I'll try to oblige, NS.  I'll do "slave" first and then get on to the beating  , a bit at a time.

Easton's Bible Dictionary - Slave

Jeremiah 2:14 (A.V.), but not there found in the original. In Revelation 18:13 the word "slaves" is the rendering of a Greek word meaning "bodies." The Hebrew and Greek words for slave are usually rendered simply "servant," "bondman," or "bondservant." Slavery as it existed under the Mosaic law has no modern parallel. That law did not originate but only regulated the already existing custom of slavery ( Exodus 21:20 Exodus 21:21 Exodus 21:26 Exodus 21:27 ; Leviticus 25:44-46 ; Joshua 9:6-27 ). The gospel in its spirit and genius is hostile to slavery in every form, which under its influence is gradually disappearing from among men.

This one is long so I am just posting a link:-

http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/slave-slavery.html

Rational Wiki on slavery which looks interesting, I haven't read it all yet:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Bible#Beating_slaves
------------
Here is an extract from "The Blue Study Bible"
6. (Exo 21:26-27) The law of retribution as it regards masters and servants.

"If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.

a. If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye: The principle of eye for an eye has a different application for servants. The servant, if injured by the master, received something more precious than an eye - his freedom.

b. If he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free: "If this did not teach them humanity, it taught them caution, as one rash blow might have deprived them of all right to the future services of the slave; and this self-interest obliged them to be cautious and circumspect." (Clarke)
---------
From Religious Tolerance site:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_bibl2.htm

I was particularly interested in people who sold themselves or their families into slavery, because of debt and destitution.  A comparison could be made to those people who used to take themselves, and children, to the Workhouse because they had no option.  They worked there for little or nothing except a roof over their heads and food.
Another thought was the very poor in third world countries who sometimes "sell" a child to a master, in the belief that the child will have work and training and, ultimately, a better life.  Yet they are sold a story and the child often ends up in another land, as a slave.  Horrific.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy isn't it? We live in a secular society; there is evidence for some people living in slave conditions.
 

Yes but the point is whatever the causes they aren't to do with religion.....unless you take the Dawkins line of mischieviously suggesting that religion is the root of all evil.

But fairs fair Hillside if you are suggesting that we live in a secular society where there just happens to be slavery going on but it has nothing to do with secularity can we also take it that the Early Christians happened to live in a society where there was
an unconnected slavery going on......or are you specially pleading?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Funnily enough he doesn't bother though with putting "secular" and "high literacy rates", or "secular" and "more than 50% of cancers are cured" together, or even for that matter "secular" and "I can post whatever bollocks I like on a public forum like this one".

Yeh.......... look at the NHS though and social security system in yer increasing secular society.

[Maeght]

Yes but the point is whatever the causes they aren't to do with religion.....unless you take the Dawkins line of mischieviously suggesting that religion is the root of all evil.

If you're referring to the title of the TV show he featured in, as has been sadi many times that wasn't his preferred title, iit was that of the production company, and he made them add a ? to the end.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you're referring to the title of the TV show he featured in, as has been sadi many times that wasn't his preferred title, iit was that of the production company, and he made them add a ? to the end.

Why didn't he get them to remove the Religion Root of all evil bit?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Yes but the point is whatever the causes they aren't to do with religion.....unless you take the Dawkins line of mischieviously suggesting that religion is the root of all evil.

But fairs fair Hillside if you are suggesting that we live in a secular society where there just happens to be slavery going on but it has nothing to do with secularity can we also take it that the Early Christians happened to live in a society where there was
an unconnected slavery going on......or are you specially pleading?

In which Vlad once again demonstrates his misunderstanding of the term "special pleading" by conflating theocracies that condoned slavery with secular societies that criminalise it.   

[Maeght]

Why didn't he get them to remove the Religion Root of all evil bit?

Because the producers insisted on it staying and it was their program. They wanted to create controversy and get attention - which worked.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In which Vlad once again demonstrates his misunderstanding of the term "special pleading" by conflating theocracies that condoned slavery with secular societies that criminalise it.

I understand it was Wilberforce a Christian who got Slavery criminalised not a secular state of the type which could allow and encourage an internship culture or expect work from people with no return. Therefore legislation made in more religious times is decaying because of lack of commitment in enforcement by the secular state.

By the way Hillside  conflates the pastoral leadership of a minor sect obviously considering the position of slavery and whether it fits in with it's core teachings with a theocracy in his usual way.