• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Slavery in the bible

leov

Well-Known Member
That source seems to confirm that there were some, but downplayed the huge numbers that some sources gave. Plus it appears that many of them were indentured servants. Meaning that once they worked their term of contract they would be free.
First time I learned that when was a kid and read Captain Blood. Some sources say some 300000 people were transported from England to New World. Which is nothing comparing with these guys: Slavery in the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia
 

leov

Well-Known Member
That source seems to confirm that there were some, but downplayed the huge numbers that some sources gave. Plus it appears that many of them were indentured servants. Meaning that once they worked their term of contract they would be free.
Yes, some where on contract some with death penalty changed to transportation. Captain Blood (novel) - Wikipedia Something I read when was 10 or so,
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
If you believe in Noah's flood, I suppose its not such a leap to believe Ham was black.


When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, he said,
“Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers.”
He also said,
“Praise be to the Lord, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
May God extend Japheth’s territory;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be the slave of Japheth.”


Ham means "hot" or "sunburnt." Cursed by Noah, his sons were Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan.

One of Ham's grandsons was Nimrod, a mighty hunter, king over Babel. Nimrod also built the ancient city of Nineveh, which later played a part in the story of Jonah. (Of course Nimrod was also a myth)

What Happened to the Sons of Noah After the Flood?
Indeed. But Ham being the father of the black races has never been a doctrine of the church, so far as I know (with the notorious exception of the Dutch Reformed Church, which used this to justify apartheid in S Africa).
 
Slavery in America began with white Christians shipped from Britain.

No it didn't.

It's basically some pseudo-history that was invented to fuel Irish nationalism and has been further popularised by white supremacists.

Irish slaves myth - Wikipedia

Indentured servitude was usually voluntary, and penal transportation was a combination of imprisonment and exile (and time limited).

Conflating chattel slavery with these is nonsense.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
Hey Dan.
I decided to give you the answers to your Atheist accusation that the God of the Bible, YHWH...was a slave monger. I attacked a small writing on the topic and hope you will take the time to read through it, and lets see if you can prove me wrong!
I am of opinion that Atheists never read the Bible for themself, and go to sites such as annodated Bible hosted by Atheists to prove errors in the Bible.
Sorry pal, you are found to be at a loss in this regard.
Slavery does not come from the Bible at all, and you did not know it!
Go to the new thread Slavery in the Bible (and Quran) and let me know what your conclusion on the origin of slavery is.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
It's there. We all know its there. I'd like to get into it, listing the arguments I've heard and my refutations of each. I'd welcome people to point out flaws in ny understanding or refutations, and equally as interested to hear new arguments about it.

1: It isn't slavery, it's indetured servitude.

For your hebrew slaves, sure. That rule didnt apply to the slaves taken from other nations, who were bought and sold as property.

2: It's an old testament thing, the new testament releases christians from the old ways

Paul said "slaves, obey your masters, even the cruel ones." It's very much a new testament thing, too.

3: every 50 years they had to let them go

So? 50 minutes of slavery is immoral.

4: In the context of the time there was nothing wrong with it

There're three ways to come at this. The first is we're not in their time, so it's still wrong when preached in our time as the "truth". However, that may be a strawman argument. Another attack could be that if god does offer objective morality, it stands to reason that if it is immoral now, it was immoral then but they got it wrong. My preferred argument is that if you can write off that part of the bible due to historical context, then you can do the same with the notion if god (e.g. it was the only way they could explain the world they lived in and control their people)

5: god is the law on morality, so slavery is moral even if we choose not to accept it.

In that case, so is executing your wife for wearing two types of fabric. If you want to claim that slavery is moral because god said so, you'd be forced to accept every single thing in the bible as your only moral guideline. If you want to try and get me to accept that, you have to first prove that any god exists, then prove that it is the christian god.

Again, more than happy to hear where my reasoning is flawed, please explain though so I can correct it.

Also, I'm not interested in being preached at, so if you're thinking of doing that please don't (especially if you're gonna say that point 5 is correct. you can guarantee I'll burst a vessel trying to ignore those comments)
Looking at your question from a Gods point of view, slavery is a wrong act and leads to suffering for many many human beings. So even it is written about it in different religions, that does not mean it is morally right to keep other human beings as slaves.
So what do we have left then? We can take away the religious aspect of it because religions in itself have nothing to do with slaves. It is a human problem, where human beings want to rule over other human beings, to feel they are in power. So when the scriptures were written down (bible about 600 years after Christ, as far as I know) then the culture of slaves was already there, so the writers did add it to the teachings (in my view they should not do that)
So actually it is more a cultural and human being problem then it is true teaching from a God.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
Indeed. But Ham being the father of the black races has never been a doctrine of the church, so far as I know (with the notorious exception of the Dutch Reformed Church, which used this to justify apartheid in S Africa).
Nope!
The Dutch Reformed Church never used that claim to further Apartheid.
That was done by the ultra far right group which did not even ammount to 20 000 members.
On the contrary, the Protestant Churches in South Africa dismantled Apartheid on the grounds of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Apartheid was never a political idiology to subdue Black people into slavery, It was a principle the White Afrikaners tried in South Africa to allow "Seperate development for all 11 Black nations where they couls rule themself with their own governments.
However, they Black people did not want to rule themself, but they wanted to take over the only first world country in Africa to decimate the White Afrikaner nation who bought and died for their country.
Let me prove to you why the Afrikaners were correct!
They, the Afrikaners had one of the strongest economies in Africa, the best Universities, Municipalities, water supply, electricity supply, infrastructures, hospitals, doctors, and,and,and...
Black people had employment, medical, safe policing, homes and,and,and.
After the ANC Communist Socialist took over, our land went into the drain.
Our schools, univercities, electrical compoany, municipalities went totally bancrupt, everything gets burned down, unemployment is more than 36%, Whites are murdered daily by torture, burning them with electric irons, beating them with axes, disemboweling them, women raped, then killed, children skinned in front of their parents,and no one says anything.

There is not a single government official who can claim he is not corrupt. The broadcasting company, Airways, mining industry, are used as a source for cash to pay socialist grants to everyone who dont want to work, but demands handouts.
Our petrol are sold at 60% higher than the actual feul price, to keep the government going.

Guys, South Africa is an example of Communists and socialists taking over a country, and destroying it on the principles of Atheist marxism.
Please dont talk about South Africa, if you dont know what is actually going on.
The Communists destroyed Mocambique, Zimbabwe, Angola, and now South Africa with illigal immigration, open borders, government grants, and all those rotten socialist practices.
Look at how Venezuela went the same path, and it is now practiced on the USA!
be carefull of what you laugh at, Communism and socialism is at your own door soon.
 

SA Huguenot

Well-Known Member
Looking at your question from a Gods point of view, slavery is a wrong act and leads to suffering for many many human beings. So even it is written about it in different religions, that does not mean it is morally right to keep other human beings as slaves.
So what do we have left then? We can take away the religious aspect of it because religions in itself have nothing to do with slaves. It is a human problem, where human beings want to rule over other human beings, to feel they are in power. So when the scriptures were written down (bible about 600 years after Christ, as far as I know) then the culture of slaves was already there, so the writers did add it to the teachings (in my view they should not do that)
So actually it is more a cultural and human being problem then it is true teaching from a God.
The Bible was not written down 600 years after Jesus.
The Quran was written 600 years after Christ.
The oldest "complete Bible dates from 360 AD.
the oldest New Testament manuscript fragments date from 80 AD.
The oldest references to the New Testament writings dates from 120 AD.
Just because we dont have the original manuscripts, does not mean that the NT was not in existance at the time of Paul and the Apostles.
Evidence shows that the New Testament was in full use in 69AD already.
Anyhow, the Bible condemns slavery, and what you read in the word "Slave" is something totally different.
Go check out my thread.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
The Bible was not written down 600 years after Jesus.
The Quran was written 600 years after Christ.
The oldest "complete Bible dates from 360 AD.
the oldest New Testament manuscript fragments date from 80 AD.
The oldest references to the New Testament writings dates from 120 AD.
Just because we dont have the original manuscripts, does not mean that the NT was not in existance at the time of Paul and the Apostles.
Evidence shows that the New Testament was in full use in 69AD already.
Anyhow, the Bible condemns slavery, and what you read in the word "Slave" is something totally different.
Go check out my thread.
Then i was mistaken in my understanding. Thank you for the clerification
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Indeed. But Ham being the father of the black races has never been a doctrine of the church, so far as I know (with the notorious exception of the Dutch Reformed Church, which used this to justify apartheid in S Africa).

Really? My ancestors were Dutch Reformed.. I have heard of the Curse of Ham all my life as a justification of slavery and thought it was BS.

They claimed Africans were descended from Ham.. The Hamites. Its also a language group and I think Abraham considered them "Canaanites".


1 Chronicles 4:40 And they found fat pasture and good, and the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceable; for they that dwelt there aforetime were of Ham.

Hamites | Encyclopedia.com
https://www.encyclopedia.com/.../anthropology-and-archaeology/people/hamites
Hamites
, African people of caucasoid descent who occupy the Horn of Africa (chiefly Somalia and Ethiopia), the western Sahara, and parts of Algeria and Tunisia. They are believed to be the original settlers of N Africa.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The Bible was not written down 600 years after Jesus.
The Quran was written 600 years after Christ.
The oldest "complete Bible dates from 360 AD.
the oldest New Testament manuscript fragments date from 80 AD.
The oldest references to the New Testament writings dates from 120 AD.
Just because we dont have the original manuscripts, does not mean that the NT was not in existance at the time of Paul and the Apostles.
Evidence shows that the New Testament was in full use in 69AD already.
Anyhow, the Bible condemns slavery, and what you read in the word "Slave" is something totally different.
Go check out my thread.

There was NO full New Testament in 69 AD.
 
Top