Are Christians permitted to own slaves?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its not Robbies stance, it is the Biblical stance.

Is your own stance somehow at odds with the "Biblical stance"?

Do you endorse the "Biblical stance"?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sure FMF, i think about owning and buying slaves all the time 🙄

No one has suggested that you do.

But justifying the practice of slavery, for whatever reason a person might happen to subscribe to, is in my view a serious matter.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please see the citation above, all these things that you mention are perfectly valid and applicable, but context is everything. A Christians treatment of a captive is governed by all of these principles, in fact, i would be surprised to find that any Christian should keep someone in bondage against their will, but the issue is whether it is permitted ...[text shortened]... but to simply ascertain what the Biblical stance is, so I beg to be excused, if you don't mind.

Sure. Have a good day or don't get enslaved. 😉

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[quote]As is the case with every Bible-related question, the issue of slavery must be considered in context. [b]A careful examination of the Scriptures reveals that God deplores the mistreatment of humans.

Such an examination also reveals that the kind of slavery practiced by God’s people in the Bible is not the cruel and abusive slavery that is envis n't the only use of deceit by the Watchtower Society in the text you provided in your post.

the punishment for the owner was death, which slave owner would be willing to risk beating their slave so that they died and incurred death themselves, that is correct, nada, please contrast that with any other form of slavery, if you please , then you may have a case instead of uttering such silly assertions.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the punishment for the owner was death, which slave owner would be willing to risk beating their slave so that they died and incurred death themselves, that is correct, nada, please contrast that with any other form of slavery, if you please , then you may have a case instead of uttering such silly assertions.

Are twenty first century Christian slave owners [where permitted by local secular laws to own slaves] permitted by God to beat their slaves?

Originally posted by FMF
Are twenty first century Christian slave owners [where permitted by local secular laws to own slaves] permitted by God to beat their slaves?

I posted an article which demonstrated that no one should be inhumanely treated by a Christian, but again, the question is, not what opinions we have of whether someone should be beaten, but whether it is permitted. The Bible does not rule out physical punishment although education is the preferred method for correction. Once again your post fails to distinguish between oppressive slavery and the kind practised by servants of God. One regularly needs to keep winding you in, lest you forget or heaven forbid, make a misrepresentation, a banning offence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the punishment for the owner was death, which slave owner would be willing to risk beating their slave so that they died and incurred death themselves, that is correct, nada, please contrast that with any other form of slavery, if you please , then you may have a case instead of uttering such silly assertions.

There's nothing "silly" about the following.

Exodus 21
20“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21“If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

Clearly the Bible is permitting slave to be severely beaten - even to the point of death (so long as the slave doesn't die within "a day or two" ) .

For one, if the slave didn't die within "a day or two" the Bible clearly states that "no vengeance would be taken". The Bible clearly condones any other type of beating and such beatings could be quite "cruel and abusive".

From what I gather, even in the Antbellum South slaveowners rarely beat their slaves to death. Slaves were considered a valuable commodity. However the beatings were "cruel and abusive" nonetheless. The Bible clearly condones beatings of that type.

So, once again, "What does it say about the Watchtower Society that they would tell such a bald faced lie [as shown in my previous post]?"

Originally posted by FMF
The OP question is: "Is [robbie's] opinion about the legitimacy of slavery even until this day a commonly held belief among Christians?"

NO.

Can we freaking move on now? Please?




Good grief, if this is all you atheists have to try and turn people against God, then you have a long, uphill fight ahead of you. I don't know how much more clearly I can say it: For (hopefully) the last time, mosaic laws do not apply to Christians.

Nor anyone in this day and age, but this is in my humble opinion only.

Originally posted by Suzianne
NO.

Can we freaking move on now? Please?




Good grief, if this is all you atheists have to try and turn people against God, then you have a long, uphill fight ahead of you. I don't know how much more clearly I can say it: For (hopefully) the last time, mosaic laws do not apply to Christians.

Nor anyone in this day and age, but this is in my humble opinion only.

No, I don't think we should move on just yet.

Because the fact that the laws are not applicable to Christians does not absolve you from answering why God ever permitted any of his followers at any time to practice slavery and beat a fellow human being.

So, do you believe that Mosaic law came from God?

Do you agree that this law permitted the cruel and abusive beating of a human being?

Once you have answered this, we can move on to why you think God changed his mind about the acceptable treatment of a human being.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
There's nothing "silly" about the following.
[quote]Exodus 21
20“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21“If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

Clearly the Bible is permitting slave to be severely beaten - even to the point of death ( ety that they would tell such a bald faced lie [as shown in my previous post]?"

It permits physical punishment, yes, to what extent and in what manner remains a matter of conjecture. If you think that the scripture is permitting the abuse of slaves then so be it, I simply don't see it as that but that the abuse of slaves will have consequences. The only lies I see are yours.

Originally posted by Suzianne
NO.

Can we freaking move on now? Please?




Good grief, if this is all you atheists have to try and turn people against God, then you have a long, uphill fight ahead of you. I don't know how much more clearly I can say it: For (hopefully) the last time, mosaic laws do not apply to Christians.

Nor anyone in this day and age, but this is in my humble opinion only.

This of course is not good enough, the mosaic law no longer applied to first century Christians yet the bible clearly documents that some were slaves and some were salve owners.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It permits physical punishment, yes, to what extent and in what manner remains a matter of conjecture. If you think that the scripture is permitting the abuse of slaves then so be it, I simply don't see it as that but that the abuse of slaves will have consequences. The only lies I see are yours.

if your view is correct then why doesnt it make the clear distinction that punishment will only occur if the slave dies within 2 days? if you are correct, punishment should occur if the slave dies or not and the amount of days they manage to cling on to life would be irrelevant.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It permits physical punishment, yes, to what extent and in what manner remains a matter of conjecture. If you think that the scripture is permitting the abuse of slaves then so be it, I simply don't see it as that but that the abuse of slaves will have consequences. The only lies I see are yours.

It permits physical punishment, yes, to what extent and in what manner remains a matter of conjecture.

It's not a matter of conjecture.

It is clearly stated here:

Exodus 21
20“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21“If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.

The extent is to the point where the slave doesn't die within "a day or two" and the manner is striking slaves with a rod .

The only lies I see are yours

What "lies" are those?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]It permits physical punishment, yes, to what extent and in what manner remains a matter of conjecture.

It's not a matter of conjecture.

It is clearly stated here:
[quote]Exodus 21
20“If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. 21“If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance sh ...[text shortened]... king slaves with a rod .

The only lies I see are yours

What "lies" are those?[/b]

your scurrilous and quite scandalous portrayal of the watchtowers position.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
if your view is correct then why doesnt it make the clear distinction that punishment will only occur if the slave dies within 2 days? if you are correct, punishment should occur if the slave dies or not and the amount of days they manage to cling on to life would be irrelevant.

because the verse is cited to demonstrate that inhumane treatment is punishable, not to determine any type of degree of severity of punishment as has been insinuated.