Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That really doesn't say much about the idea of scripture or natural law changing. It was more about man's view of morality.
How about the biblical and natural law argument for slave ownership?
Leviticus 25 " As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property.
"Slavery was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." [Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America. speech in the US Senate on April 14, 1850]
"The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example." [Rev. R. Furman, D.D., Baptist, of South Carolina]
"It is certainly a matter of faith that this sort of slavery in which a man serves his master as his slave, is altogether lawful. This is proved from Holy Scripture. It is also proved from reason …All theologians are unanimous on this." [Leander: Quaestiones Morales Theologicae, Lyons 1668 ]
"Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not at all contrary to the natural and divine law (ie scripture),…. It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given. [Pope Pius IX, Instruction of the Holy Office, June 1866]
But, since 1964 the scriptural and natural law approval of the legitimacy of slave ownership are not considered any longer true.
“The seventh commandment forbids acts or enterprises that .... lead to the enslavement of human beings, to their being bought, sold and exchanged like merchandise, in disregard for their personal dignity. It is a sin against the dignity of persons and their fundamental rights to reduce them by violence to their productive value or to a source of profit.”
Last edited by Aristotle's Child; 10-10-2014 at 04:53 PM..
Reason: addition
The term 'slavery' as found in the OT was not slavery as existed in the antebellum south. They are completely different things.
I found it interesting that Christians would use the Scripture to condone the salvery of the 19th century when the OT itself explicitly condemns it:
“Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” (Exodus 21:16)
This verse, as well as many others proves that slavery in the OT was an economic-based contract that was entered into for debt repayment or simply to be cared for when a person was destitute. It was the only safety net for the poor in those times and had nothing to with race and was extremely regulated by law.
The term 'slavery' as found in the OT was not slavery as existed in the antebellum south. They are completely different things.
I found it interesting that Christians would use the Scripture to condone the salvery of the 19th century when the OT itself explicitly condemns it:
“Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” (Exodus 21:16)
This verse, as well as many others proves that slavery in the OT was an economic-based contract that was entered into for debt repayment or simply to be cared for when a person was destitute. It was the only safety net for the poor in those times and had nothing to with race and was extremely regulated by law.
Actually, it WAS one of the kinds of slavery back then. Just conveniently forget about the other kind, like when enemies were captured and/or the women of enemies were still virgin.....
Of course the Scripture does not change, because God does not change. Society changes, but God and His ways are the same today as they have been since the moment of creation.
Actually, it WAS one of the kinds of slavery back then. Just conveniently forget about the other kind, like when enemies were captured and/or the women of enemies were still virgin.....
How slaves were obtained does not change the fact of slave ownership. And, according to Leviticus one could buy them and then they (and their future offspring) would remain the property of the owner.
It was considered contrary to scripture to charge interest for anything loaned.
Biblical dictionary: Usury - the sum paid for the use of money, hence interest; not, as in the modern sense, exorbitant interest.
“If he has exacted usury or taken increase -- Shall he then live? He shall not live! If he has done any of these abominations, He shall surely die; His blood shall be upon him.” (Ezekiel 18:13)
“Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast borne me a man of strife and a man of contention to the whole earth! I have neither lent on usury, nor men have lent to me on usury; yet every one of them doth curse me. [Jer 15:10]”
"The law governing loans consists necessarily in the equality of what is given and returned; once the equality has been established, whoever demands more than that violates the terms of the loan. Therefore if one receives interest, he must make restitution according to the commutative bond of justice; its function in human contracts is to assure equality for each one. This law is to be observed in a holy manner. If not observed exactly, reparation must be made". [Vix Pervenit, 1745]
But the some moral teachings in the Bible, such as slave ownship and the prohibition against charging interest, have changed that's the point.
If you try to maintain that God does not change but the bible does, how can you argue that God authored the bible?
Don't confuse what the Bible records as history as the notion that God is saying it is moral. The Scripture records many things that were sinful and are still sinful today, but God's morality hasn't changed. Just because God doesn't give us a 'thou shall not' doesn't mean that he condones it as moral behavior.
God does not change. Society does.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
