Debunking Myths about the Bible and Slavery Part 1

The Christian Road Warrior powerslams the false claims of YouTube atheists and others who try to claim that the Bible "endorses" or "condones" or "supports" slavery with the facts. Key words are defined and analyzed, while the idea that "Roots" slavery and Biblical/ANE slavery are somehow equivalent is debunked.

And finally, the claim that "slavery is slavery" is clotheslined into next week! Ohhhh what a rushhhhh!

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Slavery
• in
• the
• bible
• black
• christian
• jesus
• skeptic
• Bible
• study
• rights
• turpishaereticum

[shakinahstorm]

Warrior you a champion mate, luv ya!!!. Praise God for you mate :)

[CRoadwarrior]

@shakinahstorm Thanks.

[CRoadwarrior]

@Netruic NO, the text is abolitionist at the core and was even used by my ancestors to justify the new "Pharoah" to let them go. Sorry, but you simply want to argue against basic facts gleaned from the text. And you TOTALLY misread Deut. 23:15,16, which is a clear abolitionist text that desolves the institution. To promote the institution, you tell the slave to GO BACK to the master, and yet God tells Israel NOT to send them back. Why? Because Israel herself was a runaway slave.

[CRoadwarrior]

@csadler Yes, KJ got it wrong, as many English translations tend to do. Read the context of the very first verse of the passage you yourself brought up. Let's see if you can read and understand basic English.

[csadler]

@CRoadwarrior I guess KJ got it wrong?

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that has known man by lying with him.

But all the young girls, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

So please under what *context* is killing the male little ones ok - EVER.

[CRoadwarrior]

@footballunleashed Nonsense. I fail to see how the words "let my people go [from slavery]" promotes slavery. Ex. 5:1

[CRoadwarrior]

@slybear525 You see, since I have actually done Bible research, I can tell you that your claims are based in ignorance. The reason why the slave was saying he loved his master had NOTHING to do with punishment. Show me that IN THE TEXT. And no, the Bible does not mean "a person owned by another" when it uses the term slave, and they did have more rights than cattle. You could not beat a slave in any way and get away with it, and if you killed one you were punished (Ex. 21:21, 26,27).

[CRoadwarrior]

@soulriter That is a nonsense claim. I did say something. You may not have liked it or got the point, but that's different from your factless claim.

[CRoadwarrior]

@IamAsi94 No, that's called indentured servitude. Today we would call it a job. Stop the nonsense and do some basic research.

[CRoadwarrior]

@ukgreaterlondon Now that claim is a joke.

[CRoadwarrior]

@gunblade64 No, it's not just about Ex. 21:5. It's about seeing the facts from a cultural and historical perspective and not making snap judgments out of ignorance. Obviously, if slaves could talk about truly loving their masters and not wanting to desolve the slave/master relationship, then it follows that the kind of slavery at that time involved a familial treatment that our Western culture has not seen. But I have provided in my series resources to research these things. Do the homework.