The Christian Slave Owner Contrasted With The Abolitionist

[Taufgesinnter]

The Quakers who bought slaves to emancipate them, often teaching them to read and preparing them for a trade first, were Christian slave owners.

The typical Southern slave owner was wicked, for breaking up his slaves' marriages, assaulting them and failing to recognize that they did not actually own their slaves but only part of their labor, as with slavery at the time Paul wrote. Southern legislatures were evil when they denied slaves the right to an education, denied owners the right to manumit their slaves, and in gross violation of Scripture when they denied slaves the right to purchase their own freedom. As for their treatment in law of free persons of color and particularly freedmen after the war and their descendants, Southern states have no excuse. If they had, as in Paul's time, granted citizenship to freed slaves with equal rights to the freeborn, either automatically upon manumission or even for an affordable price, that would have been a different matter.

 

[Tanker]

>>>>>As for their treatment in law of free persons of color and particularly freedmen after the war and their descendants, Southern states have no excuse.<<<<<

The history of the south with respect to slaves and then later the free colored people is one of the most sordid chapters in human history. It is made even more sordid by the willful distortions of the historical record in recent years by confederate apologists. The only thing that equals this record is the Nazi history and that of the holocaust deniers.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Tanker:
The history of the south with respect to slaves...The only thing that equals this record is the Nazi history

Typical liberal response. By the way, you liberals have overused and misused the term "Nazi" so often it now has little meaning, just like people like Jesse Jackson have so overused and misused the term "racist" that it no longer has any sting.

Frankly, it is wratth infantile of anyone to always call anyone who disagrees with them a "Nazi". Grow up and use big people words.

By the way, Yankees were/are just as racist in thoughts and actions as were/are Southerners.

 

[Karen]

Originally posted by KenH:
........
By the way, Yankees were/are just as racist in thoughts and actions as were/are Southerners.

Dear KenH,
I don't see consistency in some of your arguments.
Sometimes you are saying that the South did not do wrong. Othertimes you are admitting tacitly that it did by saying, so what, the North is bad, too.

Karen

 

[Kent Witcher]

The typical Southern slave owner was wicked,

Of course many of them were. But that still doesn't change the fact that a christian slave no matter how he got that way was still under a biblical obligation to serve his master.

Many owners weren't brute savages and their slaves were to be obdeiant to them as well.
Noone wants to talk about the wicked slaves who disobeyed their masters. Everyone wants to talk about the wicked slave owners.

 

[ScottEmerson]

Originally posted by Kent Witcher:
The typical Southern slave owner was wicked,

Of course many of them were. But that still doesn't change the fact that a christian slave no matter how he got that way was still under a biblical obligation to serve his master.

Many owners weren't brute savages and their slaves were to be obdeiant to them as well.
Noone wants to talk about the wicked slaves who disobeyed their masters. Everyone wants to talk about the wicked slave owners.

As mentioned in an earlier thread, the American institution was built around those who the Bible calls "enslavers," and slave owners were guilty of having slaves who were kidnapped and taken from freedom in Africa. The "no matter how he got that way," isn't found in Scripture - and a case could be made that those who were free and were stolen into slavery, as the American slaves were - had every right to revolt and reclaim their freedom.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Karen:
I don't see consistency in some of your arguments.

We all do wrong. Even after conversion, this side of Heaven, our hearts are capable of being as dark as the night.

 

[Kent Witcher]

As mentioned in an earlier thread, the American institution was built around those who the Bible calls "enslavers,"

It amazes me how all these people who never wanted to listen to what Mark or myself or others quoted from the Bible but someone comes up with some translation that uses the word enslavers instead of how it has been traditionally transalted as menstealers for hundreds of years and now all of a sudden they care about what the Bible says.

Gimme a break!

 

[Kent Witcher]

slave owners were guilty of having slaves who were kidnapped and taken from freedom in Africa. The "no matter how he got that way," isn't found in Scripture - and a case could be made that those who were free and were stolen into slavery, as the American slaves were - had every right to revolt and reclaim their freedom.

Scott,

Yes "the no matter how he got that way applies" in that if the government says that I am a slave even if I previously had been free then I am a slave. If someone owns me even if I was kidnapped I (NOTICE I SAID I) am still responsible for being obediant to my new master per the instructions in the Bible even if he is a wicked no good dirty kidnapping rat .

I only have the right to seek my freedom if the government says I do.

In the case of the African enslavement their government legalized the capture of people for slavery and other people whose government said that they could own/ buy slaves did. Period.

Were the governments moral. Maybe so, maybe not. ( probably not ) did this change what God said. NO it did not.

So here's a question. If the gov't legalizes the capture of people for the purpose of slavery is it still kidnapping?

I think you know the answer.

 

[Tazman]

Originally posted by KenH:

I notice none of you South-haters are willing to take on the New Testament or the apostle Paul on this issue. Ya'll just keep repeating the same old pablum.

I think you missed the heart of our faith. Your understanding is lacking the Love of God in your assertion of the biblical relationship between "Slaves and Masters".

1 Cor 8:1 "Now about food sacrificed to Idols: We know that we all possess knowledge (as you say). Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know."

We all know that the man who "Loves" is made complete in Christ. And also this same love for God must be shown in our love for each other (1 John 4:12, 19-21)

Historically God has made men slaves through war and financial obligation. The only slaves in the bible were foreigners of Gods people , sometimes Gods people and those who were defeated by Gods people . Each situation has its own circumstance set by Gods will.
God never directed cruel treatment of slaves, and His definition of "Slaves" differs from what you understand of "Slaves". With God, slavery has to do with "Willingness" and commitment to pay dept and have FREEDOM there after.

Through wars SET BY GOD, men were forced to be slaves because of there sin. Through financial obligation others were made to be slaves and/or submitted themselves as slaves to pay depts. Slaves in the old testaments had rights and submitted to their particular Master (Or Debtor), but not to every Jew/Hebrew. In most cases this was a form of "WILLFUL" employment. Once a dept is paid, the person had the option of continuing in his masters service or moving on with his own belongings. There was an upward movement for the position of a slave, not just lateral.

If what I'm saying is true of the Biblical establishment of "Slavery" then there seems to be a huge conflict with your application of scripture concerning slavery and submission applied to the Un-willful Slavery of African-Americans here.

Romans 6:15-18
"15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey--whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness."

2 Kings 4:1 "The wife of a man from the company of the prophets cried out to Elisha, "Your servant my husband is dead, and you know that he revered the LORD . But now his creditor is coming to take my two boys as his slaves "

The type of "Slavery" that took place in Africa and Here (US) is not that of the bible. And it is something worth fighting against:

2 Cor 11:20 "In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or pushes himself forward or slaps you in the face. To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!"

Just a side note, but even Paul didn't accept unjust punishment at times.
Paul also wrote the letter to the Romans as well as the one above.

Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."

The type of "Slave / Master" relationship you support does not remotely reflect that of Gods perception or Paul's.

Your knowledge neglects HEART AND LOVE .

It would seem typical of such people to distort that truth in such a GODLESS way, and having the nerve to recognized early American slave owners as possible Christians (CHRIST LIKE).

 

[rlvaughn]

Originally posted by Tazman:
The only slaves in the bible were foreigners of Gods people, sometimes Gods people, and those who were defeated by Gods people. Each situation has its own circumstance set by Gods will.

That seems to cover all groups and circumstances, doesn't it?

 

[Tazman]

Originally posted by rlvaughn:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tazman:
The only slaves in the bible were foreigners of Gods people, sometimes Gods people, and those who were defeated by Gods people. Each situation has its own circumstance set by Gods will.

That seems to cover all groups and circumstances, doesn't it? </font>[/QUOTE]Yes, you are correct

I guess my mind was racing with my heart as I considered specific situations in the bible.

Forgive me, some postings on this topic seem to be missing love and has become offensive. Kinda scary actually, but I'm trying to explane some things as best I can.

However, I don't understand why those that believe earlier slave owners in the US to be possible Christians by their treatment of Slaves. I know that slavery in that sense is not what Paul was refering too, but these people have yet to respond. And I've shared scripture to defeat their wrong application of what Paul said.

 

[Kent Witcher]

Forgive me, some postings on this topic seem to be missing love and has become offensive.

Question:

Do you believe that rebuke though it may "offend" some is not out of love.

Love for the truth, love for God, love for God's people to be engulfed in the truth etc. etc.

 

[Kent Witcher]

And I've shared scripture to defeat their wrong application of what Paul said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In all seriousness I missed this somewhere. Please restate the scripture given and what you are attempting to defeat.

 

[Tazman]

Originally posted by Kent Witcher:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Forgive me, some postings on this topic seem to be missing love and has become offensive.

Question:

Do you believe that rebuke though it may "offend" some is not out of love.

Love for the truth, love for God, love for God's people to be engulfed in the truth etc. etc. </font>[/QUOTE]I do believe it is out of love.

 

[Tazman]

Originally posted by Kent Witcher:
And I've shared scripture to defeat their wrong application of what Paul said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In all seriousness I missed this somewhere. Please restate the scripture given and what you are attempting to defeat.

The misapplication of 1 Tim 6:1-2 for slaves of early America to submit to the "Slave Masters" as defined by human standards of government.

1 Tim 6:1-2
"Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort."

On the basis of these words I assert, without blushing, that when the northern Baptists of this country made opposition to slavery a test of missionary fitness, the Baptists of the slave holding states were not only justified but morally obligated to withdraw from them.

How a slave got into slavery is not an issue. The only issue is whether or not the government under which the slave lives identifies him as slave or free. Joseph, for example, was kidnapped by his own brothers and sold into Egyptian slavery; but he didn't rebel against his master. To the contrary we read:

All of the above are quotes made by Mark Osgatharp justifying submission to "Christian" slave owners that are "Forward" or oppressive. This is based on Slavery in America of Africans. I'm sure his point is applicable to any government outside the states as well.

The Bible has authority over the Government. This one scripture was shared in conjunction with Joseph's slavery in order to support submission to "Masters" as defined by mans Government, not by God.

I see this one scripture in conjunction with the humility of a man that obviously received insight from God to be used to justify the Abusive non-biblical slavery that was done years ago. People must understand that the definition of certain terms are not as applicable today as it were when it was written.

My purpose in my earlier post was to point out that Slavery as a whole in the bible as recorded was Set By Gods laws Government and commands for his people. Slavery was a Job in most cases and taken on willingly, again, unless someone owed a dept or GOD told his people to do it in a military campaign. I don't remember God giving any such message to southern Baptist slave owners. These people were chained and owed them nothing, nor were they willing serve them, nor did they have the freedom to do anything but serve. These are not the "Slaves" I read of in the bible. And even Paul himself said when speaking about submission and servitude, respect, and fear, with sincerity of heart, stated: "Masters, treat your slaves in the same way."

Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him."


Why didn't he use the scripture above to make his point. The point is true Christian should not accept the conditions of slavery that mans Government set, but that of Gods.

Slaves had every right to fight for there freedom. Just as Christ did to free us from the slavery of sin.

The slaves that Paul refered to had a good relationship with their masters and not forced.

 

[Tazman]

You know there is another part of that scripture in 1 Tim 6: that Mark did not share:


3If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain .
6But godliness with contentment is great gain.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Originally posted by Tazman:
Slaves had every right to fight for there freedom. The slaves that Paul refered to had a good relationship with their masters and not forced.

What part of OBEY THEM really means FIGHT THEM? Brother, YOU gave the Scripture and can read what it says.

And what does "FROWARD" mean concerning obeying Masters? Good relationship? Absurd.

Both of your premises are invalid. But thank you for trying!

Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.

 

[Tazman]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tazman:
Slaves had every right to fight for there freedom. The slaves that Paul refered to had a good relationship with their masters and not forced.

What part of OBEY THEM really means FIGHT THEM? Brother, YOU gave the Scripture and can read what it says.

And what does "FROWARD" mean concerning obeying Masters? Good relationship? Absurd.

Both of your premises are invalid. But thank you for trying!

Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free. </font>[/QUOTE]NO, I think you missed the point. Did you read
Eph 6:9 AND MASTERS, TREAT YOUR SLAVES IN THE SAME WAY.

BOB, WHAT WAY IS THAT?


The way mans government define terms of slavery is NOT the same as Gods or the aspect in which Paul was speaking!

This is not ungodly slavery. Just because you put some one in slavery does not mean that they are to obey you.

What kind of slaves where in the bible?

 

[Tazman]

BOB,

If I were to take some one against their own will and put them in chains and Make them work for me, even though they owe me nothing, and God did not tell me to do it , are they in "Slavery"? If so, on what grounds?

BY which term should this be considered slavery enough to apply Gods word to it?

Our Govenment or Gods Word?

This same example could be considered imprisonment. Could it not? So, who's to say that this was biblical slavery.