English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It seems the south used the bible as an augument for support of slavery which caused the civil war if so is god responsible for all the deaths from this war.

2006-12-26 20:10:31 · 13 answers · asked by bill r 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

13 answers

Not god, since he doesn't exist - but the bible certainly condones it.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/topics/slavery.html

It does tell us how hard we're allowed to beat our slaves, however.

2006-12-26 20:16:59 · answer #1 · answered by eldad9 6 · 1 0

I do not believe so.
At least not to the point of enslaving a certain race.
One does have to consider that during the time that the bible was written, people were holding slaves. It was part of their culture, but it was not like it was during the Civil War. Back when the bible was written, people became slaves in order to pay off debts, this was how the lender was repaid if the borrower could not pay him/her back. It was made law that one could not hold a slave for more than seven years, after seven years the debts were forgiven.
It says, in the bible, that it is wrong to hold a person as a slave for their entire life. The bible gives NO ground for a person to claim that an entire race should be treated cruelly, or as slaves. Anyone that claimed/claims that the bible says such, is twisting the words to suit their own ways and desires.

It was not the bible or God that caused the Civil War, it was the twisted ways of mankind. We are at blame; never God.

2006-12-26 20:41:51 · answer #2 · answered by Andy 2 · 0 0

The Bible does not condone slavery. If you look at the Biblical concept of 'slavery,' it is contracted servitude. Slaves were slaves either because they voluntarily contracted themselves for seven years of labor, or because they were being punished for a legal offense. In either case all slaves had to be set free after serving seven years. In the rare event that a 'slave' did not want freedom, he could get his ear pierced as a sign of voluntary servitude.

The south was more concerned with a state's sovereign right to decide if slavery was acceptable. Their justification may have taken a religious tone, but their ultimate argument was economic, as are all great atrocities. They kept slaves for the love of money, not because they actually believed that the Bible condoned it. And there is no Biblical equivalent of southern slavery - no scripture condones the ownership of another human being.

The Christians did not condone slavery either. In the first few centuries of the Christian era, churches regularly took up collections to buy freedom for Roman slaves, and as soon as Christians gained a little political clout in the 4th century their first order of business was to outlaw slavery throughout the Roman Empire. Pretty amazing when you consider that slavery had been a Roman institution for over 1000 years.

2006-12-26 21:10:22 · answer #3 · answered by NONAME 7 · 0 0

there's a connection with slavery in the recent testomony additionally, in the recent testomony it says something like, slaves would desire to obey their masters, paintings troublesome and do the terrific activity they'd because of the fact it particularly is going to deliver glory to god and make him happy. if slavery replaced into unsightly to god, then I`m specific he would have pronounced something approximately it in the bible, like thou shalt no longer have slaves. no the place in the bible does it say that slavery isnt acceptable "whilst a guy strikes his male or woman slave with a rod so troublesome that the slave dies below his hand, he would be punished. If, even regardless of the indisputable fact that, the slave survives for an afternoon or 2, he's to no longer be punished, because of the fact the slave is his very own assets. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB) "Christians who're slaves would desire to offer their masters complete appreciate so as that the call of God and his coaching in basic terms isn't shamed. if your grasp is a Christian, it is not any excuse for being disrespectful. you will desire to paintings all of the extra reliable when you consider which you're assisting yet another believer through your efforts. coach those truths, Timothy, and inspire anybody to obey them. (a million Timothy 6:a million-2 NLT)

2016-12-15 08:55:43 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

In bible time a slave was a servant, not the negative personification it has in our time.

At times slaves held a position of great trust and honor in a household. The patriarch Abraham’s aged servant (likely Eliezer) managed all of his master’s possessions. (Ge 24:2; 15:2, 3) Abraham’s descendant Joseph, as a slave in Egypt, came to be in charge of everything belonging to Potiphar, a court official of Pharaoh. (Ge 39:1, 5, 6) In Israel, there was a possibility of a slave’s becoming wealthy and redeeming himself.—Le 25:49.

Gods laws in reference to slavery were very clear and righteous. What happened here in the United States went completely against Gods regulations.

2006-12-26 20:45:47 · answer #5 · answered by Liz R 2 · 0 0

The Mother and Father God are portrayed quite severely in the Bible which is why I question it as the word of God. When men translated only the books that agreed with their beliefs and threw out the rest as heresy, then I can't possibly believe that it is the only infallible word of God.

2006-12-26 20:45:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), 570 - 632 AD, said "He will not enter paradise who behaveth ill to his slaves. The companions said, "O Apostle of God! Have you not told us, that there will be a great many slaves and orphans amongst your disciples?" He said,"Yes; then be kind to them as your own children, and give them to eat of what you eat yourselves. The slaves that say their prayers are your brothers." and "..yield obedience to my successor, although he may be an Abbysinian slave."

The first call to prayer at the Quba mosque built by Prophet Muhammad was given in 622 by Bilal - a black slave freed by the Prophet. On the contrary, The Supreme Court of the United States declared in 1857 that the slave Dred Scott could not sue for his freedom because he was not a person, but property.

2006-12-27 00:40:18 · answer #7 · answered by BeHappy 5 · 0 0

No. The Bible states owning human chattel is wrong.
That's why slave owners had to convince themselves that Africans weren't people.

Historically, religious texts have been frequently misused in order to justify atrocities.

2006-12-26 20:18:37 · answer #8 · answered by Iris 4 · 0 0

God is also responsible for the millions of other deaths he has caused using natural disasters. Because we all know this is God's wrath on the Earth and that there is nothing natural about volcano's, plates shifiting and earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes.

2006-12-26 20:13:14 · answer #9 · answered by trevor22in 4 · 1 2

I don't know if "god" did, but the bible surely did!
P.S. I DON'T support slavery.

2006-12-26 20:18:18 · answer #10 · answered by Sliceathroat 3 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers