RE: slavery (was Re: [asa] Sin, animals, and salvation)

No illegal immigration is a vountary indentured servant issue as opposed to American slavery and much of Islamic slavery which was forced.

--- On Thu, 11/20/08, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:

> From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: slavery (was Re: [asa] Sin, animals, and salvation)
> To:
> Cc: "asa@calvin.edu" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Date: Thursday, November 20, 2008, 4:33 PM
> David O. said:
> "...in particular that Africans were the cursed sons
> of Ham. "
>
> What about the white slaves?
>
> http://www.revisionisthistory.org/forgottenslaves.html
> http://multiracial.com/site/content/view/460/27/
>
> I'm still wondering if we have an abusive
> "slavery" issue in the USA today with illegal
> immigrants.
>
> http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-101165721.html
>
> When it comes to slavery, it has a lot to do with money.
> Why tolerate illegal immigration? The economy needs them,
> supposedly.
>
> ...Bernie
>
> ________________________________
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of David
> Opderbeck
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 1:01 PM
> To: George Murphy
> Cc: John Burgeson (ASA member); gordon brown;
> asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: slavery (was Re: [asa] Sin, animals, and
> salvation)
>
> And also, quite crucially, the "Biblical"
> arguments in favor of slavery in the 18th C were based
> substantially on an anthropology that is nowhere even
> implicitly endorsed in the Bible, in particular that
> Africans were the cursed sons of Ham.
>
> David W. Opderbeck
> Associate Professor of Law
> Seton Hall University Law School
> Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:54 PM, George Murphy
> <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com<mailto:GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com>>
> wrote:
> I am not in favor of slavery.
>
> With that out of the way so that there's no
> misunderstanding, I want to point out that Burgy has given
> the pro-slavery advocates of the mid-19th century a bit more
> benefit of the doubt than they deserve. The biblical
> writers of course accepted the institution of slavery &
> encouraged slaves to be obedient to their masters. But what
> requires equal emphasis if one believes "the Bible to
> be a rulebook and inerrant" is that there are texts
> that limit the behavior of masters toward slaves (Ex.21:20
> & 26-27, Eph.6:9, Col.4:1, Philemon 15-16.) Of course
> it will be pointed out that these do not rule out slavery in
> itself but the issue C.1850 was not slavery in the abstract
> but slavery as it actually existed in the United States,
> & in practice that often violated these stipulations,
> & especially their spirit.
>
> But there is really a more fundamental point that the
> pro-slavery people ignored. Ex.21:2 shows that there was
> (at least in theory) an important distinction between Hebrew
> slaves & foreign ones. The former, at least if male,
> was to be freed (if he wished - vv.5-6) after 7 years.
> I.e., the slavery of an Israelite male was not to be
> permanent. If there is some parallel between Israel and the
> church (as Christians have generally held) then this
> indicates that slaves who are Christians cannot be held in a
> permanent condition of slavery.
>
> I don't point out any of this to argue "Slavery is
> OK if we follow all the rules." I do not think that
> the Bible is an inerrant rulebook, or that the rules that it
> does have are applicable at all times & in all places.
> We have to recognize that scripture was to some extent
> accomodated to the understandings of social relationships
> (as to scientific knowledge) held by people in ancient
> cultures, & its acceptance of slavery is part of that.
> But the texts I noted - & even more the pattern of human
> relationships offered to us in the story of Jesus - are the
> beginning of a biblical trajectory toward something
> different. This is not 1000 BC or 60 AD & as Christians
> we should have learned well before 1850 that the idea of
> owning other people just doesn't fit with what we are
> called to in Christ.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://home.neo.rr.com/scitheologyglm
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Burgeson (ASA member)"
> <hossradbourne@gmail.com<mailto:hossradbourne@gmail.com>>
> To: "gordon brown"
> <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU<mailto:Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU>>
> Cc: <asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>>
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Sin, animals, and salvation
> .......................
> > They were good arguments, if one takes
> > the Bible to be a rulebook and inerrant. Of course, by
> taking that
> > position, one can also justify genocide as being
> "God's will."
> .................

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 20 17:02:12 2008