Whip it, whip it good

One of the cruelest legacies of the Abrahamic religions, was the normalisation of slavery.  Slavery in the Western Christian world persisted largely until the 1800s. Islamic countries did not ban slavery for the most part until the 1900s.  Even then it survived in extremist groups as with Islamic militias in Sudan or ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

This slavery presents a major problem for theists.  It is in direct conflict with a range of claims. These include the moral character of their prophets.  Abraham owned slaves. Mohammad owned slaves. The benevolence of God of Abraham and the origin of morality with this deity, does not survive the reality of slavery.

Christians throughout history have used two main arguments to defend slavery.  These are that their version was more humane, and that slavery was in some sense, a necessary evil.

The Nice Version of Slavery Argument.

This is often seen in pop-apologist defenses of ancient Judeao-Christian slavery.  Apparently all slavery in the ancients kingdoms of Israel was voluntary debt-bondage, of limited scope (rolls eyes).  There's nothing wrong with slavery therefore, if it is practiced by ancient Israelites or Christians.

This is a completely made-up argument. The OT rules on slave ownership make it clear manumission-guarantees were limited to Jewish males. Foreign slaves did not get the right to be freed after 6 years. The OT also describes slaves taken in warfare. Exodus 21:20-21 contradicts alleged humane nature of this ancient slavery by sanctioning the beating of slaves, and more explicitly, defining them as property rather than human beings.

Despite many Christians today wanting to distance themselves from pro-slavery arguments, this 'nice slavery' defense is echoed in later centuries. The motif of the kind slaver-owner, solicitous of their slaves' welfare, was commonly employed to defend slavery.

"We ought to consider whether the negroes in a well regulated plantation, under the protection of a kind master, do not enjoy as great, nay, even greater advantages than when under their own despotic governments" - Michael Renwick Sergeant

This tries to justify slavery as welfare-enhancing. While slavery isn't a good thing per se, the slaves are better off than in their own countries.  Or even better, by being exposed to Christianity they would become Christian and so, save their souls. Slavery was a small, temporal price to pay for an eternity in heaven. And with such justifications, moral slippage occurs.

The blunting effects of slavery upon the slaveholder's moral perceptions are known and conceded the world over; and a privileged class, an aristocracy, is but a band of slaveholders under another name.
- Mark Twain A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

The Necessary Evil Argument

This argument is duplicated by slavery apologists, both modern and historical.  Arguments from the 18th (and 19th Centuries in antebellum US) were that slavery had benefits. It civilised or Christianised the barbaric and pagan peoples of Africa.  

The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. - Robert E Lee. 

Modern apologists do not balk at similar arguments. Slavery was necessary for ancient societies and economies. 

Noting that Jesus did not instruct followers to abolish slavery ignores the fact that slavery was often voluntary and civil and a component of societal functioning in Biblical times - Pop-Apologist Stephanie Thomson

I note that there are other forms of 'unfree' labour that ancient economies could use instead. Ancient Egypt and China used a corvee system of mass labour conscription in agricultural slack-months, to undertake public works.  And while slavery did exist in Ancient China, there were attempts to abolish it. The Han emperor Wang Mang did so in 9 CE- during the lifetime of Jesus. Serfdom in various forms was also possible. Slavery was not necessary.

But wait, Christians ended slavery

It seems always odd the Christians also want plaudits for ending slavery in the West.  While I appreciate the efforts of all who were involved in abolition movements, the reality is they were also strongly opposed by Christians. Some were still defending slavery when the Federal Army's guns reached Richmond.  Most people for much of Christendom's history, were not like Wilberforce.  

One thing that also struck me is how much the abolition arguments emphasised the cruelty and brutality of slavery, rather than Christian arguments for ending it. It seems odd that if the argument against slavery really was theological, that this was employed so rarely. 

The problem is also that Christians had to end slavery because no-one else could. They had the political power in the West. It wasn't the Atheists or Buddhists in Western countries that could abolish slavery. They had no power to do so.  And when slavery has been legal for say, 90% of your religion's history, it's not earning the religion much credit to finally abolish it. That's taken far too long and the agonising suffering slavery produced reached too great a scale. 

Summary

It seems ironic that modern apologists use arguments that mimic those from people they claim to oppose.  The Trans-Atlantic slave trade was terrible. Antebellum slavery was not wonderful. Both were defended by Christians for centuries. 

Overall, I find the arguments defending historical slavery inadequate and unconvincing.  They lack a proper moral justification.  It seems instead they require a degree of moral slippage that people outside these faiths, would balk at. In ancient times, few had the courage and moral character to seek the abolishment of slavery. Moses, Jesus and Mohammad were not among them.  I cannot reconcile slavery with the alleged morality of the Abrahamic prophets and deity. 

Whip it good, SJT takes on slavery

On to objection number 5.  By now I'm expecting to see a lot of text avoiding my points, plus a healthy dose of bible verses...

Objection Number 5 is the peculiar tolerance of slavery in the Christian world. 

The Objection

My original: Right, Christianity has always been against slavery. Even in the first 1800 years when it wasn’t. And as the American Civil War showed, for many, not until the Federal Army reached Richmond. The problem is that Jesus never said to abolish slavery. Neither did anyone else in the bible. Indeed, Exodus 21:20-21 said it was permissible to beat a slave so badly that they would die 2-3 days later. The slave-owner wasn’t punished in this case as the slave was his property. A chattel. Not a human being, but property.

This is a very simple test. Moral beings don’t sanction this horrific behaviour. Christianity perpetuated slavery. It’s failed to reach a credible standard of morality that would corroborate a loving, moral supreme deity.

But We're Good Now!

S.J. Thomason responds:

SJT: The first point to address the issue of slavery is to note that no true Christians of sound mind today are endorsing the type of slavery that was present in the United States in its early history. Slavery is something of the past in developed countries and involuntary servitude is not something any Christian of sound mind cares to resurrect.

The problem isn't today. The problem is for about 90% of your religion's history, slavery was completely cool. If you can coexist with slavery for roughly 1800 years, then Christianity was never against slavery. It was for it.

SJT: The next point is that the type of slavery reported in Biblical times was often voluntary with civil owner slave relationships. 

Rubbish, slavery is a coercive arrangement that takes advantage of a person's desperate desire to survive.  In the classical slaves were heavily sourced from wars, and slavery was as pervasive in Jewish society as it was in Graeco-Roman (see Hezser, 2006, Jewish Slavery in Antiquity, OUP). 

The myth that ancient Judaea practiced a kinder, gentler form of slavery is an agenda-driven form of apologetics.  

Nevermind the Unfloatable Boat- We Need Whips!

SJT: Exceptions exist, which Kaimatai notes, and it is fortunate we are given such glimpses into the lives of people who lived during Biblical times so we can better understand the context of the Bible. Had reports of slavery been excluded from the Bible, one would question its historical authenticity.

Oh garbage. If they alone had stood out and said slavery was wrong, that would be at least some evidence they had a sense of morality.  And as for historical authenticity! The bible has impossible floods, talking animals and mass migrations of people that never happened.  It is so parochial it manages to show no interest in the campaigns of the ancient Hellenes and Romans.  How hard is it to not notice the conquest of the Achaemenid Empire by Alexander the Great! But you think it needs to promote slavery to be perceived as authentic!

Owning People as Property Is Moral If It Serves the Greater Good

SJT: Noting that Jesus did not instruct followers to abolish slavery ignores the fact that slavery was often voluntary and civil and a component of societal functioning in Biblical times.

Oh wow, so some people had to become property for the good of society!  Slavery may be an evil crime against humanity, but hey, you can live with it (roll eyes).

Have Doubts- Try the Kool-Aid instead

SJT: Instead of identifying areas in which Jesus did not instruct, we should consider His instructions to love our neighbors as ourselves, alongside the Beatitudes from Matthew 5:3-12:

I refuse to ignore history because it conflicts with your fictions. Millions of Africans were enslaved. One-to-two million died horribly in the Middle Passage.  Mostly because Christians of the time though Jesus was ok with slavery. Was it really impossible for him to say that slavery should be abolished?

And as predicted, the bible verses...

SJT: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.

Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

You know the bit in bible class where they tell you to quote the bible because the "Word of God" has power?  They lied. It's usually platitudinous rubbish that sound asinine to non-believers. 

Summary

So we agree that slavery was a thing for most of Christianity's history.  And an invitation to drink a lot of Kool-Aid so I can forget about the problem.  We may have a new low for rebuttals.