"Don't own people." Three words to write, two seconds to read, and one horrific stain on humanity and civilization lessened - not averted (people would still be awful), but at least somewhat lessened.
And almighty >God, who had just freed the Israelites from slavery, could not tell them that, instead regulating slavery among rules almost identical to every other culture from there to Mesopotamia, and somewhat worse than the Code of Hammurabi from which they all copied (I believe debt slavery under the code was only half as long as in the OT). Draw your own conclusions.
@@KaiHenningsenThe god that could tell people not to eat pork, not to wear clothes of mixed fabrics, not to eat shrimp, and to cut off a part of their penis to show their loyalty and devotion somehow couldn't tell the same people not to own slaves? Pretty useless god then.
In case there are any viewers here that haven't seen Dan before, rest assured that he is well aware of Hebrew debt slavery, and he has made videos about the difference between that and chattel slavery, both of which are condoned by the Bible.
just slightly more difficult to enslave Hebrew slaves permanently in the bible it is not indentured servitude. That is the canard. Non Jewish people can be slaves from the jump.
@@gattaca5911 No, Israelites only worked for 6 years and had to go back to their own towns in the seventh. Hebrews are foreigners Not Israelites, they were treated as if they were Israelites (Leviticus 19:33) (1 Samuel 14:21) Leviticus mentions the nations around these are referring to foreigners and referred to as Hebrews. This is a big mistake to think Hebrew and Israelites are the same people in Exodus/Leviticus/Deuteronomy
This is so sad but true the bible contains so much on slavery, sadly not a commandment; thou shall not treat people like slaves or fiddle with kids! These should have been two of the first commandments.
Right? Why is it ambiguous AT ALL if he's so great? But no, the first commandment is "I'm the best," the second is "Worship only me," and the third is "Worship me the right way." Stroking his ego is more important than saving lives, I guess.
@@MusicalRaichu Then what are they about? Those three commandments plus the one about the sabbath, have always seemed to me to be in jarring contrast to the other six, which essentially codify basic human ethical interactions. It took God four whole commandments to establish his authority?
@@MusicalRaichuhe’s completely right. It could’ve been summed up in one commandment and could’ve been worded to sound much less like like a jealous boyfriend
@@cedarwaxwing3509 The Torah was written by people expressing what they understood about how to interact with God. These commands express the view that Israel should worship its deity only. God's commands were wise and would lead to their flourishing. Read the prophets to see the injustices that resulted from not following them. In their time and place, these were reasonable. It's not about currying favour with God. It's about getting priorities right and living ethically to promote a good society. By all means critique the past and seek to do better, but don't judge people unfairly especially when you're not in their shoes.
Min 1:40 The Southern Baptist Church used Leviticus 25:44-46 from the Mosaic Law, that allowed the purchase of other owned humans " from the nations around you ", and 1 Timothy 6:1-2 that stated that the fellow Christians who owned other humans " were fellow partakers in the promise... " and are accepted as Christians. Ephesians 6:5 " Slaves, obey your masters with all respect..." The Evangelical SBC was biblicly correct ••• and morally incorrect.
I think it was the Dominicans who were the first to condemn slavery using the Bible, even denying communion to people who had slaves in Latin America through the encomienda system. However, even as they were against slavery, they were still in favor of cultural genocide. It's because the Bible has passages that both support and condemn slavery, so you can cherrypick whatever you want to support your case. For Bartolome de Las Casas, he found a passage about how God is not pleased with offerings stolen from the poor, and so he turned against slavery (gradually, over time). That does require cherry picking, but it is a good example of how someone can have a religious experience that changes their mind for the better, and shows how the original idea of the Bible being Life Giving can work. Inspiration is not in the words, but in the spiritual experience one has with the text.
(Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.) I know slave owners use to love to read this verse to my ancestors smh my ancestors had a rough life makes me sad to think about it but shoutout to Harriet Tubman for fighting and getting out
@man I can you are uneducated it is the whole verse now I will educate you now other verses in that chapter says that slave owners are not supposed to threaten them but they just means not to tell someone you are going to harm them it does not say do not hit them as we know that’s allowed in the Bible and majority of the time Christian slave owners did not threaten my ancestors they would just abuse them it’s disgusting how you are trying to defend nasty actions
@@innocentodinkemere4597 Irrelevant to the directions given to the slaves, is there ANY part where is says they can revolt if the slave owner does not obey the bible? Nope, so you can run along.
I read Slave Religion: The "Invisible Institution" in the Antebellum South by Albert J. Raboteau. It's a great academic book about this topic: how Christian Bibles were used in the chattel slavery of Africans. It should be mandatory for all children to read in high school.
A more important read would be how everyone knows how we get cheap fuel and the vast majority of everything we buy on a daily basis and at best all we say is "life is cheap over there".. yes, "they" choose to wear rags and live in tin shacks and only eat rice and beans because "life's cheap". Just so we can keep on pretending we abolished slavery. Sure its not "plantations" now, we know it's whole countries Sure its not "dog collars and brands" now, we know its papers please and economic and legislative constriction that are more restrictive than any brand was We know colonialism was never decolonised, we just lie and say it is now free market capitalist democracies, but we all know its still same ol' same ol' Ie hows the cultural holocaust on the native americans going? They are all becoming nice 'n' white, right? W-right language W-right eductions W-right jobs W-right identification W-right clothes W-right medicine W-right culture Nice W-right Lives Right? Cultural tolerance is intolerance We only allow their culture if it is already done by ours But we parade them around Like circus animals At select events To give a sliver of truth to the myth but we know We don't tolerate other cultures We assimilate and homogenise them Science and eugenics are far more important in validating and continuing slavery, so where's the great academic books on this? That's truly important reading, right? Data over dogma and all that, right? Cause we are "anti-racists" right?
I like the Claremont era suit too but wolverine has a gray and black one that looks great and don’t forget the blue and yellow one which was the original
A minor disagreement. I don't think the idea of defending slavery to the enslaved is that absurd. I can imagine that the enslaved themselves, specially those born into it, are less likely to rebel if you teach this as a state of affair that has been commanded by God.
@@JCW7100 Surely there were. What I'm really curious about is how many slaves bought it. Honestly, I suspect some did. Not because they're foolish, but because it was the path of least resistance.
Another great video. I love the history of things. Cultures. Writings. The human condition (which is my training as an MSW, LCSW). Even in what I do I have to go where the patient is to determine what they mean. Operationalizing with the source material (patient). Which makes it easy for me and harder for you.
@@ji8044 1 Timothy 1 vs 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers-and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
@@ji8044 Matthew 13:41-42: “The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire.
Every time I hear people mention the slave Bible used in the US, I ask myself if they forget that the Bible was still used to defend/justify slavery well before the 1800s.
From a handwritten document by Abraham Lincoln, entitled 'Pro-slavery Theology'. "'Give to him that is needy' is the Christian rule of charity; but 'Take from him that is needy' is the rule of slavery."
Jesus and the apostles did not outright condemn slavery. They didn’t need to. The effect of the gospel is that lives are changed, one by one, and those changed lives in turn bring transformation to entire families, clans, and cultures. Christianity was never designed to be a political movement, but, over time, it naturally affected political policy. Alexander MacLaren wrote that the gospel “meddles directly with no political or social arrangements, but lays down principles which will profoundly affect these, and leaves them to soak into the general mind”. In nations where Christianity spread and took firm hold, slavery was brought to an end through the efforts of born-again individuals. The Lord chooses to change people and society gradually, through the ministry of the Holy Spirit and the proclamation of the truth of the Word of God.
People have never needed to have a specifically edited Bible to cherry-pick from the Bible. Not that there was much cherry-picking even involved in using the Bible to defend slavery anyway; it's not like the unabridged version denounces slavery either.
@@zsazsa4159 The slave Bible was made by an abolitionist, for the purpose of getting the Bible to enslaved people who otherwise wouldn't have it in any form at all. When it comes to white people justifying slavery to themselves, they just used the already-awful-enough regular Bible.
@@zsazsa4159 So you have the magical version of the bible that is correct and can prove it is correct? Nope, you're just as easily dismissed as everyone else.
@@zsazsa4159 The "slave Bible" was made by an abolitionist, for the purpose of getting the Bible to enslaved people who otherwise wouldn't have it in any form at all. White people trying to defend slavery to themselves or each other just used the regular Bible.
Why was Jesus-seen by some as a paragon of virtue, by others as a god or a demigod-unable to offer the slightest critique of a slave system such as the one prevalent in the Roman Empire? Why did he use the term 'slave' repeatedly to illustrate his parables but never deigned to speak of them in human terms-let alone humanistic ones-without a word, gesture, or even a glance in their direction to acknowledge that their unjust condition was incompatible with the well-being and love he so often spoke of? In any case, Saint Paul took care of it, but not in the way those unfortunate souls might have hoped. Well done Jesus, you showed us your true humanity and ambivalence.
I've never heard of the "Slave Bible." A bible edited for slaves is an interesting exercise in hypocrisy. I'm anxiously waiting for your book to become available. Benchmark Books in SLC is my favorite store.
An added layer of hypocrisy is that in most of the slave-owning states, there were actual laws (enacted by state legislatures) forbidding the teaching of slaves to read. So who was supposed to be the reading audience for these eviscerated bibles?
Read this book, and it can answer many questions on this topic. I've read it and highly recommend it to anyone who wants to do some academic reading. Slave Religion: The "Invisible Institution" in the Antebellum South by Albert J. Raboteau
Since ancient Greece,arguments in favor of inequality had been made, and they were sometimes aimed at the unfortunate people. It wouldn't surprise me if at least some flimsy justification would be presented to slaves even today.
Many people have commented why Jeesus never condemns slavery. The reason is, Jeesus wuz a Roman invention, and thus it would go against the Romans themselves if he had. As is well known, the Romans were one of the biggest slave-owning empires in history
The Bible does raise one issue with it, the conflict of interest when someone bound by covenant to obey God is in a situation where they have to obey a human being who might order them to do something immoral. Hence Leviticus says not to enslave Israelites and Paul says to obtain your freedom if an opportunity avails itself.
You should go on with Trent horn, he has a channel called the counsel of Trent I think. You remind me of him and I think it would make a great podcast to her both of your takes since you both do have different views.
That's a GOOD thing. God created us to embrace logical, rational thinking, and to question things. What God actually IS is SO far beyond the comprehension of these people that insist that The Bible (a book written by rather primitive and entirely fallible Human men) is "inerrant" and "infallible". Actually, I'm convinced H.P. Lovecraft had a much keener understanding of these beings we call "God" and "angels" and "devils".
@@Dalekzillathis is so well put! The thing to remember is that the contemporary lenses Dan talks about are actually necessary and good for using the bible in a loving and caring way today. Also, approaching your doubt with humility rather than shame that your faith isn’t strong can help you to build a faith that isn’t so reliant on what other people tell you to believe, be they Christian or secular or otherwise.
hes leaving out an important part that the scriptures that were left out are the ones that promote freedom Exodus 21:16 Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Deuteronomy 23:15-16 “If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master. Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them.” That’s just a few the Slave Bible was HEAVLY edited the Moses exodus was left out. Yes the Bible has some comfortable issues with slavery BUT there are differences from biblical slavery AND chattel slavery. AND that is what the original creator was pointing out the Bible does not condone what slave owners were doing and THATS why they edited it to create a obedient slave, to strip them of their culture and make them think this was the Devine order for blk ppl AND the Bible does not say that
Exodus 21: 20-21 - "20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money." You're easily dismissed. Numbers 31: 17 - 18 - "17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." Your bible is nonsense, deal with it.
Exodus 21:16 “He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.” This verse is literally speaking against slavery. 1) "He who Kidnaps" = By use of force, against ones will, no human rights.... 2) "and sells him" = Forced Labor, Forced servitude. Slavery is used to mean servants in the old testament they are employees and some (IF and ONLY) they chose and the Court of Judges allowed, then they could become permanent employees.
Why were specific passages like Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt and like Galatians 3:28, which states, "There is neither slave nor free... for you are all one in Christ Jesus" omitted in slave Bibles, if not for the express purpose of control the enslaved population by promoting obedience and discouraging thoughts of liberation or resistance? Also, appeal to silence about what a text _doesn't_ say is weak sauce.
except in Ephesians 6:5-9, Paul explicitly condones servile obedience for those who are slaves, and Leviticus 25:44-46 is all about how the israelites are to buy and keep the peoples of other nations as slaves
That is why. Or at least to keep the enslaved from trying to use those passages among themselves to promote resistance. I don't think Dan means to say otherwise. The point is that the primary use of the Bible to defend slavery was among the white population - to keep people who might have had the power to change things from attempting to do so and for that purpose unedited Bibles were used. No need to remove passages there. Of course, some abolitionists did use the Bible to try to persuade other white people to end slavery. It was, as usual, a tool that both sides in a major debate would quote to justify their position.
@@jeffmacdonald9863 Exactly. The point I am making is that while the alterations may not have been made to help defend slavery against the enslaved, a compelling case can be made that they were made to sidestep a potential issue altogether. Of course, that raises another poignant question. If the Bible unambiguously condones/endorses slavery, and "there's no syllable of the Bible that in any way, shape, or form whatsoever questions, much less condemns the practice of buying, selling, and owning other human beings," why would any such ommissions be necessary? The fact that those who produced these slave Bible felt it was necessary to edit passages like those says something. It's almost as if the Bible isn't univocal and as unambiguous as is being let on, and that those who assert that it holds a definitive position is negotiating with the text and dictating what it is and is not _allowed_ to say.
Galatians also states there is no female or male in Christ yet there is support for distinctions in the role and place of women compared to men, so I don't see how that verse in Galatians means that slavery is in any way wrong. Israelites being freed has no bearing on whether slavery is considered wrong and, in fact, the Israelites were allowed to engage in slavery when dealing with non-Israelites. You may be able to interpret these lines out of context as anti-slavery, which is what some slave masters may have feared, but that doesn't mean that slavery is actually being described as wrong by the authors.
I think there are rules like freeing your slaves every seven years but the Tribe of Judah invented doctrines saying otherwise. You're supposed to double his possessions after the seven years, too! Double their net worth.
"Don't own people."
Three words to write, two seconds to read, and one horrific stain on humanity and civilization lessened - not averted (people would still be awful), but at least somewhat lessened.
And almighty >God, who had just freed the Israelites from slavery, could not tell them that, instead regulating slavery among rules almost identical to every other culture from there to Mesopotamia, and somewhat worse than the Code of Hammurabi from which they all copied (I believe debt slavery under the code was only half as long as in the OT). Draw your own conclusions.
This didn't even make the Top Ten list.
How much better would things have been if that was one of the 10 commandments?
The stain on humanity was setting them free…
@@KaiHenningsenThe god that could tell people not to eat pork, not to wear clothes of mixed fabrics, not to eat shrimp, and to cut off a part of their penis to show their loyalty and devotion somehow couldn't tell the same people not to own slaves? Pretty useless god then.
In case there are any viewers here that haven't seen Dan before, rest assured that he is well aware of Hebrew debt slavery, and he has made videos about the difference between that and chattel slavery, both of which are condoned by the Bible.
just slightly more difficult to enslave Hebrew slaves permanently in the bible it is not indentured servitude. That is the canard. Non Jewish people can be slaves from the jump.
@@gattaca5911
No, Israelites only worked for 6 years and had to go back to their own towns in the seventh. Hebrews are foreigners Not Israelites, they were treated as if they were Israelites (Leviticus 19:33) (1 Samuel 14:21)
Leviticus mentions the nations around these are referring to foreigners and referred to as Hebrews. This is a big mistake to think Hebrew and Israelites are the same people in Exodus/Leviticus/Deuteronomy
@@sammur1977 No, lies by omission genius. there are easy loop holes & arm twisting to get Israelites as slaves for life...do some more homework.
@@sammur1977 prisoners of war are allowed to be taken as slaves in the bible...wrong again.
@@sammur1977 Unless you gave them a wife.
Thank you Dan. Your scholarship and integrity are always appreciated. ❤
Integrity? The dudes a Mormon with a testimony.
@@sohu86x What is your point?
This is so sad but true the bible contains so much on slavery, sadly not a commandment; thou shall not treat people like slaves or fiddle with kids! These should have been two of the first commandments.
Right? Why is it ambiguous AT ALL if he's so great? But no, the first commandment is "I'm the best," the second is "Worship only me," and the third is "Worship me the right way." Stroking his ego is more important than saving lives, I guess.
@@SnoopSqueak Oh for goodness sake, they are not about stroking God's ego.
@@MusicalRaichu Then what are they about? Those three commandments plus the one about the sabbath, have always seemed to me to be in jarring contrast to the other six, which essentially codify basic human ethical interactions. It took God four whole commandments to establish his authority?
@@MusicalRaichuhe’s completely right. It could’ve been summed up in one commandment and could’ve been worded to sound much less like like a jealous boyfriend
@@cedarwaxwing3509 The Torah was written by people expressing what they understood about how to interact with God. These commands express the view that Israel should worship its deity only. God's commands were wise and would lead to their flourishing. Read the prophets to see the injustices that resulted from not following them.
In their time and place, these were reasonable. It's not about currying favour with God. It's about getting priorities right and living ethically to promote a good society. By all means critique the past and seek to do better, but don't judge people unfairly especially when you're not in their shoes.
Min 1:40 The Southern Baptist Church used Leviticus 25:44-46 from the Mosaic Law, that allowed the purchase of other owned humans " from the nations around you ", and 1 Timothy 6:1-2 that stated that the fellow Christians who owned other humans " were fellow partakers in the promise... " and are accepted as Christians.
Ephesians 6:5 " Slaves, obey your masters with all respect..."
The Evangelical SBC was biblicly correct
••• and morally incorrect.
I always remember Genesis 9:18-27 being used as a "justification" for slavery back in the day.
Genesis 9:18-27 was a long time ago. You must be ancient 😀
@@PegasusBEphesians 6:5 is considerably more recent.
Great as always. Thank you Dan!💙🙏🇺🇸
I think it was the Dominicans who were the first to condemn slavery using the Bible, even denying communion to people who had slaves in Latin America through the encomienda system. However, even as they were against slavery, they were still in favor of cultural genocide.
It's because the Bible has passages that both support and condemn slavery, so you can cherrypick whatever you want to support your case. For Bartolome de Las Casas, he found a passage about how God is not pleased with offerings stolen from the poor, and so he turned against slavery (gradually, over time). That does require cherry picking, but it is a good example of how someone can have a religious experience that changes their mind for the better, and shows how the original idea of the Bible being Life Giving can work. Inspiration is not in the words, but in the spiritual experience one has with the text.
THANK you, this is perfect. As soon as I get unbanned from Reddit, I know exactly which comment I'm pasting this in reply to lol
(Ephesians 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.) I know slave owners use to love to read this verse to my ancestors smh my ancestors had a rough life makes me sad to think about it but shoutout to Harriet Tubman for fighting and getting out
But that's not the whole verse is it? What are slave holders supposed to do?
@man I can you are uneducated it is the whole verse now I will educate you now other verses in that chapter says that slave owners are not supposed to threaten them but they just means not to tell someone you are going to harm them it does not say do not hit them as we know that’s allowed in the Bible and majority of the time Christian slave owners did not threaten my ancestors they would just abuse them it’s disgusting how you are trying to defend nasty actions
@innocentodinkemere4597
Whi cares what they are supposed to do. They should not be enslaving people at all.
@@innocentodinkemere4597 Irrelevant to the directions given to the slaves, is there ANY part where is says they can revolt if the slave owner does not obey the bible? Nope, so you can run along.
@@innocentodinkemere4597 - You mean the part that slaveowners ignored?
I read Slave Religion: The "Invisible Institution" in the Antebellum South by Albert J. Raboteau. It's a great academic book about this topic: how Christian Bibles were used in the chattel slavery of Africans. It should be mandatory for all children to read in high school.
A more important read would be how everyone knows how we get cheap fuel and the vast majority of everything we buy on a daily basis and at best all we say is "life is cheap over there".. yes, "they" choose to wear rags and live in tin shacks and only eat rice and beans because "life's cheap". Just so we can keep on pretending we abolished slavery.
Sure its not "plantations" now, we know it's whole countries
Sure its not "dog collars and brands" now, we know its papers please and economic and legislative constriction that are more restrictive than any brand was
We know colonialism was never decolonised, we just lie and say it is now free market capitalist democracies, but we all know its still same ol' same ol'
Ie hows the cultural holocaust on the native americans going? They are all becoming nice 'n' white, right?
W-right language
W-right eductions
W-right jobs
W-right identification
W-right clothes
W-right medicine
W-right culture
Nice
W-right
Lives
Right?
Cultural tolerance is intolerance
We only allow their culture if it is already done by ours
But we parade them around
Like circus animals
At select events
To give a sliver of truth to the myth but we know
We don't tolerate other cultures
We assimilate and homogenise them
Science and eugenics are far more important in validating and continuing slavery, so where's the great academic books on this?
That's truly important reading, right?
Data over dogma and all that, right?
Cause we are "anti-racists" right?
"in his correct costume" just gonna add that to Dan's closing
I like the Claremont era suit too but wolverine has a gray and black one that looks great and don’t forget the blue and yellow one which was the original
A minor disagreement. I don't think the idea of defending slavery to the enslaved is that absurd. I can imagine that the enslaved themselves, specially those born into it, are less likely to rebel if you teach this as a state of affair that has been commanded by God.
You can imagine it, but that doesn't make it grounded in any truth.
@Praha175 You think there were no cases of slave owners explaining to their slaves that their state of affairs is "good and holy"?
@@JCW7100 Surely there were. What I'm really curious about is how many slaves bought it. Honestly, I suspect some did. Not because they're foolish, but because it was the path of least resistance.
Jesse Lee Peterson seems to demonstrate you are right.
But is there any evidence that it was used this way? Also, they didn't care nearly as much (if any) about convincing the people they owned.
❤❤❤❤❤❤thanks Dan!!
Another great video. I love the history of things. Cultures. Writings. The human condition (which is my training as an MSW, LCSW). Even in what I do I have to go where the patient is to determine what they mean. Operationalizing with the source material (patient). Which makes it easy for me and harder for you.
Happy holidays Dan
This is what got me to finally leave christianity. There is no justification for this
Did you know Paul said slave owners would go to hell? It's in one of his epistles to Timothy. Did you also ever read Philemon?
@@innocentodinkemere4597 Timothy is a pastoral epistle, thus Paul probably didn't write it.
@@innocentodinkemere4597 He did not.
@@ji8044 1 Timothy 1 vs 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers-and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
@@ji8044 Matthew 13:41-42: “The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire.
Every time I hear people mention the slave Bible used in the US, I ask myself if they forget that the Bible was still used to defend/justify slavery well before the 1800s.
Serious question: will Dan's book be released internationally, like in the Philippines (which is a super Christian/religious) country?
He said it's gonna be available on-line (e-book)
Well, I would ask that his work be peer reviewed by other scholars. He made some statements in a short videos that are false, this cannot be allowed.
From a handwritten document by Abraham Lincoln, entitled 'Pro-slavery Theology'.
"'Give to him that is needy' is the Christian rule of charity; but 'Take from him that is needy' is the rule of slavery."
Great shirt, my man, Dan 👍
Merry Christmas Dan!
Jesus and the apostles did not outright condemn slavery. They didn’t need to. The effect of the gospel is that lives are changed, one by one, and those changed lives in turn bring transformation to entire families, clans, and cultures. Christianity was never designed to be a political movement, but, over time, it naturally affected political policy. Alexander MacLaren wrote that the gospel “meddles directly with no political or social arrangements, but lays down principles which will profoundly affect these, and leaves them to soak into the general mind”. In nations where Christianity spread and took firm hold, slavery was brought to an end through the efforts of born-again individuals. The Lord chooses to change people and society gradually, through the ministry of the Holy Spirit and the proclamation of the truth of the Word of God.
People have never needed to have a specifically edited Bible to cherry-pick from the Bible.
Not that there was much cherry-picking even involved in using the Bible to defend slavery anyway; it's not like the unabridged version denounces slavery either.
Not true this is my issue with this the slave Bible is a HEAVLY edited version they literally cherry picked what to leave and what to keep.
@@zsazsa4159 The slave Bible was made by an abolitionist, for the purpose of getting the Bible to enslaved people who otherwise wouldn't have it in any form at all.
When it comes to white people justifying slavery to themselves, they just used the already-awful-enough regular Bible.
@@zsazsa4159 So you have the magical version of the bible that is correct and can prove it is correct? Nope, you're just as easily dismissed as everyone else.
@@zsazsa4159 The "slave Bible" was made by an abolitionist, for the purpose of getting the Bible to enslaved people who otherwise wouldn't have it in any form at all.
White people trying to defend slavery to themselves or each other just used the regular Bible.
Trump’s election enabled a portion of my Bible believing family to openly express their belief that slavery was great. Sad.
I always wonder how Americans thinks white means Christian. I mean Jesus was never White
They must think Jeffrey Epstein was great too then.
I've always presumed that was the sentiment with the moniker making America great again, back when you could own other human beings. Indeed sad.
Very brave video. Thank you.
Why was Jesus-seen by some as a paragon of virtue, by others as a god or a demigod-unable to offer the slightest critique of a slave system such as the one prevalent in the Roman Empire?
Why did he use the term 'slave' repeatedly to illustrate his parables but never deigned to speak of them in human terms-let alone humanistic ones-without a word, gesture, or even a glance in their direction to acknowledge that their unjust condition was incompatible with the well-being and love he so often spoke of?
In any case, Saint Paul took care of it, but not in the way those unfortunate souls might have hoped.
Well done Jesus, you showed us your true humanity and ambivalence.
Thank you.
I've never heard of the "Slave Bible." A bible edited for slaves is an interesting exercise in hypocrisy. I'm anxiously waiting for your book to become available. Benchmark Books in SLC is my favorite store.
An added layer of hypocrisy is that in most of the slave-owning states, there were actual laws (enacted by state legislatures) forbidding the teaching of slaves to read. So who was supposed to be the reading audience for these eviscerated bibles?
Read this book, and it can answer many questions on this topic. I've read it and highly recommend it to anyone who wants to do some academic reading. Slave Religion: The "Invisible Institution" in the Antebellum South by Albert J. Raboteau
Wolverine!
Is that a shout-out to Dan's Canadian subs? 😉
Since ancient Greece,arguments in favor of inequality had been made, and they were sometimes aimed at the unfortunate people. It wouldn't surprise me if at least some flimsy justification would be presented to slaves even today.
Many people have commented why Jeesus never condemns slavery. The reason is, Jeesus wuz a Roman invention, and thus it would go against the Romans themselves if he had. As is well known, the Romans were one of the biggest slave-owning empires in history
LOLOLOLOLOL
I’m interested to know what parts of the Bible were typically left out of the versions given or read to enslaved folks, and why those parts. Exodus?
The Bible does raise one issue with it, the conflict of interest when someone bound by covenant to obey God is in a situation where they have to obey a human being who might order them to do something immoral. Hence Leviticus says not to enslave Israelites and Paul says to obtain your freedom if an opportunity avails itself.
You should go on with Trent horn, he has a channel called the counsel of Trent I think. You remind me of him and I think it would make a great podcast to her both of your takes since you both do have different views.
I want to know
How do you whip someone with a loving spirit. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.
JST, JST, JST. Just chanting over here
Abraham owned at least one slave, Hagar.
Dan is slowly losing his clean shaven-ness. What am I witnessing? Is this evolution?
Watching this channel was the worst decision I have ever made; it cost me my faith. 😢 I was just a happy guy, praying. Now i am full of doubts.
It gets better as you dive into truth
That's a GOOD thing. God created us to embrace logical, rational thinking, and to question things. What God actually IS is SO far beyond the comprehension of these people that insist that The Bible (a book written by rather primitive and entirely fallible Human men) is "inerrant" and "infallible". Actually, I'm convinced H.P. Lovecraft had a much keener understanding of these beings we call "God" and "angels" and "devils".
Try not to conflate a bad decision with a difficult one. ❤ Doubts are honest! We were lying to ourselves before.
@@Dalekzillathis is so well put! The thing to remember is that the contemporary lenses Dan talks about are actually necessary and good for using the bible in a loving and caring way today. Also, approaching your doubt with humility rather than shame that your faith isn’t strong can help you to build a faith that isn’t so reliant on what other people tell you to believe, be they Christian or secular or otherwise.
This, too, shall pass 🙏🏾. I personally left the faith last year, I'm only sticking around because I fear judgement from my family.
Kidnapping-->capital punishment-bible says so!
So…. Did the curators of the Bible believe slavery was good!
God practiced it, so I guess so.
Obviously, or why would they write verses defending it and providing directions on it?
hes leaving out an important part that the scriptures that were left out are the ones that promote freedom
Exodus 21:16 Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
Deuteronomy 23:15-16
“If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master. Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them.”
That’s just a few the Slave Bible was HEAVLY edited the Moses exodus was left out.
Yes the Bible has some comfortable issues with slavery BUT there are differences from biblical slavery AND chattel slavery. AND that is what the original creator was pointing out the Bible does not condone what slave owners were doing and THATS why they edited it to create a obedient slave, to strip them of their culture and make them think this was the Devine order for blk ppl AND the Bible does not say that
Exodus 21: 20-21 - "20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money."
You're easily dismissed.
Numbers 31: 17 - 18 - "17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
Your bible is nonsense, deal with it.
Exodus 21:16
“He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.”
This verse is literally speaking against slavery. 1) "He who Kidnaps" = By use of force, against ones will, no human rights.... 2) "and sells him" = Forced Labor, Forced servitude.
Slavery is used to mean servants in the old testament they are employees and some (IF and ONLY) they chose and the Court of Judges allowed, then they could become permanent employees.
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are"- exodus 21
it still is.
Hey, Bup.
Why were specific passages like Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt and like Galatians 3:28, which states, "There is neither slave nor free... for you are all one in Christ Jesus" omitted in slave Bibles, if not for the express purpose of control the enslaved population by promoting obedience and discouraging thoughts of liberation or resistance?
Also, appeal to silence about what a text _doesn't_ say is weak sauce.
except in Ephesians 6:5-9, Paul explicitly condones servile obedience for those who are slaves, and Leviticus 25:44-46 is all about how the israelites are to buy and keep the peoples of other nations as slaves
That is why. Or at least to keep the enslaved from trying to use those passages among themselves to promote resistance. I don't think Dan means to say otherwise. The point is that the primary use of the Bible to defend slavery was among the white population - to keep people who might have had the power to change things from attempting to do so and for that purpose unedited Bibles were used. No need to remove passages there.
Of course, some abolitionists did use the Bible to try to persuade other white people to end slavery. It was, as usual, a tool that both sides in a major debate would quote to justify their position.
@@plimpus4668
This is still begging the question.
@@jeffmacdonald9863
Exactly.
The point I am making is that while the alterations may not have been made to help defend slavery against the enslaved, a compelling case can be made that they were made to sidestep a potential issue altogether.
Of course, that raises another poignant question. If the Bible unambiguously condones/endorses slavery, and "there's no syllable of the Bible that in any way, shape, or form whatsoever questions, much less condemns the practice of buying, selling, and owning other human beings," why would any such ommissions be necessary? The fact that those who produced these slave Bible felt it was necessary to edit passages like those says something.
It's almost as if the Bible isn't univocal and as unambiguous as is being let on, and that those who assert that it holds a definitive position is negotiating with the text and dictating what it is and is not _allowed_ to say.
Galatians also states there is no female or male in Christ yet there is support for distinctions in the role and place of women compared to men, so I don't see how that verse in Galatians means that slavery is in any way wrong. Israelites being freed has no bearing on whether slavery is considered wrong and, in fact, the Israelites were allowed to engage in slavery when dealing with non-Israelites.
You may be able to interpret these lines out of context as anti-slavery, which is what some slave masters may have feared, but that doesn't mean that slavery is actually being described as wrong by the authors.
I think there are rules like freeing your slaves every seven years but the Tribe of Judah invented doctrines saying otherwise. You're supposed to double his possessions after the seven years, too! Double their net worth.
No that only applied to the deb slavery of fellow Israelite males.
Anybody who wasn't an Israelite male was a chattel slave.
To free Hebrew slaves, not Gentiles. And who wants to be owned for 7 years?😂
@@Cr-pj8bz Is it fair to the gentiles to enslave them with the system they use to enslave others, instead? Everyone practiced slavery back then.