I was having a conversation with a friend of mine concerning the up coming Canadian election. He told me that he wasn't going to vote (at least that is what I interpreted him to say). He basically said to me that there isn't a party that would support his beliefs on what he believes is the most biblical form of a democratic government. If I understand what he said, his opinion is based on the principle that if a person doesn't work, they don't eat. He doesn't believe anyone who doesn't work should get welfare (I am not sure if he has exceptions to this). Instead he believes that a form of slavery which is non-racial and voluntary for those who need it. This would be run privately by people who can afford to support slaves. This would include food, medical, as well as education for the slaves and their families. He also mentioned something about every seven years there being something that benefited the slaves, but unfortunately I didn't understand his point in mentioning that. I would have liked to have found out more about his ideas, but unfortunately we ran out of time.
I have to admit that my first inclination was to dismiss what he said out right. However, I thought I would get the opinions of other Christians before I do so.
What are your thoughts on his view? Please give reasons.
It may sound silly, but it doesn't sound that bad to someone like me. It sounds silly because it is out of place in our countries. It might work for someone like me in my current situation who needs a job, guaranteed. Tom, you mentioned food, medical, and education; is housing included in that? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Well, <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/3stooges.gif" alt="" /> to his idea. IMHO the CHURCH has a responsibility to reach out to those in need with food, clothing, shelter, re-education, etc. If the Church reached out to these in the fullness of the Scripture than the only homeless would be those who would be homeless by choice (which some do desire). IMHO the CHURCH has miserably failed here in what we may call social outreach/evangelism, etc. Just a rhetorical question, but how many here voluntarily work in a homeless shelter even 1 hour a week? Thus, where is Christ and the Church in his solution (Deut 15:4, 11)?
While I do believe in the homeless working et. al., the solution clearly is not the re-institution of slavery.
Quote
Instead he believes that a form of slavery which is non-racial and voluntary for those who need it. This would be run privately by people who can afford to support slaves. This would include food, medical, as well as education for the slaves and their families.
IMHO this is called having a job <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> so why attach the term voluntary slavery to it?
There is a book called, "On Being Black and Reformed," by Anthony Carter that both you and he may enjoy. It is a quick read, probably an hour or so. There is only one premise in the book I did not agree with (the terminology "Black Theology") and it has an excellent section on slave history and reformed theology in its application to such. It is worth the read as it gives what I would consider some introductory thoughts on the motives behind the initial slave trading which may be of some shock to some here.
This would be run privately by people who can afford to support slaves. This would include food, medical, as well as education for the slaves and their families.
I think that forced slavery and voluntary slavery are two seperate forms. The former is what the USA had prior to 1865 or so. Voluntary slavery is actually called Indentured Servitude, and is more like what the OT laws were regarding bought families or single individuals.
2Th 3:7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, 2Th 3:8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you; 2Th 3:9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example. 2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. 2Th 3:11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. 2Th 3:12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.
Quote
Matthew Henry
2Th 3:6-15 - Those who have received the gospel, are to live according to the gospel. Such as could work, and would not, were not to be maintained in idleness. Christianity is not to countenance slothfulness, which would consume what is meant to encourage the industrious, and to support the sick and afflicted. Industry in our callings as men, is a duty required by our calling as Christians. But some expected to be maintained in idleness, and indulged a curious and conceited temper. They meddled with the concerns of others, and did much harm. It is a great error and abuse of religion, to make it a cloak for idleness or any other sin.
Those who chose indentured servitude were also required to follow the 'religion of the house' so to speak as well, under OT laws concerning this practice. These people also had basic 'rights' and were not mere property like cattle.
Well Tom I am with your freind on the work issue.I cannot comprehend a christian not working health permitting of course.Even when someone is classified as ill they can still serve very usefull purposes e.g.we have a lady in our church who has severe athritis yet she still contributes in many ways to the practical life of the church and the community.I share the frustration many others have that the welfare state here in the u.k.at least is counter productive IMHO.It is a sad joke here that many make a career out of being so called ill,while as always the real people who are ill do without.
But I will say that what my friend was talking about was more than just a job. Once they have voluntarily become slaves, they are slaves in every sense of the word. This doesn't mean that the slave owner is not subject to laws on how they are to treat the slaves. Also, from what I gather from the conversation, the slave is not free to leave the when they want. Perhaps that is why my friend mentioned seven years.
To be opposed to a Socialist state with its exorbitant spending to fund social programs, some of which challenge the imagination, such is the case here in Canada, is one thing. But to advocate slavery of any kind as an alternative is unacceptable. I would also challenge this friend of yours (you sure do have some "strange" friends) to prove the Bible teaches slavery is to be enjoined as a means to resolve homeless and/or poverty.
Also, from what I gather from the conversation, the slave is not free to leave the when they want. Perhaps that is why my friend mentioned seven years.
I am glad you clarified this. Indeed, this is sad that any would think in such a manner today. Slavery is not biblical today. Despite the Bible's apparent acknowledgment of slavery, what the Bible taught us about God and man led Christians to conclude that the holding of another man or woman in bondage was a sin. Look up some articles on William Wilberforce as he is probably more responsible for a Christian view against slavery today than any other--IMHO.
I was quite taken back when I found out my friend advocated a form of slavery. Soteriology speaking he believes the same as I do, but I am finding that some of his views are a lot different than mine. I plan if the opportunity arises, to find out more about what he believes on the matter. I may also ask him to prove that the Bible teaches slavery. Some how I hope I misunderstood what he was saying, but if I did I have no idea what he was saying.
Is there a particular Bible passage that you believe speaks against slavery?
Thanks for mentioning William Wilberforce, I just read a couple of articles on him. He sounds like he was quite a man. I will be reading a few other articles, because I haven't found where he uses the Bible against slavery.
By the way, I don't think my friend would advocate any unfair treatment of slaves. At least I hope not, because he is a Christian. He also has a pastor's degree, though he is not a pastor. But that is another story.
If someone owned you and could make a profit what would happen? SELL, SELL, SELL. The Bible specifically condemns the slave trade (1 Timothy 1:10). The Bible offers a unique framework for people as being equals: We were all are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27) and we are all equal in God's sight (Galatians 3:28).
What does everyone think military service is, but indentured servitude?
Yes, but aren't we glad there are persons willing to serve in the military especially today, D-day? Without these great men who fought for the freedoms we have today what would the world look like?
President Reagan said, "These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war."
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
