Clivedurdle

Spin, are you saying "masters' is a politically correct translation of "slave owners?"

Has anyone done a biblical translation without the rose tinted spectacles?

"Master" is a reasonably innocuous word - someone who is an expert for example - not quite the same as "pimp" or 'slave owner".

And what about "servant"? Did they exist, were they equivalent to upstairs downstairs?

Haran

The word "masters" can also be translated "lords" and is the same word used of "The Lord". "Masters" carries some antebellum baggage, if you ask me...

The verse Spin mentions, in context, seems to me to exhort equity and respect in the treatment of others. It is certainly not a commentary on maintaining slavery as the status quo.

Haran

Grouping slave traders with murderers and perverts and then condemning them for not conforming to "sound doctrine" seems like a pretty strong condemnation of slave trade, and even slavery, to me.

Those who make money their God will fight hard for it...

Haran

Something I find funny in many atheists, especially militant ones, is that they tend to insist on interpreting the Bible in the exact same ways as those "Christians" they happen to believe behave poorly and least like Christ...strange.

Clivedurdle

Is "Slave-owner, saviour, messiah" then a reasonable translation of a certain phrase that is alleged to be the name of someone?

Haran

Not sure I follow you. Can you elaborate?

Definition of lord

pharoah

It's quite possible to be appalled by slave traders and still not oppose slavery itself. For example, few would argue that it would be inconsistent for me to own a gun and be contemptuous of arms dealers. The slave trade almost invariably entails kidnapping, murder, family breakups, etc. I think that it was those aspects of the trade that appalled Paul. When one looks at the verses in Ephesians, Colossians and Titus where he clearly exhorts slaves to obey their masters, I think that this would be an accurate description of Paul's position.

One could argue with equal force and far greater scriptural backing that the Bible gave aid and comfort to those seeking doctrinal support for preserving slavery. Clearly what was needed was an unequivocal comdemnation of the entire institution, and that's nowhere to be found in the Bible.

yummyfur

To Haran

Slave traders have always been considered scummy, even in societies that thouroughly approve of slavery, so I'm not sure how a condemnation of slave traders shows anything, they were universally considered decietfull and nasty, and this was true even during America's slavery period.

more on status of slavers in Roman world
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~thurley/trade.html

Clivedurdle

.

Your dictionary confirms my alternative version of "Lord Jesus Christ"!

Don't all those comments about being slaves to God mean Jesus was seen as a slave master?

Haran

So, slave trade was contrary to the "sound doctrine" of God. If it is contrary to the "sound doctrine" of God, then it ought, surely, to be ended. Where, exactly, does the end of slave trade leave the institution of slavery?

This is, of course, a subjective view, and one that I believe to be far from true. There is much more in the NT that speaks of respect and love for one's neighbor, etc.

Though the bible does not offer explicit condemnation of many wrongs besides just slavery, it does speak quite clearly about how we are to treat others..."love your neighbor as yourself". This should be more than enough for those not driven by selfish and monetary goals.