Why did slave holders in the South comply with the Emancipation?

[ole]

This was the biggest one because it was believed that Africans were the true blood descendants of Canaan and therefore slavery was God's role for them.

I believe it was the descendents of Cush who were "colored." The curse on Canaan, instead of on Ham, has been interpreted as an excuse to destroy Cannan and destroy its inhabitants.

Just a thought.
Ole

[ole]

Do all bible references to slavery deal with Africans or are other ethnicities covered? Because I'm thinking that anyone who was in debt to anyone else in those days could have been forced into some form of servitude. Thanks for the help.

Few, if any (note how adeptly avoided saying none) biblical references to slavery mention colored or black or otherwise. You took slaves in war or bought those who had been taken in war. It was also possible to sell a child or even yourself into slavery to pay a debt or avoid destitution. The references to slavery are mostly (note how adeptly I avoided saying all) have to do with the treatment of slaves.

Justification of slavery on biblical grounds was quite likely a practice of the non-slaveholder -- the bible says it's OK as long as they are treated well, but I'm not obligated to look in on how they are treated. Slaveholders who used the bible as justification may or may not have observed the admonishments on treatment -- usually along the lines of "like your own family." Slaveholders who used other rationales -- positive good, they're better off, a necessary evil, too stupid to live without our supervision, savage brutes, won't work without a beating now and then -- will, I strongly suspect, be in the majority.

Just an observation.
Ole

[JerseyBart]

Thanks Ole,

You are very adept at avoiding the extremes/absolutes in writing. I was just curious to know if slavery was broken down into race or the spoils of war or being on the power end of debt. I didn't really remember (notice that I avoided the word never as well) reading or hearing that slavery was specific to Africans and Africans only in the bible. That cleared it up.

Bart

[ole]

The Native Americans were not mentioned either, but a goodly number ended up cultivating tobacco and cotton. US practice was limited people of color or convicts. Indentured servants and apprentices had a limited term of servitude. (Hence, the term "persons held to service" in the Constitution.)

By the way, can't sleep?
Ole

[JerseyBart]

Ole,

Sleep??? What's sleep??? I think that I've forgotten how to sleep and what sleep is in the past few years. Or I could take the Bon Jovi approach and say that "I'll live while I'm alive and sleep when I'm dead." lol

Bart

[MobileBoy]

Ole,
Yea the land of Cush was ancient Ethiopia.actually Moses wife came from there.I didn't mean the Israelites thought the descendants of Caanan were black.I meant Southerners of the antebellum era thought of the slaves as descended Canaanites.I'm not saying I personally believe any of this as I'm sure you already figured.
Jersey Boy,
The Bible never mentions color relating to slaves at all.In the Old Testament there are no caucascians in any of the verses.I know I have a hard time not picturing of Charlton Heston.The only big no no was enslaving other Israelites or exploiting them.Other poeples were for the most part considered evil.Not really fair for them ,but the customs of Israeli neighbors such as child sacrifice and orgies didn't help fight the Israeli stereotype of them as devilworshippers.This is off subject but I always found the portrayal of how Jesus looked on earth silly.Usually he's fair complected,with light brown hair, and blue eyes.Nonbiblical sources which described him say he was tan with dark hair and dark eyes.The Bible just says he basically looked like an ordinary Jew.

[JerseyBart]

Thanks Ashley,

That definately clears up a curiosity of mine. I thought that the Bible's definition of slave wasn't specifically African and wondered how anyone who just threw around the slavery quotes in the bible when talking about American slavery automatically quoted the Bible as if that okay'd the institution. Thanks for the help.

Bart

[trice]

Originally Posted by MobileBoy

...This is off subject but I always found the portrayal of how Jesus looked on earth silly.Usually he's fair complected,with light brown hair, and blue eyes.Nonbiblical sources which described him say he was tan with dark hair and dark eyes.The Bible just says he basically looked like an ordinary Jew.

The way Christ's image was portrayed changed after the Shroud of Turin came to Europe. Whatever the truth about it's origin may be, any study of the art involved will show the timing of the change. You might say that artists just went with the flow -- after all, if there was any truth to the story then they had an example at hand to copy. (Plus, no one really wanted to risk ticking off church authorities.)

Regards,
Tim

[ole]

Cush is usually translated as Ethiopia but was Nubia which apparently conquered Egypt and ruled it as the XXV dynasty for about 60 years. Babylon was also referred to as Cush. If we're talking Zipporah, there may have been another Cush in Midian. At least one of Moses' wives was not the same color as Moses.

I don't see the connection between the sons of Canaan as slaves when it was Cush who was cursed and whose descendants were Africans.
Ole

[Hanny]

Have you ever read them in their entirerty? The impression I came away within no way gives me the impression slavery was all that great...

Your impresion has nothing to do with the slaves expressed opinion now does it?, unless your only intrested in your opinion on slavery that is, as oposed to those who actually lived under it.

Just as a simple note; 1930's... mmm great depression? Also white people asking; not black... Of coarse there would be 70% or so saying: Yeah... I was happier as a slave, isn't that what you want to hear?

Federal census takers compiled it, the data is neutral, what you take it to mean is up to you. Most people today simply do not understand the condition of slavery.

It's also remarkable to me that you conveniently forget the horrible account of watching a man burned alive as punishment or of a mother never seeing her cildren again.

Burning alive as a military puishment for the crime of arson remained as a stutue till the mid 1800, and if you pass through US or UK eduaction, you will be taught that family break up through sale of ofspring was LOWER for negros than it was for whites whose familys moved interstate, but why blet ugly fact ruin your pre conceptions of conditions.

Time on the Cross, which you cite utterly refutes your last rambellings about slave breeding, break up of familys through sale etc. Dont cite works that dont support your argument, as it tends to give the impresion your have not read them and think an appeal to authority is all you need.

On the comntary, its the Nobel prize winning use of statistical intpretation that allows us now to know that slave breeding for prophit simply did not exist as it would not be profitable if it was practised, as Time on the Cross explains at length, that the number of negro familys broken up through inforced sale was statitscly speaking absurdly insignifcant, so please dont call my mention of whats actually in the book as not being supported by the book, clearly you have not read it in some time, if at all.

simply request then as you say you have a copy, scan in what is says on slave breeding for profit, break up of familys through sale of children,or shall i do it for you?.

Excuse me? I have not cited from Time on the Cross except to say it is among one of many titles that have shaped my opinion that your premise that slavery was lovely is ignorant.

Lovely?, i did not say or imply that is was.

I assure you I have read them; I typically only list books that I own; though I have often also mentioned books from the library that I frequently reference.

Then i look forward to your scans from Time on the Cross.

Davis as a source for... never mind. The very idea that EVERY black man serving as a conscript is a load of crock and a shallow attempt to cheapen their service and I believe you know it.

I refered to the Federal law that required every negro to be conscipted into federal military service who was not in full time employment, and Davis as a source is nothing to be shy off, he was not ignorant of the causes and conditions.

Of coarse some of the books I listed do not portray slavery as the brutal practice I see it as. Simply because I list a book as a worthy look does not mean I 100% agree w/ it either. Point out a single book that I listed that concludes slavery as the equal to your 21 year military career.

Well another year in Iraq makes 22, pesky reservist compulsary service, but that aside, i was referiing to the 1800 practice of life service as a member of the military, in which the punishments were as bad as those for slavery if not worse, in fact, i know you dont like facts ruining your misconception of the condition of slavery, but you had a higher chance of being whipped in the UK Army than did a slave, and an even higher one if in the RN, lived a shorter life expetency, ate a worse diet, lived in a smaller spacial dwelling.

As you have called it a day, have a nice one. Continue to defend slavery; it's your right to do so.

Well i had to go fight in an ilegal war against my wishes, so i did not have a nice day at all, but i guess an object lesson of mil service defeating personal desire as being a form of slavery couold be lost on you.

Defend it?, nope i attempted to explain it to you because you do not appear to researched it
yet nor had it taught to you at College/school.

I really do hope it garners you no friends here. You implied those who disagreed w/ you ignorant in an earlier post... well I disagree w/ your premise and see only an individual who makes the increadible and unbelievable claim that he would be happy to be a slave. If that makes me ignorant... so be it.

Ok, cite where i posted i would be happy to be slave for me. To be ignorant is simply to be unaware, so kindly dont take it as offensive when i ask you to cite the post in which i say as you claim, as im ignorant of doing so.
We can get to being ignorant of whats contained in the Time on the Cross shortly.