The Bible TI251 Fall 2020

For Tuesday’s class, we read and discussed the topic of slavery.

First, an important perspective going into these readings and discussions were necessary. I once read a quote that said, “we cannot judge the past with standards of the present.” This is important when we are reading anything from a different time period, especially when it comes to the Bible.

Second, an important distinction that we made was the difference between ancient slavery and American slavery, with which I am more familiar with. Beforehand, I didn’t know about this distinction. Ancient slavery was more similar to being a servant, compared to American slavery where slaves were actually bought, traded, and owned. In ancient slavery, it was more of a choice and volunteered to become a slave. Most people sold themselves, or their kids, into slavery in order to pay off debt. Of course, this is not something they preferred but was a better option than dying. American slaves were forced just because of their skin color and had no say. In the Timothy reading, I found it interesting that they said “those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful.” Does this mean those who don’t have believing masters can be disrespectful? It only matters if the master believes? It doesn’t matter if the slave believes or not?

Thirdly, we discussed the difference in the economy and idea of the property that took place at these times. The economy was mostly agriculturalists. Most people had land and relied on crops and animals in order to feed themselves and to make money. This is why the idea of slavery was so prevalent because it was easy to get in debt and necessary in order to survive. The idea of the property being different is also important because they did not think of slaves as property, but things like land and animals and crops as property.

Lastly, we discussed the types of battles happening. Dr. McGrath explained that the battles of slavery are over. And to this, I might argue. People in the US agree that slavery is bad, but there is secretly a lot of slavery still happening in other parts of the world where people still think it is okay and are abusing people. However, I did agree that there are other parts of the Bible that are still being battled. These battles include social policy, laws, and rights. These battles are important for our future.

Today in class we discussed the idea of slavery in the Bible. We talked about how the idea of slavery in the Bible was different than the US slavery that we have been taught about in school. I thought it was interesting that slavery when discussed in the Bible is something that people offered to pay off debts. I also thought the conversation of a world without slavery was interesting as well. We talked about how if there is no slavery, how would these people pay off their debts they cannot pay? These are questions I have never thought about before. I had never thought much about the idea of indentured servitude. With this in mind, I wonder how many other people think about indentured servitude when reading the Bible as opposed to US slavery.

In response to the question left for us to ponder on ‘what is being left out of the conversations including the Bible,’ I would say that the context of the situation is being left out. There are many times in which people try to shape the words of the Bible to fit the argument they are trying to uphold as truth. For example, slavery; the cultural difference between the American perception of slavery in the 21^st century is different than the perception of slavery in ancient times. Or even the Slave Bible where all the narratives of slaves in ancient times having any sort of notion to go against the hand of authority under which they lay. In most conversations, it’s a matter of taking what you like and discarding what you don’t like. The matter of liking or disliking comes down to what is upholding your side of the argument. By taking out pieces of information the audience does not get the full picture of what is going on and the text given can skew the meaning of the full meaning itself. This plays into the historical context as well; people take the literal words from the Bible and fix them to their point of view without considering what the context was in history. It ignores the fact there were different cultures with different beliefs and practices.

Today in class we discussed the issue of slavery/indentured servitude in the Bible, and there were a few things I wanted to address about this topic. Context of when sections of the Bible were written (and to an extent, who wrote a given section) is critical when analyzing and attempting to understand the Bible. I Timothy 6 was written during the Roman Empire, which lasted from about 27 BC to 1453 AD, and Exodus was most likely written at the same time as the Greek Empire (about 1200 BC to 323 BC). The Egyptian Empire and the Greek Empire existed during the same period of time. All three of these empires used slaves and servants, so it’s crucial to understand the historical and cultural contexts of servitude and slavery of these three empires and how it may effect the authors of the Bible when they write about slavery. Slavery during the time of the Bible was more akin to indentured servitude. People would sell family members, themselves, or the entire family into servitude in order to repay debts. Those who were sold into servitude or willingly participated in it to repay a debt, could buy back their freedom, have it restored by a court (if the master behaved poorly), or have their freedom restored after a period of time, and Exodus 21 lays out the conditions for these restorations of freedom to servants. Slavery in any period of time can’t be looked at through a single lens, but should be studied for its given period in time.

In class on 9/24, we talked about a hypothetical society and what commandments we would have for it. We all agreed mostly agreed on the basic commandments of don’t kill, don’t lie, and be kind. Where we disagreed, however, was the inclusion of the first commandment as being necessary: “I am the Lord your God, thou shall not have any other Gods before me.” Some claimed that this commandment is needed because there needs to be something to act as the foundation, or the reason to follow the rest of the commandants. People said that there should be some sort of divine commandment to have before all the other ones. However, I don’t entirely think that there needs to be such a reason in order to follow a society’s laws/commandments. Why can’t people want to follow them in order to have a society that they want to live in? A society with law, order, freedom, and happiness. I feel like most people would want to follow the rules for that reason, and there doesn’t have to be a divine or religious commandment in order for that to happen. Obviously, there will always be people who break the law. There will always be people to break the commandments, if that’s what they try to follow. In our hypothetical society, this commandment is very exclusive for many people, for example like atheists and Hindus.

This week’s discussion made me think a lot about how the Ten Commandments have influenced me and the law. In Sunday school, I always accepted them for what they were and they eventually became a part of me subconsciously. The “do nots” seemed like the obvious way to do it. The law in America is basically the same, saying “you get in trouble for ____” and we all accept the way it’s written.

Don’t kill, don’t lie, don’t steal all seem pretty obvious, but how DID God and Moses figure out what to tell the Israelites? We had plenty of trouble agreeing on what kinds of rules to include on our master list in class, but what made these people follow it? Was it really the idea that they were God-ordained? People here break rules all the time, even the most Christian-y Christians. Sometimes people disobey for very good reasons.

Once again, a simple, black-and-white example from Sunday school turned grey because there really doesn’t seem to be a clear answer anymore. The law is complicated, but to me it says something about the role of God in religion and secular life. If the Ten Commandments were really god-sent, which I believe, then this list shows he knows what he’s talking about. “Do not murder” and “do not lie” seem pretty obvious, and seem to have clear exceptions, but just avoiding them in general is a good idea. Especially for the wandering and fragile tribes of Israel. Whether it’s a perfect example for society today or not, it worked for them and there’s definitely some good advice there.

In class on Thursday, we discussed the commandments that we would give a community. It was a hot debate. Most people settled on don’t kill, don’t lie, and don’t steal. I find it interesting that they all start with do not. It is hard to come with laws/rules that are telling a person what to do instead of telling them what they shouldn’t do.

However, I came up with one. Be Kind. In my community, I believe this would be my only commandment. Because if you are being kind, the bad things that happen in a community should be avoided, and the good things should be encouraged. I believe this one commandment would overall create a very healthy, friendly, and simple community. It starts to get too complicated when you put in too many rules. People start resenting the commandments, ruling, etc. Giving people more freedom will usually turn out to be better by encouraging the natural good in people. Maybe some simple clarification of kindness and examples of what would be kind and what wouldn’t be kind would be needed, but otherwise, I would leave it at that. Be Kind.

Reading Exodus was interesting because again, I have never read these texts before (or from what I remember). The idea of the plagues was interesting, and the 10th plague was unexpected where the firstborn dies.

Reading about the Slave Bibles was sad. The manipulation and torture that occurred along with slavery are sad. Slave owners really thought it was okay to selectively edit the Bible in order to instill slavery and avoid rebellion. I feel as this shows that slave owners knew what they were doing was wrong, and had to manipulate in order to make it “okay.” It is disgusting that they kept parts of the Bible that discussed enslavement and listening to masters but cut out the parts that discussed rebellion, uprising, and freedom.

Discussing Biblical Law is something I believe to be important. It is true that you must ensure that the law is truly saying that before perceiving it to be true and demanding others to follow it. I also think its important that laws must change over time and must be adapted or rejected. This reminds me of the Constitution and how some laws must be adapted because it was written by white males who thought slaves are only 3/5 of a person.

This brings me to the next reading of the audience of the ten commandments. It is an important distinction that the audience was aimed at privileged males (mostly white). Knowing the intended audience can help when perceiving the readings.

One of the biggest things I have taken away from these readings is how differently people interpret certain parts of the Bible. Just like how there were different interpretations and views of the story of Sodom that influenced and still influences people’s opinions of homosexuals, there are many passages in the Bible that has influenced people’s views of slavery in the past in America based on how they interpret certain parts of the Bible. Some people take certain areas of the Bible in a literal sense, which then influences their ideas about that certain area of the Bible, which then influences their perspective on a certain idea of society or an idea about humanity. Others may use different areas of the Bible to try to interpret a certain story or passage in another area of the Bible, and this also influences people’s ideas and perspectives in different ways. It has always amazed me how many different perspectives have been made about the Bible, even though it is considered to be one cohesive book and story.

The Slave Bible was the most interesting part of both the reading and the lecture for me. What the abridgement of it tells me about those who enslaved people and give them this new Bible is that they know that they were wrong in their actions of enslavement. If you have to take out 80% of a book in order to justify something to a group of people with very limited reading abilities, then you must know that there isn’t much substance to your argument. It extra doesn’t help that it’s the most holy scripture to Christians. If we know one thing it is that when reading the Bible you need context. This applies to all issues in the Bible, not just slavery. The vastly different interpretations of the Bible by people who dedicate their whole lives to it show how the version of the Bible we have today is already vague in many parts and so removing as much context as they did is just about nullifies everything. This to me is just about the most unholy thing that you can do, use the Bible to blind a whole group of people from the true word of God.