In one of the episodes on Thinking Christian, I had a conversation with David Zach from Remedy Drive. David is involved with Exodus Road, a ministry that helps women and men who are subject to human trafficking. During that conversation, David raised the issue of slavery in the Old Testament. As an Old Testament theologian, I’ve been aware of the conversations about slavery (and violence more generally) in the Old Testament. I committed to exploring the issue in greater depth. This series of articles is my attempt to do that.
5 Important Factors about God and Slavery
The topic of “slavery” in the Hebrew Bible is complicated by a number of factors.
1. We tend to assume that our social arrangements (while flawed) are better than others.
To put it differently, we tend to think that the way we dehumanize others is less normative than exceptional. That tendency is problematic in so much as we begin to miss the underlying dynamics of domination, captivity to sin, and dehumanization that all societies institute or allow in a fallen world.
2. We assume to know how and why God does what he does.
As the old argument goes, if God is all good, loving, and sovereign, evil should not exist. Understanding that the sinful world is chaotic and confused and that God is good, loving, and sovereign are not logically incompatible. Instead, they suggest that God is exercising his benevolence, loving us, and exercising authority in a fallen world in ways we may not fully grasp or enjoy.
3. The problem of translation.
“Slaves” and “slavery” are attached to concepts rooted in social arrangements like those in the antebellum South or contemporary human trafficking. That concept of slavery doesn’t align with the social arrangements described in the Hebrew Bible.
The terms used to describe two different social arrangements are the same, but the actual practices are quite different.
4. We need to wrestle with specific commands God gives to his people.
Instances when God instructs Israel to take those from other nations as “slaves” require some explanation. In my estimation, these texts need to be situated within a broader framework of God’s relationship to the nations.
5. There has been relatively little research done on concubines in the Hebrew Bible.
Marital status and sexual practices between concubines and their husbands are often difficult to ascertain. I’ve opted not to address concubines in this series because I have not had time to consider the topic with the depth it deserves. At this point, I would only say that the taking of concubines is problematic, though I would hesitate to equate it with what we often see in modern-day sex trafficking. That said, my understanding of concubines in the Hebrew Bible is admittedly insufficient to draw any hard conclusions.
Have We Really Progressed Beyond Ancient Social Structures?
No social, cultural, or political arrangement can escape the curse of the fall (Gen 3:8-24). Unfortunately, there are some who believe that our society is more advanced or “morally superior” to that described in the Hebrew Bible. For instance, in a recent episode of the Jordan Peterson podcast, espoused atheist Daniel Dennett notes,
“What we think of as good today is quite different from what was thought good back in Old Testament days. Nobody today would want to live with Old Testament morality. We’ve come a long way from that. Thank goodness. Thank goodness. Goodness has evolved.”
Dennett’s comments reflect a perspective that tends to dominate our imaginations. It assumes progress and forward movement. It assumes that we are more advanced than those who came before us. The terms “advancement” and “progress” suggest that we know we are headed in the right direction. Yet, as C. S. Lewis once wrote,
“We all want progress. But progress means getting nearer to the place where you want to be…If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man.”
If we don’t know whether we are moving in the right direction, we can only guess whether we are progressing. As such, we need to be careful not to confuse change with progress.
So, how can we think about social structure? We may find it helpful to compare societies to a Lite-Brite. If you are unfamiliar, a Lite-Brite consists of a light box underneath a panel covered with black paper. It also includes colored pegs that fit into the panel. When the colored pegs are poked through the black paper and illuminated, multi-colored patterns emerge. Different patterns can be created depending on the placement of the pegs. The pattern doesn’t produce the light. The light source illuminates the pattern. Patterns on the Lite-Brite differ because they release and block the light source in unique ways.
Social structures are similar. The “light” (or good) we see in society is the reflection of God’s glory through that society rather than the product of that society. The various ways God’s glory shines through a given society are distinct, as are the ways a given society blocks or distorts God’s glory. As such, when we are comparing societies, broad judgments like “better” or “worse” will generally lack the specificity necessary to understand that society. Instead, we can think about social arrangements as reflecting or obscuring the light of God’s glory.
While she does not address social arrangements specifically, Lauren Winner’s insight regarding practices is helpful. She argues that practices can be “deformed” by sin and that the way they are deformed is “proper to” or emerges from the practice itself. A society’s practices will always be susceptible to “deformations” unique to that society. For instance, the United States is rooted in a set of practices intended to preserve freedom and individual rights. Yet, we can see that there are instances in which freedom is used in a “deformed” manner (e.g., free enterprise and greed; free speech and pornography). The freedom preserved results in “deformations” that reflect a misuse of that freedom. Until there is a full restoration of our social arrangements, there will always be negative consequences that arise from the character of those social arrangements.
We should not assume that all societies are “bad” (or disordered) in the same way. Though we could certainly point to a common problem like sin, we cannot say that sin always produces the same sort of disorder in every case. Societies follow different idols. Any human effort to overcome human limitations is bound to reinforce disordered social arrangements. As such, the body of Christ taught through discipleship is the only true alternative available to a hopelessly disordered world. That said, the body of Christ remains a community in process and continually susceptible to sin in unique and profound ways. Still, the body of Christ has recourse (i.e., confession, repentance, accountability) and power (i.e., the Holy Spirit) that those without Christ do not.
We shouldn’t excuse the unique ways a given society obscures or distorts God’s glory. Any departure from God’s order is deeply lamentable and damaging. It reminds us of our limitations. Those limitations are not something to be overcome. Instead, they should drive us to be dependent on and loyal to God. Our limitations should press us to relate rightly to our sovereign, wise, and benevolent God. When we seek to live apart from God, our limitations become vulnerabilities. Our insecurities and inability/unwillingness to depend on God create a situation in which disordered social relationships become the norm rather than the exception. This understanding of social relationships is crucial because it reminds us that no social arrangement apart from God can overcome sin and provide the resources for human flourishing.
We arrange ourselves to mitigate certain difficulties that come with life in a disordered world. In some settings, those arrangements are relatively just. One task of governing authorities is to restrain evil. Governing authorities are to set limits through judgment so that chaos doesn’t have free reign. Even in those settings, however, we cannot escape the sort of disorder that leads to coercive, if not abusive, social arrangements. As individuals empowered by the Holy Spirit and committed to imitating Christ, we can resist the temptation to pursue our own comforts and desires at the expense of others. Even so, we too often do so imperfectly.
Social Arrangements and Slavery in the Bible
The references to servitude or “slavery” in the Hebrew Bible have often prompted criticism. For instance, well-known atheist Sam Harris notes, “The entire civilized world now agrees that slavery is an abomination…Consult the Bible, and you will discover that the creator of the universe clearly expects us to keep slaves.” Such criticism is, on the one hand, less than concerning. Within the scope of Harris’s broader project, it makes sense that he would raise this sort of moral question without, at the same time, recognizing the underlying theological issues and concerns that give rise to human indignity and evil in every age.
When considering how society was arranged in the Hebrew Bible, we are not seeking to justify a given arrangement or to defend God. The goal is not to argue a position but to consider themes and texts that might help us understand God and the various ways he relates to a disordered creation he has committed to restore. Humanity’s fallen state creates a confused and chaotic world. God’s work in that world may be construed as “redemptive” in a broad sense, but that redemption is not immediate. Instead, God engages in a range of actions that demonstrate his patience, compassion, restraint, and love. As 2 Peter 3:9 notes,
“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.”
In contrast to Harris, whose position is served by painting a simplified, selective picture of the Bible’s teaching, Christians need to consider these matters with greater depth and nuance. The suggestion that God “endorses” certain social arrangements (e.g., slavery) must account for the beginning and the end of the biblical narrative. God did not create disorder. Disorder was the result of free agents who chose to reject the order God established. That rejection had consequences, which, in part, influenced human social arrangements. God interacts with humans engaged in those social arrangements even though such arrangements were only tolerated (Matt 19:8).
God is moving toward the new creation. Along the way, however, we are living in a fallen world where human beings pursue their own selfish ambitions rather than loving their neighbors. While God may appear “slow” in dealing with injustice, all human action will ultimately be subject to God’s judgment. Even when God employs nations for his purposes, they will be held accountable (Jer 25:8-14). God, then, is not seeking to establish an eternal society in which individuals or groups use the gifts he has given for their own advantage, but a society in which an unreserved love of God issues forth in a pure love for others and an uninterrupted harmony with the rest of creation. In the meantime, God deals with sin in a variety of ways, empowers protection of the vulnerable within (and often despite of) the limitations of human society, and calls on his people to endure not only persecution but also the suffering that comes from experiencing life in a world that is not as it should be.
Photo Credit: SWN Design
Read Part 2: How God Handles Divorce and Other Broken Social Norms
Read Part 3: What Sets Modern Human Trafficking Apart from Ancient Slavery?
