BIBLE Professor's Slavery Apologetics - Dr. Bowen Responds

When online apologists defend the endorsement of slavery in the Old Testament, that's one thing. In this video, however, Professor Carmen Imes provides her understanding and justification for difficult issues like slavery, violence, and genocide in the Bible. Dr. Josh responds, explaining why her theologically motivated explanations do not align with the text in its original context.

𒀭Support Digital Hammurabi!𒀭

----------

For general information and sources relating to the Ancient Near East, we recommend these websites:

----------

Music: Brak Bnei Original Composition

[ChipPayet]

Very polite, detailed, and thorough description of exactly how and why the apologist is either misleading or wrong. Dishonest is a 3rd possibility, but Josh is far too nice to ever suggest that.

[VulcanLogic]

My biggest problem with these guys is that we've outlawed indentured servitude and debt slavery, because those practices are also morally repugnant. But the ancient Israelites also had chattel slavery and daughters were sold as property for money to be used by men and the book says that was ok.

[discoveringancienthistoryw]

This is why examining a person's CV is so important. Josh is far too nice to do it publicly, but I'm not. This is PRECISELY what you should expect from a professor who teaches at Biola University - not to mention getting her masters and PhD from openly evangelical institutions. No one should be surprised.

[markrothenbuhler]

I must have missed that passage in the Bible that said, "Thou shalt excuse and explain away all problematic words of this holy text."

[quinn]

Her wording just got to me. "People died..." as if they just fell over of their own accord in these battles as described.

It's just so bizarre, and she was consistent about it, so these wording choices seem intentional.

[ufpride]

“Every marriage relationship in the ancient world involved the exchange of wealth between two families” is a nice way of saying “marriage in the ancient world was human trafficking where dads were more of a pimp to his daughter than he was an actual father and the book I use to get my morals from views marriage the exact same way”

[Philusteen]

Im not sure how this woman cannot see her own intellectual dishonesty.

[kedamafoe]

I still don't understand her argument. god didn't want them to commit genocide just erase them from history is still genocide

[craigmiller]

I am struck by two main things watching your response.

One, you do an excellent job clearly communicating your perspective and sources, and know the topic well

Two, I have read and watched you way too much on this topic, because each time you played a clip of her, I had a pretty good idea where you were going with your response. As soon as she said 6 years, I immediately knew you were going to bring up Hammurabi’s 3 :)

Keep up the good work!

[chrisdsouza]

26:20 "If Dr.Imes would like to discuss with me"

If she does agree to discuss with you, I will eat my hat 😂

[taylorlibby]

I don't have as much of a problem with the Bible depiciting and endorsing slavery and genocide, I'm sure that the same and much much worse was happening all over the world at the time (and since) and I don't use the Bible as my moral framework, as I do with the desperate tap dance Bible apologists do to try and pretend that we're not seeing what we're seeing.

[dennisjohnson]

Anyone who claims to know the Bible and defends the Bible’s view of slavery by only referring to the verses on inslaving fellow Israelites is dishonest and deceitful period

[Jahonay]

Whenever I see people try to separate the slavery in the bible from the slavery of the south. It strikes me as being very misinformed or underinformed. If you read through Albert Bledsoe's essay on liberty and slavery for example, you would see that the hard passages like leviticus 25:44 are exactly how the proslavery south defended slavery.

[gustavderkits]

Thank you for not letting this go unchallenged

[robbabcock_]

Josh and Megan must have the most fascinating dinner conversations! Great stuff, as always.

[niddy-.]

YHWH: "Leave none alive" .... Her: "I mean, it's about objects" Um... uh... She is in real-time lowering the value she places on people in the command. Just because you interpret a focus of objects doesn't diminish the value of the people ALSO commanded to be destroyed.
It's like saying, "Destroy my neighbors house! Burn it to the ground! una*ive the children, mother and pets! Destroy their toys, beds, kitchen!" If you think my point is the objects, I don't know how to help you.

[robinette]

I really didn’t expect much when she decided the NIV was going to be the best translated source.

[noonesomeone]

I think there is some merit to the idea that a degree of context is needed to explain how slavery in the Ancient Near East differed from the version most familiar with modern audiences, however it is just that context not an excuse. Slavery in the text truly isn’t the issue either, rather it is the insistence that the Bible should be the basis for modern morality. What I find most troubling is the legacy and continued impact of Christianity leads to excuse making, lying, downplaying, and so on in an effort to reinforce modern power structures and ideologies. . That combined with the insistence that the Bible and what it contains must be viewed differently than other texts from antiquity in non devotional contexts leaves a bad taste in my mouth. No one is apologizing for Cato the Elder’s view of slaves or saying it is a model for how to run labor relations, yet that process is exactly what apologetics is doing for the relevant sections of the Bible.

[orthocath]

Bravo! Excellent response. This is the type of presentation that can reach many. The tone of respect is so important. More of these, please!

[Thoughtful_Theologian]

I’ve typically found Imes thoughtful, but oof, the sanitizing of these concepts found in scripture smacks of the comparative religions approach that privileged Israelite/Judaic/Christian religion in the Bible as better than their neighbors, which Dr. Bowen lays out well. It’s perfectly fine to allow the tensions within scripture to exist and not soften the more unsavory portions to make it more palatable to readers. AND, to say “this is problematic even if it was part of the socio-cultural practices of the time and should not be considered good or normative.”