Download Hermeneutics of Slavery - Digital Commons @ Andrews University

Andrews University
Digital Commons @ Andrews University
Faculty Publications
Theology & Christian Philosophy
2016
Hermeneutics of Slavery: A “Bible-Alone” Faith and
the Problem of Human Enslavement
Darius Jankiewicz
Andrews University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theology-christianphilosophy-pubs
Recommended Citation
Jankiewicz, Darius, "Hermeneutics of Slavery: A “Bible-Alone” Faith and the Problem of Human Enslavement" (2016). Faculty
Publications. Paper 135.
http://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theology-christian-philosophy-pubs/135
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Theology & Christian Philosophy at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please
contact [email protected].
HermeneuticsofSlavery:
A“Bible-Alone”FaithandtheProblemofHumanEnslavement1
byDariusJankiewicz
Notlongago,whiledrivingonthefreewaytoChicago,Inoticedanoldfamilyvan,
thebackdoorofwhichwasplasteredwithallsortsofstickersbearingreligiousmessages.
Oneofthese,prominentlydisplayedatthecenterofthehatch,boldlystated:“TheBible
saysit!Ibelieveit!Thatsettlesit!”Itwasobvioustomethattheownerofthevantookthe
Bibleseriouslyandconscientiouslyadheredtoitsdirectives.Suchdevotiontothe
normativetextofChristianityshouldcertainlybeapplauded.Afterall,Iammyselfa
devotedChristianwhoacceptstheBibleasaninspireddocument,whichisnormativefor
Christianity.IreadmyBibleonaregularbasis,acceptitsteachingsandattempttoliveup
toitsstandards.AsIpassedthevanIlookedatthedriverandoureyesmet.Iwondered,if
weeverhadthechancetomeetandtalk,justthetwoofus,bothcommittedtotheWordof
God,howmuchwouldwereallyagreeon?Mostlikely,itwouldnotbemuch.Apartfrom
thegeneralbeliefsthatallChristiansshare,suchasthatGodexists,thattheBibleisthe
inspiredWordofGod,andthatJesusdiedforoursinsandroseagain,wewouldmostlikely
findplentytodisagreeon.Unfortunately,thesedisagreementsmightprecludeour
fellowshippingtogetherasChristians,eventhoughtheBibleisatthecoreofourbelief
system.
Thefactthatmyhypotheticalmeetingwiththedriverofthevanwouldmostlikely
resultinvariousdisagreements–perhapsevenstrongdisagreements–showsthe
limitationsofthetruism:“TheBiblesaysit!Ibelieveit!Thatsettlesit!”Whilesucha
declarationmayinitiallyconveytheimpressionofdeeppiety,itultimatelyprovestobea
hollowandselfishpremise,whichpromisesmuchbutdoesnotdeliver.Thisisbecausea
simplisticapproachtoScripturedoesnottakeintoconsiderationtheverycomplexsetof
conditionsandcircumstancesthatguidehumanencounterwiththeWordofGod.
Itistruethat,ontheonehand,theoverallmessageoftheScripturesissimpleand
maybeunderstoodbyall:viz.,thatGodcreatedtheworld;thatsindisruptedthe
relationshipofGodwithhumanity;thatthroughJesusChristGodsetinmotionaplanof
reconciliation;andthatonedayJesuswillcomebacktotakeHischildrenhome.2Adeeper
andprayerfulstudymayleadtoadiscoveryofspecificdoctrinalpreceptsthatmayguidea
communityofbelieversintoagreaterknowledgeofGodandresultin,forexample,a
TrinitarianconfessionofGod.Ontheotherhand,however,itmustalsobeacknowledged
thattheBiblewaswrittenoveraperiodofabout1500hundredyearsandaddressedtoa
varietyofpeoplesandculturesseparatedfromourtimebytwoorthreemillennia.Assuch,
theScripturesalsocontainpronouncementsthataredifficulttointerpret.This,inturn,
leadstodivergentinterpretationsandstronglyheldopinions.Itisthesedifficult-tointerpretconceptsthatcausemajorityofdisagreementsamongChristiansandthatwould
likelyleadtodisagreementbetweenthedriverofthevanandmyself.Thus,whilethe
1ThisarticlefirstappearedinJournalofAdventistMissionStudies12:1(Summer2016):47-73.
2ThisisnottosaythatChristiansalwaysagreeonteachingsoftheScripturethatcanbedescribedas
“plain.”Somearriveatoppositeconclusions,evenonsuchplainscripturaltruthsastheSecondComingof
Christ.
1
overallmessageoftheBiblemaybeconsidered“simple,”humaninteractionwiththeWord
ofGodcannotbedescribedassimplistic.3
Encounteringsuchissues,thoughtfulChristiansareforcedtoaskquestionssuchas
these:WhydoIinterpretaparticularbiblicalpassageinthiswayandmyfellowpew
dwellerinterpretsitinanother?HowdoIknowthatmyinterpretationofaparticular,
difficultpassageisthecorrectone?WhatifwhatIthinkthetextmeansactuallymeans
somethingdifferent?TowhatextentamIreadingmyownideasintothetext?Such
questionsmaketheslogan“TheBiblesaysit!Ibelieveit!Thatsettlesit”toosimplisticto
embrace.
EvenaperfunctoryexaminationofChristianhistoryrevealsthattheproblemI
encounteredonmywaytoChicagoconstitutesamicro-representationofahistorical
phenomenon,whichhasoccurredwithincreasingintensityamongChristianssincethe
deathoftheapostles.Christianhistoryislitteredwithdisagreementsoverthe
interpretationofthebiblicalmessage;disagreementsthatoftenledtoschisms,
persecutions,excommunications,wars(someofwhichlasteddecades),muchkillingand
manyotheratrocities.Itseemsthatmostpeopleinvolvedinsuchconflictswouldagree
thattheywerebasingtheirparticularpointofviewontheteachingsofBible.4Such
thinkingwasexhibitedduringoneparticularconflictthatresultedinthesoakingof
AmericansoilwithmillionsofgallonsofAmericanblood,viz.,theAmericanCivilWar
(1861-1865).
HermeneuticalFoundationsofthePro-SlaveryPosition
ItiswelldocumentedthatthecausesoftheAmericanCivilWararehistorically
complexandcannotbeeasilyreducedtoasinglephenomenon.5Thereappearstobelittle
doubt,however,thatreligiousconcernsflowingfromaparticularwayofreadingtheBible
wereattherootofSouthernChristianity’sdefenseofslaveryasabiblicallyandmorally
sanctionedpracticethatcouldnot,andshouldnot,beabolished.Thus,atthebeginningofa
foundationalChristianpro-Slaverydocument,“ASouthernAddresstoChristendom,”which
purposedtoanswerthequestion“Isslaveryasin?”wefindthesewords:
3ClementMokoncestated:“Veryoften,peopleconfusesimplewithsimplistic.Thenuanceisloston
most.”InBillJensen,Simplicity:TheNewCompetitiveAdvantageinaWorldofMore,Better,Faster(NewYork:
BasicBooks,2000),12.
4Oneofthelongestandmostdestructivereligio-politicalconflictsinEuropeanhistorywaswhat
becameknownasthe“ThirtyYears’War”(1618-1648),whichresultedinmillionsofhumancasualties,
famines,destructionofcommerceandmanufacturing,aswellasstagnationofintellectuallife.Theultimate
resultwasthat“religionwasgreatlymaimed.”WillistonWalker,AHistoryoftheChristianChurch(NewYork:
CharlesScribner’sSons,1970),389-396. 5DaleAndersonlistsvariousreasonsthatledtotheCivilWar,includingdeepdistrustbetweenNorth
andSouth,aswellasdifferenteconomicandsocialsituations;however,Andersonassertsthatthemajor
reasonwasslavery.CausesoftheCivilWar(Milwaukee:WorldAlmanacLibrary,2004),5-8.Twoexcellent
sourcesforfurtherinformationcouldbelistedhere:AlanFarmer,AccesstoHistory:TheAmericanCivilWar:
Causes,CoursesandConsequences(London:HodderEducationPublishers,2008),andJ.G.RandallandDavid
Donald,TheDividedUnion(Boston:Little,BrownandCompany,1961).
2
Inansweringthisquestion,asaChurch,letitbedistinctlyborninmindthattheonly
ruleofjudgmentisthewrittenwordofGod.TheChurchknowsnothingofthe
intuitionsofreasonorthedeductionsofphilosophy,exceptthosereproducedinthe
SacredCanon.ShehasapositiveconstitutionintheHolyScriptures,andhasno
righttoutterasinglesyllableuponanysubject,exceptastheLordputswordsinher
mouth.Sheisfounded,inotherwords,uponexpressrevelation.Hercreedisan
authoritativetestimonyofGod,andnotaspeculation,andwhatsheproclaims,she
mustproclaimwiththeinfalliblecertitudeoffaith,andnotwiththehesitating
assentofanopinion.6
ThisstatementsetsahermeneuticalfoundationfortheSouthernwayofreadingtheBible.
FortheSoutherners,theScripturesweretobereadintheplainestwaypossible,withthe
husksofhumanreason,culture,philosophyandallotherinfluencespeeledaway.
Accordingly,becausetheBiblenevercondemnedslavery,theSouthernersconsideredthe
abolitionistcauseunbiblical,andthefactthatslaverywasnotpracticedintheNortha
resultofshiftingculturaltrendsratherthanapositionfoundedontheScriptures.James
HenleyThornwell(1812-1862),aprominentSouthernPresbyterianminister,theologian
andreligiouswriter,persuasivelyexpressedthissentimentwhenhestatedthatChristian
beliefsmustbefoundedonlyuponexplicitWordofGod“andnotaspeculation.”7The
abolitionistpositionwas,forhim,anexampleofsuch“speculation,”basedonculturerather
thanontheexplicitteachingoftheScriptures.Thus,hedidnothesitatetoutterstrong
wordsofcondemnationfortheabolitionistcause:
ThepartiesinthisconflictarenotmerelyAbolitionistsandSlaveholders;theyare
Atheists,Socialists,Communists,Redrepublicans,Jacobinsontheoneside,andthe
friendsoforderandregulatedfreedomontheother.Inoneword,theworldisthe
battleground.ChristianityandAtheismthecombatants,andprogressofhumanityis
atstake.8
Similarly,theinfluentialEpiscopalbishopHenryHopkinsarguedthatitwas
impossibletosustainanabolitionistcausewithoutanextra-biblicalappealtomodern
culturaltrends.TheBible,heasserted,“sanction[ed]”thepracticeofslavery,“solongasit
[was]administeredinaccordancewiththepreceptslaiddownbytheApostles.”9Antislaverycampaigners,heargued,weredelusionaryandengagedin“awillfulorconscious
6“ASouthernAddresstoChristendom,”inAmericanChristianity:AnHistoricalInterpretationWith
RepresentativeDocuments,ed.,H.SheltonSmith,RobertT.HandyandLeffertsA.Loetschner(NewYork:
CharlesScribner’sSons,1963),206(emphasisintheoriginal).
7JamesHenleyThornwell,quotedinMarkNoll,“TheBibleandSlavery,”inReligionandtheAmerican
CivilWar,ed.byRandallM.Miller,HarryS.Stout,CharlesReaganWilson(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,
1998),64(emphasisintheoriginal). ThornwellalsoservedasaprofessoroftheologyinthePresbyterian
TheologicalSeminaryatColumbia,SouthCarolina.
8JamesHenleyThornwell,quotedinEugeneGenovese,“JamesHenleyThornwell,”inTheSouthern
Front:HistoryandPoliticsintheCulturalWar(Columbia:UniversityofMissouriPress,1995),37.
9JohnHenryHopkins,Scriptural,Ecclesiastical,andHistoricalViewofSlavery(NewYork:W.I.Pooley
&Co.,1864),5.
3
oppositiontothetruth.”Thesepeople,hecharged,wereseducedby“thefeelingsofafalse
philanthropy,whichpalliate[d],ifit[could]notexcuse,theirdangerouserror.”The
abolitionists,hebelieved,didnotknowhowtostudytheirBiblesorhowtobefaithfultoits
teachings.Consequently,theyopenedthemselvestotheinfluenceof“thenewspapers,the
novel,andthemagazine.”10Onthecontrary,heargued,theteachingsofScriptureonthe
matterofslaveryare“plain,”and“whoarewe,thatinourmodernwisdompresumetoset
asidetheWordofGod,and...inventforourselvesa‘higherlaw’thatthoseholyScriptures
whicharegiventousas‘alighttoourfeetandalamptoourpaths,’inthedarknessofa
sinfulandapollutedworld?”11“TheteachingsofboththeOldandNewTestament
Scripturesaresoplain,righteous,consistent,andpalpable,”arguedJohnBellRobinson,
“thatIcannotexerciseasufficientstretchofcharitytowardssuchmentobelievethem
sincere.Butinfidelityisatthebottomofthewholeschemeofabolitionism.”Thustheantislaveryministerswho“donotunderstandsuchplainteachings,”heconcluded
emphatically,“arenotfitfortheGospelministry,andshouldbesilencedfortheir
ignorance.”12
Nolessstronginhisconvictionswasthemostdistinguishedrepresentativeofthe
famousPrincetonschoolofTheology,13CharlesB.Hodge(1797-1878),14adeontologist
whobelievedthatbeingrightintheeyesofGodmeantstrictadherencetodivinely
establishedpracticeswithoutconsiderationforoutcomesorconsequences.Hissupportfor
slaveryproceededfromthedeeplyheldconvictionthatslaveholdingwasinaccordance
withdivinelaw.15ThisconvictionarosefromhishighregardforScriptureasthecomplete,
infallibleandinerrantrevelationofGod.16Inhis“BibleArgumentonSlavery”article
publishedinthemonumental,900-page,pro-slaveryvolumeCottonIsKinghewrote:“we
recognizenoauthoritativeruleoftruthanddutybutthewordofGod.”17Thus,anything
thatcouldonlybeestablishedbysome“abstractprinciples,”suchastheabolitionistcause,
couldnotbe“truth.”“Menaretoonearlyuponapartotheirpowersofreasoning,and
abilitytodiscovertruth,”hewrote,“tomaketheconclusionsofonemindanauthoritative
10Ibid.,17. 11Ibid.,16.
12JohnBellRobinson,PicturesofSlaveryandAnti-slavery(Philadelphia:NorthThirteenthStreet
Publishers,1863).91,96.
13PrincetonSchoolofTheologywasfoundedin1812asaprotestagainsttheencroachmentof
theologicalliberalism,whichunderminedtheauthorityoftheScriptures.EarleE.Cairns,ChristianityThrough
theCenturies:AHistoryoftheChristianChurch(GrandRapids:Zondervan,1996),479.
14CharlesB.HodgeHodgewasastaunchlyCalvinistscholarwhoiswidelyregardedtodayasoneof
thefathersofmodernAmericanfundamentalism.HeisknownasasystematicianofPrincetontheology,who
defendedtheverbalinspirationandinerrancyoftheScriptures.RogerOlson,TheStoryofChristianTheology
(DownersGrove:IVPAcademic,1999),559-558;cf.,CharlesHodge,SystematicTheology,vol.1(Grand
Rapids:Wm.B.EerdmansPublishingCompany,1940),155-171.
15DavidTorbett,TheologyandSlavery:CharlesHodgeandHoraceBushnell(Macon:MercerUniversity
Press,2006),75.
16Atthispointitmustbeclarifiedthatverbalinspirationandinerrancydoesnotnecessarily
correlatewithsupportforslavery.DuringHodge’sowntime,andlater,manyconservativetheologians
supportedverbalinspirationandinerrancyoftheScripturesbutstronglyobjectedtoslavery.
17CharlesHodge,“BibleArgumentonSlavery,”inCottonIsKing,ed.,E.N.Elliott(Augusta:Pritchard,
Abbott&Loomis,1860),847. 4
ruleforothers.Itisourobject,therefore,nottodiscussthesubjectofslaveryupon
abstractprinciples,buttoascertainthescripturalruleofjudgmentandconductinrelation
toit.”18Theabolitionistcause,hebelieved,wasbasedon“mereimpulseoffeeling,anda
blindimitation”ofculturaltrends,especiallythosecomingfromEngland,ratherthanon
theBibleitself.19
Thisbriefreviewofthepro-slaveryhermeneuticalpositionmakesitclearthat
SouthernersviewedtheabolitionistpositionasantitheticaltotheveryWordofGodand
Hisestablishedorder,influencedmorebymodernculturethantheBible.Theyclaimed
that“theonlyruleofjudgmentisthewrittenwordofGod,”20andtheonlysafehermeneutic
aconscientiousadherencetothe“theplainandobviousteachings,ofbothOldandNew
Testament,”which“aregivenwithsuchirresistibleforceastocarryconvictiontoevery
mind,exceptthoseweddedtothetheoryofa‘HigherLaw’thantheLawofGod.”21The
“HigherLaw,”ofcourse,wasareferencetotheabolitionists’conjecturethat,while
permittingthepractice,theGodofScripturewould,inessence,opposeslavery.Forthe
pro-slaverygroup,suchabeliefwasbasedonhumanphilosophyratherthantheWordof
God.Theonlywaytocounter(anddestroy)abolitionism,itwasargued,wastostrictly
adheretotheplainteachingsofBibleonthematter.Thus,thenotedPresbyterian
theologian,RobertLewisDabney,wrote:“Hereisourpolicy,then,topushtheBible
argumentcontinually,todriveabolitionismtothewall,tocompelittoassumeanantiChristianposition.BydoingsowecompelthewholeChristianityoftheNorthtoarray
itselfonourside.”22JamesHenleyThornwellagreedwhenhewrotethatthe“churchisnot
atlibertytospeculate[regardingslavery]...Whenshespeaks,itmustbeinthenameofthe
Lord,andheronlyargumentisThusitiswritten.”23JamesStirling,aBritishscholarwho
visitedtheSouthernstatesduringthe1850’s,puzzledoverthis.Hewrote:“Howthosewho
adheretoaliteralinterpretationoftheBible,andconsidereverydirectioncontainedinits
pagesasapplicableatalltimestoallmen,aretoreconcilethesefactswithmodernantislaverynotions,itis,thankgoodness,nobusinessofminetofindout.”24
TheBiblicalCaseforSlavery
Havingestablishedtheirhermeneuticasbasedon“theplainandobviousteachings”
oftheBible,andrejectingalltracesofhumanreasoning,philosophy,contemporarycultural
trendsand“abstractprinciples,”Southernpro-slaverytheologiansproceededtomakea
biblicalcaseforslavery.Theybeganbyaddressingtheabolitionistargumentthatslavery
wassinful.Theiranswerwassimple:standingonthefoundationofthewrittenWordof
18CharlesHodge,“Slavery,”inEssaysandReviews(NewYork:RobertCarter&Brothers,1857),480. 19Hodge,“BibleArgumentonSlavery,”842.
20“ASouthernAddresstoChristendom,”206.
21E.N.Elliott,“Introduction,”inCottonisKing,xiii.
22ThomasCaryJohnson,TheLifeandLettersofLewisDabney,vol.3(Richmond:Presbyterian
CommitteeofPublication,1903),129.
23JamesHenleyThornwell,“RelationoftheChurchtoSlavery,”inTheCollectedWritingsofJames
HenleyThornwell,vol.4.,eds.,JohnB.AdgerandJohnL.Girardeu(Richmond:PresbyterianCommitteeof
Publication,1873),384(emphasisintheoriginal).
24JamesStirling,LettersfromtheSlaveStates(London:JohnW.ParkerandSon,1857),120.
5
God,theyassertedthattheChurchhad“noauthoritytodeclareSlaverytobesinful,”as
nowheredidtheBible,“eitherdirectlyorindirectly,condemntherelationofmasterand
servantasincompatiblewiththewillofGod.”Toarguetheoppositewastoholdin
contemptthe“nakedtestimonyofGod.”25“Oppositiontoslavery,”theyargued,“hasnever
beentheoffspringoftheBible”andthusslaverycannotbeconsideredsinful.26
IntheearliestpagesoftheScripture,theyargued,Godestablishedhuman
hierarchicalorderwhenHedeclared,throughtheinspiredmouthofNoah,“Cursedbe
Canaan!Thelowestofslaveswillhebetohisbrothers”(Gen9:25).“Mayitnotbesaidin
truth,”wroteE.N.Elliott,“thatGoddecreedthisinstitutionbeforeitexisted;andhashenot
connecteditsexistencewithprophetictokensofspecialfavor,tothosewhoshouldbeslave
ownersormasters?HeisthesameGodnow,thathewaswhenhegavetheseviewsofhis
moralcharactertotheworld.”27Weshouldnotthenbesurprised,pro-slaverytheologians
taught,thatthepatriarchs,mostnotablyAbraham,notonlydidnotcondemnslaverybut
actuallyownedslaveswhowere“purchasedwithhismoney”(Gen17:13).28DidnotJob,
themanwhomGodsaid“thereisnooneonearthlikehim”alsoownslaves?(Job1:3).
Moreover,wasnotslaveownershipcodifiedintheTenCommandments?Bycommanding
slave-ownerstogivetheirslavesadayofrest,thefourthcommandmentindisputably
supportedtheinstitutionofslavery,asdidthetenth,whichcommandedagainstthe
covetingofothers’slaves.JoiningthedebateandofferingaJewishperspective,RabbiM.J.
Raphallargued:
[Thetenthcommandmentplacesslaves]underthesameprotectionasanyother
speciesoflawfulproperty...ThattheTenCommandmentsarethewordofGod,and
assuch,oftheveryhighestauthority,isacknowledgedbyChristiansaswellasby
Jews...Howdareyou,inthefaceofthesanctionandprotectionaffordedtoslave
propertyintheTenCommandments–howdareyoudenounceslaveholdingasasin?
WhenyourememberthatAbraham,Isaac,Jacob,Job–themenwithwhomthe
Almightyconversed,withwhosenamesheemphaticallyconnectshisownmostholy
name,andtowhomHevouchsafedtogivethecharacterof'perfect,upright,fearing
Godandeschewingevil'...–thatallthesemenwereslaveholders,doesitnotstrike
youthatyouareguiltyofsomethingverylittleshortofblasphemy?29
IftheTenCommandments,thefoundationofthemorallawofGod,endorsed
slavery,howcouldChristiansargueagainstit?Moreover,didnottheLeviticallawregulate
ratherthanabolishslavery?InLeviticus25:39-46,theyasserted,Mosesclearlyimplied
thatslaverownershipwaspartofthehumancondition.AllIsraelites,includingpriests,
25Thornwell,“RelationoftheChurchtoSlavery,”384.
26Ibid.,393;Hodge,“BibleArgumentsonSlavery,849.SimilarsentimentsareexpressedbyJohnBell
Robinsonwhowrote“Therefore,ifslaverybeunscriptural,itcannotbetoleratedbytheBible;andIcannot
seehowtheBiblecantolerateanythingthatiscontrarytodivinelaw.”Robinson,133.
27E.N.Elliot“TheBibleArgument:Or,SlaveryintheLightofDivineRevelation,”inCottonisKing,ed.,
E.N.Elliott(Augusta:Pritchard,Abbott&Loomis,1860),463.
28Hodge,“BibleArgumentonSlavery,”859.
29M.J.Raphall,BibleViewofSlavery(NewYork:Rudd&Carleton,1859),28-29.
6
werepermittedtobuyandownslaves(Lev22:10-11;Num31:25-26).WhileIsraelites
werenevertobesoldasslaves–theycouldonlybetreatedashiredworkersandreleased
atthetimeofJubilee–foreignslavescouldbepurchasedandheldforlife.Furthermore,
slaveownerswerenotto“ruleoverfellowIsraelitesruthlessly,”suggestingthatruthless
rulershipoverforeignslaveswasnotnecessarilyanevilpractice(Lev25:46).
FromtheNewTestament,pro-slaverytheologiansobservedthatwhileJesushad
manyopportunitiestospeakagainstslavery,Hedidnotcondemnit.InMatthew8:10,for
example,Jesusneverquestionedtherightofthecenturiontoownaslave.Instead,he
healedtheslaveandcommendedthecenturionforhisfaith:“TrulyItellyou,Ihavenot
foundanyoneinIsraelwithsuchgreatfaith.”Furthermore,heoftenusedslaveryto
illustrateHisteachings.ManyofhisparablesfeaturedthethemeofMastersandservants.
Forexample,“Supposeoneofyouhasaslave(doulos)plowingorlookingafterthesheep.
Willhesaytotheservantwhenhecomesinfromthefield,‘Comealongnowandsitdown
toeat’?”(Luke17:7).ConsideringthislackofcondemnationofslaveryfromJesus,itisnot
surprisingthatslaveowners,believingthatnon-condemnationtranslatedintoapproval,at
timesusedJesus’ownwordstoinstructtheirslavesonobediencetotheirmasters.30
Furthermore,pro-slaverytheologiansassertedthattheApostlesalsodidnot
condemnslavery.DidnotPaulteachthateachperson“shouldretaintheplaceinlifethat
theLordassignedtohimandtowhichGodhascalledhim”(1Corinthians7:17)?Anddid
henotinstructslavestonot“letittrouble”themiftheywereslaveswhen“called”byGod
(v.21)?Moreover,ratherthanbeingtroubledbytheplightofslaves,Paulappearedto
emphasizespiritualequalityamongbelievers,assertingthatallwere“baptizedbyone
Spiritsoastoformonebody-whetherJewsorGentiles,slaveorfree”(1Corinthians
12:13).Thus,Galatians3:28didnotrefertothesocialsituationofslaves,butrather,tothe
salvationavailabletoall.Accordingly,Paulinstructedslavesto“obey[their]earthly
masters...andservethemwholeheartedly”(Ephesians6:5-9);to“considertheirmasters
worthyoffullrespect,sothatGod’snameandourteachingmaynotbeslandered”(1
Timothy6:1-2);andto“besubjecttotheirmasters...sothatineverywaythey[would]
maketheteachingaboutGodourSaviorattractive”(Titus2:9-10).
ThesepassagesformedthefoundationfortheSoutherntheologian’soppositionto
abolitionism.WhiletheyconcededthatScriptureregulatedslavery,andthusslavesin
Christianhomesenjoyedspecialprivileges,theydidnotbelievethatScripturecondemned
slavery.Thus,theyconcluded,theowner-slaverelationshipwasnotdissolvedintheNew
Testament,aswasthecase,forexample,withpolygamy.WhileGodtoleratedpolygamy
duringOldTestamenttimes,thischangedintheNewTestament.“ThatChristdidgivea
newlawonthissubject,”arguedHodge,“isabundantlyevident;”however,thiscertainly
wasnotthecasewithslavery.31Similarly,RichardFurman,aninfluentialBaptistminister
whoinitiallyopposedslaverybutwasconvertedbytheforceofbiblicalarguments,stated:
TherightofholdingslavesisclearlyestablishedintheHolyScriptures,bothby
preceptsandexample...Hadtheholdingofslavesbeenamoralevil,itcannotbe
supposed,thattheinspiredApostles,whofearednotthefacesofmen,andwere
30SolomonNorthup,TwelveYearsaSlave(BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUniversityPress,1968),94. 31Hodge,“BibleArgumentonSlavery,”860.
7
readytolaydowntheirlivesinthecauseoftheirGod,wouldhavetoleratedit,fora
moment,intheChristianChurch....InprovingthissubjectjustifiablebyScriptural
authority,itsmoralityisalsoproved;fortheDivineLawneversanctionsimmoral
actions.32
WhatoftheGoldenRule“dountoothersasyouwouldhavethemdountoyou”
proclaimedbyChrist(Matthew7:12)?Aconventionalapproachwouldsuggestthatsucha
principlewouldcertainlyadvocateagainstslavery,asnohumanbeingwouldwanttobe
treatedasaslave.Notsoforthepro-slaverytheologians.Infact,thesetheologians
advocatedthat,ratherthanabolishingslavery,theGoldenRuleestablishedit.Ending
slavery,theyargued,couldharmtheestablishedreligious,socialandeconomicorder,and
couldpotentiallydestroysociety,especiallyasslaveryhadbeendivinelyinstituted.33Thus
Dabneywrote:“Icannotconceiveofanydutyarisingfromthecommandtolovemy
neighborasmyselfwhichcompelsmetoinflictaruinousinjuryonthatneighbor,andsuch
wouldbeimmediatefreedomtotheslave.”34Abolitionismwouldalsobeharmfultoformer
slaves,whocouldnotfunctioninacivilizedsocietyandwouldmostlikelymeetthefateof
theNativeAmericans.35Furthermore,“theGoldenRuledemandsthatfreemenask
themselveswhattheywouldconsiderreasonableandjustiftheywereslaves.”36Thornwell
asserted:“Wearenotboundtorenderuntothemwhattheymightinfactdesire.Sucha
rulewouldtransmutemoralityintocaprice.”Instead,mastersmustgranttheirslavesthat
whichis“justandequal,”viz.,tocontinuemaster-slaverelationshipestablishedbyGod.37
Accordingly,pro-slaverytheologiansargued,slavesweretobegratefulfortheirrole
inthegrandschemeestablishedbythe“perfectlyjustGod.”38“TheAfricansofthis
country,”statedWilliamA.Smith,“incommonwithminors,imbeciles,anduncivilized
persons,havearighttobegovernedandprotected,andtosuchmeansofphysicalcomfort
andmoralimprovementasarenecessaryandcompatiblewiththeirprovidential
condition.”39Consideringthespiritualandsocialconditionsofthe“savages”intheir
homelandofAfrica,thepro-slaverytheologiansasserted,“wecannotbutacceptitasa
graciousProvidencethattheyhavebeenbroughtinsuchnumberstoourshores,and
redeemedfromthebondageofbarbarismandsin.”40“Weallknow,”wroteKateCumming,
“whatthenegroisfreeandasaslave.Inthelattercapacityheisbetter,morallyand
physically,thanintheformer,andheismuchmorerespectedinhisplace.Whoisitthat
cannotrelatestoryafterstoryofthedegradationofthenegrointheNorth....Why,
32JamesA.Roger,RichardFurman:LifeandLegacy(MaconUniversityPress,1985),277,278-79.
33“ASouthernAddresstoChristendom,”206.
34Johnson,68. 35ElizabethFox-GenoveseandEugeneD.Genovese,TheMindoftheMasterClass:HistoryandFaithin
theSouthernSlavehorders’Worldview(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2005),621.
36Ibid.
37Ibid. 38Ibid.,622
39Ibid.
40“SouthernAddresstoChristendom,”209.
8
slaveryisheaventoitincomparison.”41Whileabuseofslavescertainlyoccurred,such
situationswereisolatedandneededtobeaddressed;however,thiswasnotareasonfor
war.Instead,Northernpoliticianswoulddomuchbettertolegislate“forthegoodoftheir
countryandallinit,”includingslaves.42Thus,forpro-slaverySoutherntheologians,
slaverydidnotcontradicttheGoldenRuleofChrist.
ConsideringtheirapproachtoScripture,itisnotsurprisingthatpro-slavery
theologiansconsideredabolitionismtobeamovementinfluencedby“thebenumbing
influences”ofcultureandhumanphilosophy,whichtheyconsidered“likelytopervert
judgment,”ratherthanonScripture.43Ultimately,theabolitionistcausecametobe
equatedwithunfaithfulnesstotheBible.44AsHodgeasserted,“Weseenowayofescape
fromtheconclusionthattheconductofthemodernabolitionists,beingdirectlyopposedto
thatoftheauthorsofourreligion,mustbewrongandoughttobemodifiedor
abandoned.”45
Thebiblicalfoundationforthepro-slaverypositionwaselucidatedinthe
quintessentialdocument,“ASouthernAddresstoChristendom,”issuedthesameyearthe
CivilWarbegan.46“Nowhereinsouthernliteraturemayonefindtheproslaveryargument
developedwithgreaterforceorlucidity.”47Whiledesirable,itisimpossibletopresentthe
documenthereinitsentiretyandthereaderisreferredtotheoriginalsourceinthe
footnotes;however,itisimportanttopresentheresomeofwhatitisfoundtherein.The
statementbeginswithastrongaffirmationaboutitsrelianceontheBiblealoneandfollows
withthesewords:
TheantagonismofNorthernandSouthernsentimentonthesubjectofslaveryliesat
therootofallthedifficultieswhichhaveresultedinthedismembermentofthe
FederalUnion,andinvolvedusinthehorrorsofanunnaturalwar...Andherewe
mayventuretolaybeforetheChristianworldourviewsasaChurch,uponthe
subjectofslavery.Webegacandidhearing.
WehavesaidenoughtovindicatethepositionoftheSouthernChurch.Wehave
assumednonewattitude.WestandexactlywheretheChurchofGodhasalways
stood–fromAbrahamtoMoses,fromMosestoChrist,fromChristtotheReformers,
andfromtheReformerstoourselves.WestanduponthefoundationoftheProphets
andApostles,JesusChristHimselfbeingtheChiefcornerstone.Shallwebeexcluded
fromthefellowshipofourbrethreninotherlands,becausewedarenotdepartfrom
thecharterofourfaith?Shallwebebrandedwiththestigmaofreproach,because
41KateCumming,Kate:TheJournalofaConfederateNurse(BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUniversity
Press,2015),158.
42Ibid.,158,176.
43JamesHenleyThornwell,TheCollectedWritingsofJamesHenleyThornwell,vol.,4(Richmond:
PresbyterianCommitteeofPublication,1873),544.
44Smith,HandyandLoetschner,AmericanChristianity,177.
45Hodge,“BibleArgumentonSlavery,”849.
46“SouthernAddresstoChristianity,”inSmith,HandyandLoetschner,206-210.Thefirstdraftofthe
documentwascomposedbyJamesHenleyThornwell.
47Ibid.,206.
9
wecannotconsenttocorrupttheWordofGodtosuittheintuitionsofaninfidel
philosophy?Shallournamesbecastoutasevil,andthefingerofscornpointedatus,
becauseweutterlyrefusetobreakourcommunionwithAbraham,IsaacandJacob,
withMoses,DavidandIsaiah,withApostles,ProphetsandMartyrs,withallthe
noblearmyofconfessorswhohavegonetogloryfromslave-holdingcountriesand
fromaslave-holdingChurch,withouteverhavingdreamedthattheywerelivingin
mortalsin,byconnivingatslaveryinthemidstofthem?Ifso,weshalltake
consolationinthecheeringconsciousnessthattheMasterhasacceptedus.Wemay
bedenounced,despisedandcastoutoftheSynagoguesofourbrethren.
Butwhiletheyarewranglingaboutthedistinctionsofmenaccordingtotheflesh,
weshallgoforwardinourDivinework,andconfidentlyanticipatethat,inthegreat
day,astheconsequenceofourhumblelabors,weshallmeetmillionsofglorified
spirits,whohavecomeupfromthebondageofearthtoanoblerfreedomthat
humanphilosophyeverdreamedof.Others,iftheypleasemayspendtheirtimein
declaimingonthetyrannyofearthlymaster;itwillbeouraimtoresistthereal
tyrantswhichoppressthesoul–SinandSatan.Thesearethefoesagainstwhomwe
shallfinditemploymentenoughtowageasuccessfulwar.Andtothisholywaritis
thepurposeofourChurchtodevoteitselfwithredoubledenergy.Wefeelthatthe
soulsofourslavesareasolemntrust,andweshallstrivetopresentthemfaultless
andcompletebeforethepresenceofGod.48
ItwassentimentssuchasthesethateventuallyledtheSouthernchurchtosupport
theCivilWar.God,theywereconvinced,wasontheirside.AsCharlesHodgeexclaimed,“If
thepresentcourseoftheabolitionistsisright,thenthecourseofChristandtheapostles
werewrong.”49
HermeneuticalFoundationsoftheAnti-SlaveryPosition
Abolitionismwasacomplexandmultifacetedmovementinvolvingpeopleofall
walksoflife.50ThereweremanyabolitionistswhocouldhardlybeconsideredChristians
andwhosebehaviorwasquestionabletoChristiananti-slaveryactivists,eventhoughthey
sharedthesamecause.51Itcannotbedenied,however,that,likethepro-slavery
theologians,Christiantheologianswhofoughtagainstslaveryfoundtheirinspirationinthe
Bible.ThemodernabolitionistmovementemergedamongEnglishQuakersandother
evangelicalgroups,52andthefirstmodernanti-slaveryactivistswereunquestionably
committed,Bible–believingChristians.ThestaroftheBritishanti-slaverymovement,
48Ibid.,206-210.
49Hodge,849.
50RichardS.NewmaninhisTheTransformationofAmericanAbolitionism:FightingSlaveryinthe
EarlyRepublic(ChapelHill:TheUniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,2002)providesanexcellentoverviewof
themovementintheNorthAmerica.
51AllenCarden,Freedom’sDelay:America’sStruggleforEmancipation,1776-1865(Knoxville:The
UniversityofTennesseePress,2014),151.
52ClareMidgley,WomenAgainstSlavery:TheBritishCampaigns,1780-1870(London:Routledge,
1992),15.
10
WilliamWilberforce,wasindubitablyaborn-againChristian.53Hisfriendandmentor,John
Newton,wasaformerslaveshipcaptainwhoexperiencedconversionthroughthereading
ofScripture,subsequentlyabandoningtheslavetradeandbecomingaChristianminister.54
IntheUnitedStates,anti-slaverysentimentsreceivedasignificantboostduringthe
SecondGreatAwakening,anevangelicalmovementthatsweptthroughoutNorthAmerica
fromthe1790sthroughtotheearly1840s.Whiledirectedprimarilytowardsspiritual
awakening,thismovementalsofocusedonsocialandpersonalreform,i.e.,it“aimedat
perfectingboththesocialorderandtheindividualsothatthemillenniumcouldbegin.”55
UnliketheFirstGreatAwakening(~1720-1750s),whichwasledpredominantlyby
CalvinistthinkerssuchasJonathanEdwardsandGeorgeWhitefield,bothofwhomowned
slaves,56mostoftheleadersoftheSecondGreatAwakening’sleanedtoward
Arminianism.57IncontrasttotheCalvinistemphasisonthesovereigntyofGodand
predestination,ArminianismfocusedonloveastheprimaryattributeofGod,aswellas
humanfreewill.Arminianismthusencouragedsocialtransformationasanoutgrowthof
theGospelmessage.Thistheologicalpersuasionsteeredmanytowardtheanti-slavery
position.58
Likethepro-slaverytheologians,theanti-slaverymovement,whichgrewoutofthe
SecondGreatAwakening,alsoemphasizedthecentralityofScriptures.“NowtheBibleis
myultimateappealinallmattersoffaithandpractice,”wroteAngelinaGrimkéinher1836
AppealtotheChristianWomenoftheSouth,“andtothistestIamanxioustobringthe
subjectatissuebetweenus.”59Similarly,theauthorsoftheAnnualReportoftheprominent
SheffieldLadies’Anti-SlaverySocietyinsisted:“theBible,andtheBiblealoneisthetouch
stonetowhichwewouldbringslavery.”OnthebasisoftheirstudyoftheBiblealone,they
concluded:“Awaywithsuchthings.”60
WhilemanyChristiananti-slaveryactivistsadoptedthestartingpointof“theBible
andtheBiblealone,”theirapproachtotheBiblewasstarklydifferenttothatofthepro
53WilliamWilberforce,PrivateLettersofWilliamWilberforce(London:T.FisherUnwin,1897),178.
54WilliamE.Phipps,AmazingGraceinJohnNewton:Slave-shipCaptain,Hymnwriter,andAbolitionist
(Macon:MercerUniversityPress,2001).
55GeorgeKnight,ASearchforIdentity(Hagerstown:ReviewandHerald,2000),36-37;cf.,John
Bicknell,American1844:ReligiousFervor,WestwardExpansion,andthePresidentialElectionthatTransformed
theNation(Chicago:ChicagoReviewPress,2015),19.
56ThomasS.Kidd,GeorgeWhitefield:America’sSpiritualFoundingFather(NewHaven:Yale
UniversityPress,2014),111.
57ArminianismtracesitsrootstotheteachingsofaDutchReformedtheologianJacobusArminius
(1560-1609).ForaquintessentialtreatmentofArminiantheologyseeRogerOlson,ArminianTheology:
MythsandRealities(DownersGrove:IVPAcademic,2006).
58BarryHankins,TheSecondGreatAwakeningandtheTranscendentalists(Wesport:Greenwood
Press,2004),85-87;cf.MarkNoll,IntheBeginningwastheWord:TheBibleinAmericanPublicLife,1492-1783
(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2016),208,231.
59ThefullversionofAngelinaE.Grimké’sAppealtotheChristianWomenoftheSouthmaybefound
onthefollowingwebsite:http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/abolitn/abesaegat.html(emphasisintheoriginal).
60SheffieldLadies’Anti-SlaverySociety,AnnualReport,1827,11,quotedbyAlisonTwells,“‘We
OughttoObeyGodRatherthanMan’:Women,Anti-Slavery,andNonconformistReligiousCultures,”in
Women,DissentandAnti-SlaveryinBritainandAmerica,1790-1865,eds.,ElizabethJ.Clapp,andJulieRoy
Jeffrey,(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2011),75.
11
slaverytheologians.Asevidencedabove,pro-slaverytheologianstendedtoconcentrateon
individualstatementsinScripture,constructingatheologyofsocietalorderthatwas
“applicableatalltimestoallmen.”61Incontrast,anti-slaveryChristianstendedtofocuson
thegrandthemesofScripture,suchastheloveofGod,Hismorallaw,creationintheimage
ofGod,freedom,equality,redemptionandrestoration.Itwasthesegrandscriptural
themes–or“abstractprinciples”62soreviledbypro-slaverytheologians–thatprovideda
hermeneuticallensforinterpretingdifficultpassagesofScripture.Seenthroughthislens,
slaverywasanutterlyrepulsiveinstrumentofsatanicoppression.Thishermeneuticallens
wasclearlyevidentinthe1818reportadoptedbytheGeneralAssemblyofthe
PresbyterianChurchintheUnitedStates,whichcondemnedslaveryinthemostblistering
terms:63
Weconsiderenslavingofonepartofthehumanracebyanother,asgrossviolation
ofthemostpreciousandsacredrightsofhumannature;asutterlyinconsistentwith
thelawofGod,whichrequiresustoloveourneighborasourselves...Slavery
createsaparadoxinthemoralsystem–itexhibitsrational,accountable,and
immortalbeings,insuchcircumstancesasscarcelytoleavethemthepowerof
moralaction.Itexhibitsthemasdependentonthewillofothers,whethertheyshall
receivereligiousinstruction;whethertheyshallknowandworshipthetrueGod;
whethertheyshallenjoytheordinancesoftheGospel;whethertheyshallperform
thedutiesandcherishtheendearmentsofhusbandsandwives,parentsand
children,neighbours[sic]andfriends;whethertheyshallpreservetheirchastity
andpurity,orregardthedictatesofjusticeandhumanity.Sucharesomeofthe
consequencesofSlavery–consequencesnotimaginary–butwhichconnect
themselveswithitsveryexistence.64
Thus,whileadoptinga“BibleandBiblealone”stance,anti-slaveryChristianactivists
believedthatuniversal,Bible-based“principlesofhumanityandreligion”65appliedtoall
humaninteractions;andthatthedifficultbiblicalpassagesregardingslaveryshouldbe
interpretedthroughthelensoftheseuniversalprinciples.SowhatweresomeoftheantislaveryargumentsusedbyChristianabolitionists?
TheBiblicalCaseAgainstSlavery
Asoutlinedabove,anti-slaverybiblicalargumentsbeganwiththeconceptofGodas
love.Anti-slaverytheologiansproclaimedthat“Godha[d]noattributeinfavorofslavery,”
andthataGodofloveandgrace“cannotloveslavery.”66AsGeorgeThompsonwrote,“The
61Stirling,120.
62Seefootnote15above.
63“MinutesoftheGeneralAssemblyofthePresbyterianChurchintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,”in
AmericanChristianity:AnHistoricalInterpretationwithRepresentativeDocuments,ed.,H.SheltonSmith,
RoberthT.HandyandLeffertsA.Loetschner(2NewYork:CharlesScribner’sSons,1963),179-180.
64Ibid.
65Ibid.
66CharlesElltiott,TheBibleandSlavery(Cincinnati:LK.Swormstedt&A.Poe,1857),121.
12
religionofChristisareligionoflove,”andthus“itneverhas,itnevercan,sanctionfora
moment,sofoul,soinhuman,soimpious,andmurderousasystemasthatof...
SLAVERY.”67Furthermore,anti-slaverytheologiansemphasizedthebiblicalteachingthat
allhumanswerecreatedintheimageofGod,making“acompellingcasethatnothing
[could]annulthebirth-rightcharter,whichGodha[d]bequeathedtoeverybeingupon
whichheha[d]stampedhisownimage.”68AsFrederickDouglasswrote:“[Slavery]isan
attempttoundowhatGodhasdone,toblotoutthebroaddistinctioninstitutedbythe
Allwisebetweenmenandthings,andtochangetheimageandsuperscriptionofthe
everlivingGodintoaspeechlesspieceofmerchandise.Suchadecisioncannotstand.God
willbetruethougheverymanbealiar.”69Anti-slaverytheologiansarguedthatthe
creationofallhumanityintheimageofGodnegatedracism,inequalityandoppressionof
anykind;70andthat“allthosecreatedinGod’simage[should]beincludedin‘Wethe
people.’”71Moreover,theyassertedthatwhileAdamandEvereceiveddominionoverall
creation,theywerenotgivendominionoverotherhumanbeings.“Manthen,Iassertnever
wasputunderthefeetofman,bythatfirstcharterofhumanrightswhichwasgivenbyGod
...thereforethisdoctrineofequalityisbasedontheBible.”72
HavingestablishedafoundationforChristianabolitionisminthebiblicalaccountof
Creation,anti-slaveryChristianactivistsmovedtodismantlethepro-slaverypositionpoint
bypoint.DidNoah’scurseestablishedslavery?Inhismeticulouslyresearchedandwritten
masterpiece,TheBibleandSlavery(1837),prominentChristianpastorandabolitionist
TheodoreDwightWeldassertedthat,first,thecursewasapredictionratherthana
normativedeclaration;second,theprophecywasfulfilledinIsrael’ssubjectionofthe
Canaanitessome900yearslater,implyingthattheprophecyspoketonationalratherthan
individualservitude;third,itwasservice,ratherthanslavery,thatwasprophesied;and
that,finally,itcouldnotbeindubitablyestablishedthatallAfricansdescendedfromHam.73
Accordingly,Weldmaintainedthatthisparticularprophecywasnotapplicabletoallmenat
alltimes.Indeed,Abrahamownedslaves;however,theirsituationwasnothinglikethatof
theSouthernslaves.ForexamplenotethatAbraham“thoughsogreataman,[went]tothe
herdhimselfandfetch[ed]acalffromthenceandserv[ed]itupwiththisownhands,for
theentertainmentofhisguests.”Noaspectofbiblicalservitude,accordingtoChristian
abolitionists,resembledslaverypracticedintheAmericanSouth.74Furthermore,whilethe
67GeorgeThompson,TheSubstanceofMr.Thompson’sLectureonSlaveryDeliveredintheWesleyan
Chapel(Boston:IsaacKnapp,1836),18(emphasisintheoriginal).
68JohnF.Kilner,DignityandDestiny:HumanityintheImageofGod(GrandRapids:WilliamB.
EerdmansPublishingCompany,2015),11.
69FredericDouglass,quotedinKilner,11-12.
70Grimké,3.
71RichardWayneWills,MartinLutherKing,Jr.,andtheImageofGod(Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press,2009),15.
72Grimké,3.
73TheodoreDwightWeld,“TheBibleAgainstSlavery,”Pittsburgh:UnitedPresbyterianBoardof
Publications,1864),95-98.
74Grimké,4.
13
lawofMosespermittedslavery,itwassubjecttostringentregulations,andinnoway
establishedanantecedentforAmericanslavery.75
ThefactthatJesusandtheapostlesdidnotactivelyopposetheinstitutionofslavery
didnotmeanthattheycondonedit.Nineteenth-centurywriterEllenG.Whiteclosedthe
dooronthisargumentwhenshewrote:
Itwasnottheapostle’sworktooverturnarbitrarilyorsuddenlytheestablished
orderofsociety.Toattemptthiswouldbetopreventthesuccessofthegospel.But
hetaughtprincipleswhichstruckattheveryfoundationofslaveryandwhich,if
carriedintoeffect,wouldsurelyunderminethewholesystem.76
Inthispassage,Whiteassertedthreethings:first,shesuggestedthatitwasnottheroleof
theApostles,whichwouldincludetheirMaster,toopposetheculturalconventionsofthe
timesinwhichtheylived,asdoingsowouldunderminethepreachingoftheGospel;
second,sheemphasizedtheoverarching“principles,”soreviledbypro-slaverytheologians,
whichunderminedhumaninequalityandotherunjustsocialpractices;andthird,White
impliedthatthepreachingoftheGospelwouldinevitablyresultinsocialchange.Thiswas
alsopointedoutbyanti-slaveryChristianwriterW.E.Channing,whostated:
Slavery,intheagesoftheApostle,hadsopenetratedsociety,wassointimately
interwovenwithit...thatareligion,preachingfreedomtotheslave,wouldhave
shakenthesocialfabrictoitsfoundation,andwouldhavearmedagainstitselfthe
wholepowerofState.Pauldidnotthenassailtheinstitution.Hesatisfiedhimself
withspreadingprinciples,which,howeverslowly,couldnotbutworkits
destruction.77
ThisbringsustotheMagnaCartaoftheabolitionistsmovement,Paul’sstatementin
Galatians3:28:“Thereisneither,JewnotGreek,thereisneitherbondnorfree,thereis
neithermalenorfemale,foryearealloneinChristJesus.”Pro-slaveryadvocatesbelieved
thatthispassagereferredonlytothecommonalityoffaithandtheequalofferofsalvation
toall,regardlessoftheirsocialstanding.78Theybelievedthatthissocialstandingwas
establishedbyGodandthuscouldnotbechanged;andthatPaul’sinclusionof“slave”and
“free”inthesamesentenceindicatedthatPaul’sintentwasnottoabolishthemaster-slave
relationship.79Afterall,thissamePaulwrote:“Slaves,obeyyourmasters.”Wouldnot
75Weld,104-114.
76EllenG.White,ActsoftheApostles(MountainView:PacificPressPublishingAssociation,1911),
459-460.
77W.E.Channing,TheCompleteWorksofW.E.Channing(London:GeorgeRoutledgeandSons,1870),
599(emphasismine).
78E.BrooksHolifield,TheologyinAmerica:ChristianThoughtfromtheAgeofthePuritanstotheCivil
War(NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2003),497.
79JosiahPriest,BibleDefenseofSlavery:AndOrigin,Fortunes,andHistoryoftheNegroRace(Glasgow:
Rev.W.S.Brown,M.D.,1852),533-534.
14
usingGalatians3:28asananti-slaverypassageforcePaultocontradicthimself?80Thus,
pro-slaverytheologiansdidnotinterpretthispassageintermsofsocialjustice;rather,they
suggestedthataChristianslaveshouldnotbediscouragedbyhisbondage,“forbyfaithin
Christheisafreemaninthehighestandbestsenseoftheterm,abrotherandfellow-heir,
withhisbelievingmaster,ofeternalgloryinheaven...Allearthlydistinctionsandblessings
vanishintoutterinsignificancewhencomparedwiththeeternalrealitiesofthekingdomof
God.”81Accordingly,theyassertedthatPaulspokeonlyofequalaccesstosalvationforall
believers,leavingthedivinelyinstituteddistinctionbetween“thebondandthefree”
intact.82
ChristianabolitionistscouldnothavereadGalatians3:28moredifferently.While
theyagreedthatPaulspokeofthecommonalityoffaithandequalavailabilityofsalvation
forboth“slaveandfree,”andwhiletheyagreedthatthepassagedidnotexplicitlyabolish
theinstitutionofslavery,theywereconvincedthatinproclaiming“neitherbondnorfree,”
Paulplantedtheseedforfutureabolitionism.HowcouldaChristian,whohadreceived
salvationbythebloodofJesus,continuekeepingothersinslavery?Rather,theyasserted
that,iftrulyembraced,Paul’sdoctrine“wouldleadtouniversalemancipation...Ifall
mastersandallslavesbecameChristians,slaverywouldatoncecease”andnooppression
ofhumanbyanotherhumanwouldcontinue.83Thus,abolitionistsviewedthispassagenot
onlyasaproclamationofspiritualequalitybutalsotheseedsofsocialandracialequality.
WithreferencetoGalatians3:28andsimilarpassages,GoldwinSmithwrote:
[They]donotinculcatesocialorpoliticalapathy;theydonotpass,uponthe
Christianworldasentenceofsocialorpoliticaldespair.Thefacultiesforsocial
improvement,andthedesiretoredressinequalityandinjustice,whichGodhad
givenus,theSonofGoddidnottakeaway.Onthecontrary,HeandHisApostles
increasedthosefacultiesandthatdesireathousand-foldbytheprinciplesofmutual
affectionanddutywhichtheyinstilledintotheheartofman,andbythenewforceof
self-devotionwhichtheyaddedtohismoralpowers.84
ManyblackAmericanslavesembracedthisunderstandingoftheGospelofChrist,
andtheliberatinghermeneuticofthe“abstractprinciples”soreviledbypro-slavery
theologiansenthralledthem.“TheequalityofallpeoplebeforeGod”or“gospelequality”
becamethe“hermeneuticalkeytounderstand[ing]bothscriptureandtheirsocial
80DavidM.Whitford,TheCurseofHamandtheEarlyModernEra:TheBibleandtheJustificationsfor
Slavery(Farnham:Ashgate,2009),30.
81JohnRichterJones,SlaverySanctionedbytheBible(Philadelphia:J.B.Lippincott&Co.,1861),25;
cf.,WilliamDoolKillen,TheAncientChurch:ItsHistory,Doctrine,Worship,andConstitution(NewYork:Charles
Scribner,1859),324-325.
82G.D.Armstrong,TheChristianDoctrineofSlavery(NewYork:NegroUniversitiesPress,1857),6570;cf.,GeorgeJunkin,TheIntegrityofOurNationalUnion,vs.Abolitionism:AnArgumentfromtheBible
(Cincinnati:R.P.Donogh,1843),50.
83AlbertBarnes,Notes,ExplanatoryandPractical,ontheNewTestament:IICorinthiansandGalatians
(Glasgow:BlackieandSon,1844),354.
84GoldwinSmith,DoestheBibleSanctionAmericanSlavery?(Cambridge:SeverandFrancis,1863),
84-85.
15
situation.”85Unsurprisingly,manyslaveownersendeavoredtolimitthereligious
educationoftheirslaves,lesttheyimbibesuch“abstractprinciples”andbuyintothe
“liberatinghermeneutic”oftheGospelofChrist.86Opposingsucheducationalpractices,
andwithagooddoseofirony,CharlesElliottwrote:
IftherelationofthemasterandslaveisonerecognizedintheBible,thentheBibleis
therightbooktoputintothehandsoftheslaves;andtheslaveshouldimmediately
betaughttoread,thathemayreadtheBible,which,theysay,sanctionsslavery.If
theBibleneverspeaksofslaveryassinful,thenthebestthingthatcouldbedoneto
supportslaverywouldbetoteachalltheslavestoreadit,thatslaverymayhavethe
sanctionoftheBible,assomepretendtoaffirmthatithas.87
InadditiontoGalatians3:28,anti-slaveryChristianactivistsexploredaplethoraof
biblicalpassagesthattheysawasaddressingtheproblemofslavery.Theyassertedthat
Moses’proclamationsinExodus21:16andDeuteronomy23:15-16should“alonebe
sufficienttoputanendtoslavery.”TheydeclaredthatJesus’missionof“preach[ing]good
newstothepoor”and“proclaim[ing]freedomfortheprisoners”(Luke4:18)was
incompatiblewiththeinstitutionofslavery.88TotheargumentthatOnesimuswas
returnedtohisownertheycounteredthat“christianity[sic],inthis,asinmanyothercases,
hasprovided,withoutexpressprecepts,asureandinoffensivecorrectiveofalloppressive
institutions,bythegradualinfluenceofitsliberalandbenignantmaxims;whichdid,in
pointoffact,dissolvethebondsofslaveryinmostpartsoftheChristianworld.”89They
sawtheprincipleofhumanequalityofallhumansinPaul’sdeclarationthat“Fromoneman
hemadeeverynationofmen”(Acts18:26).This,theyargued,wasthefoundationofthe
AmericanDeclarationofIndependence.90
Havingsurveyedallthescripturalevidence,theauthorsoftheAddresstoChristians
ofAllDenominationsontheInconsistencyofAdmittingSlaver-HolderstoCommunionand
ChurchMembership(1831)concludedthat“themodernsystemofnegroslaveryfindsno
supportinthescriptures[sic],eitheroftheOldorNewTestament,andisdirectlyat
variancewiththespiritanddesignofthegospelofChrist.”“Slavery,”theyconcluded,“will
soonceasetobeacurseuponourcountry,andadisgracetoournation.Thenwillthe
85DemetriusK.Williams,AndEndtothisStrife:ThePoliticsofGenderinAfricanAmericanChurches
(Minneapolis:FortressPress,2004),103.
86JamesOliverHortonandLoisE.Horton,InHopeofLiberty:Culture,CommunityandProtestAmong
NorthernFreeBlacks(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1997),19-20.
87CharlesElliott,SinfulnessofAmericanSlavery,vol.1(Cincinnati:L.Swormstedt&J.H.Power,
1850),127(emphasisintheoriginal).
88AddresstoChristiansofAllDenominationsontheInconsistencyofAdmittingSlaver-Holdersto
CommunionandChurchMembership(Philadelphia:S.C.Atkinson,Printer,1831),10,11.
89Ibid.,12.
90MarkA.Noll,TheCivilWarasaTheologicalCrisis(ChapelHill:TheUniversityofNorthCarolina
Press,2006),41.
16
blessingofhimthatwasreadytoperish,comeuponus,andthesouloftheemancipated
slavewillbemadetosingforjoy.”91
Analysis
EvenacursoryperusalofChristianhistoryshowsthattheBibleplayedapivotalrole
inshapingitsnarrative.Ontheonehand,Christiansconsiderthiscollectionofancient
documentsaninspiredfountofknowledgeaboutGod,humanoriginanddestiny,aswellas
God’sofferofsalvationinChristJesus.Thisknowledgehasbeenanenduringsourceof
Christiancomfortandhope,aswellasasourceofthemoralcodeofcountlesssocieties.At
thesametime,however,theChristianScriptureshavebeenasourceofintense
disagreement.TherehasneverbeenaperiodwhenChristianthinkers,scholarsand
believersdidnotargueaboutthemeaningofindividualpassagesandwords.Attimes,
thesedisagreementshaveendedpeacefully,withadherentsofvariousinterpretations
willingto“agreetodisagree”andlivesidebysideinpeace.Atothertimes,these
disagreementshaveledtowar.Fromtheearlypost-Apostolicera,millionsofhuman
beingshavelosttheirlivesasaresultofdisagreeingscripturalinterpretations.
ThiswasalsoamajorfactorduringtheAmericanCivilWar,inwhich,accordingto
someestimates,overonemillionpeoplelosttheirlives.Conflictsofsuchmagnitudeare
usuallycausedbyavarietyofhistorical,geo-politicalandsocialcircumstances,whichare
beyondthescopeofpaper.Instead,thereaderisreferredtothemanyvolumesthat
explaintheCivilWaranditscauses.Themainreasonforthispaperistobringattentionto
thefactthattheologiansandChristianactivistsonbothsidesofthisconflictclaimedtouse
theBiblealonetobuttresstheirpositiononslavery.BothconsideredtheBibletobeGod’s
revelationandthustheonlyauthoritativedocumentforChristiandoctrineandpractice;
bothclaimedadherencetoitsteachingsandadvocatedreadingitina“plain”manner;and
yetbotharrivedatdramaticallydifferentconclusions.Howcouldthisbe?
Themostprobableanswertothisquestionliesinthetworelatedbutdivergent
approachestohermeneuticsadoptedbythesetwogroups.Attheriskof
oversimplification,butforthesakeofclarity,Iwouldliketolabelthesetwoapproachesas
“static”and“dynamic”hermeneutics.A“static”hermeneuticstopsatthelevelofthetext
thusembracingaliteralisticapproachtocontroversialbiblicalpassages.Suchareadingof
thetextisthenconsideredtotranscendallculturalbarriers,anditsconclusionstobe
applicable“atalltimestoallmen.”92Beforecontinuing,itisnecessarytodistinguish
betweentheterms“literal”and“literalistic.”Jiři Moskalaoffersthishelpfulexplanation:
“‘Literal’meansthatonereadsthebiblicaltextinitscontextwithitsintendedmessage
meanwhile‘literalistic’readingmeansthatthebiblicaltextistakeninaverynarrow
dogmaticwaywithoutapplyingitscontextualandlargertheologicalconsiderations.”93
91AddresstoChristiansofAllDenominationsontheInconsistencyofAdmittingSlaver-Holdersto
CommunionandChurchMembership,12,19.
92Stirling,120.
93Jiři Moskala, “Back to Creation: Toward a Consistent Adventist Creation—Fall—Re-Creation
Hermeneutic,”paperpresentedtotheTheologyofOrdinationStudyCommitteeinJuly2013.Thefulltextof
thepaperisavailablehere:https://www.adventistarchives.org/back-to-creation.pdf(accessedonJune16,
2016)
17
Similarlytoa“static”hermeneutic,a“dynamic”hermeneuticaffirmsthatthetext
canbereadina“plain”waybutitalsogivescarefulattentiontotheimmediateandwider
contextofthepassage.Furthermore,itendeavorstoframecontroversialpassageswithin
broaderbiblical“principles.”Accordingly,overarchingthemes,suchas“GodisLove,”“back
toCreationnarrative,”“loveyourneighborasyourself,”“dountoothers,”“beholybecauseI
amholy,”etc.,becomepartofthehermeneuticallensthroughwhichdifficultscriptural
passagesareinterpreted.ThisisexactlywhathappenedinthecaseoftheChristianantislaverymovement.
TheScriptureitselfprovidessupportforthiskindofinterpretativeprocedure.94In
Nehemiah8:8theLevitesreadfromtheBookoftheLawofGodtothepeopleandthen
interpretedit,orgaveit“themeaning,sothatthepeopleunderstoodwhatwasbeingread.”
Oncethepeople“understood”theWordofGod,theywereencouragedtoputitinto
practice.Thesamethree-stepinterpretativeprocessisevidentinLuke10:25-37,wherean
expertinthelawengagedJesusinconversation.First,Jesusasked,“Whatiswritteninthe
law?”–aquestionthat,onitsown,wouldseemtosupportaliteralisticapproach;however,
Jesusimmediatelymovedontoask,“Howdoyoureadit?”–aprocessthatrequired
interpretationinviewofthecontext.Onlyinlightofthissecondstep,inwhichthemeaning
ofthepassagewasunderstood,doesChristurgetheexperttoputHisteachingintopractice
(v.37).Finally,inLuke24:13-35,JesusappearedtothedisciplesontheroadtoEmmaus.
Onceagain,thediscussionbeganwithaliteralisticinterpretationofthepropheticwords
andacherishedopinion.Jesusthenadmonishedthedisciples:“Howfoolishyouare,and
howslowofhearttobelieveallthattheprophetshavespoken!...Andbeginningwith
MosesandalltheProphets,heexplainedtothemwhatwassaidinalltheScriptures
concerninghimself”(v.27).95Oncethedisciples’eyeswereopenedthroughChrist’s
contextualinterpretation,theyimmediatelyputtopracticewhattheyheard.These
passagespointtoaholisticwayofinterpretingdifficultscripturalpassages.First,one
beginswiththetext;then“contextualandlargertheologicalconsiderations”96suchas
overarchingbiblicalthemesaretakenintoaccount,givingthepassage“meaning”(Neh
8:8);andfinally,themessageisapplied.Itisevidentthatpro-slaverytheologiansbypassed
thesecondstep,movingdirectlyfromaliteralisticreadingtoapplication.
Cana“dynamic”or“principled”interpretationleadtoamoresubjectivewayof
interpretingScripture?Thiscannotbedenied.However,thefoundationforsuchan
approachtoscripturalinterpretationliesinthefactthat,albeitinferior,ourunderstanding
ofGod’sattributesisanalogoustothewayGodunderstandsthem.Take,forexample,the
conceptof“love.”Ifwemakeasharp,qualitativedistinctionbetweenGod’sloveand
humanlove,thenwemakeGodincomprehensible,andstatementssuchas“Godislove”or
“Godisjust”aremeaningless.Ifsuchconceptsaredivorcedfromhumanexperience,then
knowledgeofGodbecomeshumanlyimpossible.ThereasonwhyGodrevealedHimselfin
theScriptureswastohelphumanitycomprehendwhatHisloveandHisjusticearelike.
94IamindebtedtoRonduPreez,whoreviewedmypaperpriortoitspublicationandbroughttomy
attentionthethree-prongedinterpretativeapproach(observation,interpretation,andapplication)aswellas
thepassagessupportingit.
95Emphasismine.
96Moskala,10.
18
Furthermore,thisrevelationwasgivensothatourdamagedunderstandingofthemoral
principlesofGod’sgovernmentcouldbecorrected.Itissuchanapproachtoscriptural
interpretationthatprovidedthefoundationalframeworkforthoseChristianswhoopposed
slavery.TosuggestthatGod,whorevealedHimselfintheScripturesthroughthelifeand
deathofJesusChrist,condonedtheatrocityofAmericanslaverywas,forthem,tantamount
toblasphemy.Itwasthiscognitivedissonancethatpro-slaverytheologianswerewillingto
livewith,whereasbesmirchingthecharacterofGodwasariskthatabolitionistChristians
werenotwillingtotake.
AsIhavereflectedonthissubject,aquestionkeptreturningtomymind:“What
makesreadersoftheBiblechooseonehermeneuticalapproachoveranother?”Before
attemptingtoanswerthisquestion,Ineedtomakeanobservation.Inmy26yearsof
Christianministry,asalocalchurchpastor,missionaryandacademic,Iamyettomeeta
believerwhousesonlyonehermeneuticalapproachconsistently.Thisisalsomyown
experience.Shiftingbackandforthbetweenhermeneuticsisnotnecessarilyundesirable.
Ahermeneutically“static”approachtosomescripturalpassagesmaybeappropriate,
whereasa“dynamic”approachmayaddanewdimensiontoourunderstandingofcertain
texts.Afterall,Godcreatedustousebothreasonandexperiencewheninteractingwith
externaldata.Furthermore,noneofushavecompleteknowledgeofallthingsandwe
continuetogrowinourunderstanding.Thus,consciouslychoosingaconsistent
hermeneuticalapproachmightnotbepossibleordesirable.Otherwise,howcouldanyone
everexperienceaphenomenonof“changingofone’smind”?ButIhavealsoobservedthat
muchofourintra-denominationalconflictiscausedbydiversehermeneuticalapproaches
tothesamescripturalpassage.Thus,wereturntothequestionposedabove:Whatisit
thatmakesuschooseaparticularhermeneuticalapproachoveranotherwhenapproaching
adifficultpassageoftheBible?
Theanswerthatmakesmostsensetomeisthatitisourworldview,basedona
varietyofpresuppositions,whichtendstomakesuschooseaparticularhermeneutical
approach.Howeverwemightdenyit,itisincontrovertiblethatwebringourselvesintothe
readingofthetext.Onceagain,thisisnotnecessarilyabadthing.Infact,havinga
worldviewisnecessaryifwewanttoapproachScriptureinameaningfulway.For
example,apersonwhobelievesthattheBibleistheWordofGodwillapproachthetextina
differentwaythanonewhoespousesatheism.Wealsobringourselvesintothereadingof
textwhenwethinkofGod’sattributes,suchasHis“love.”WhenIencountertheword
“love”intheNewTestament,Isubconsciouslyassumethatwhattheauthorhadinmind
matchesmyownconceptoflove.This,however,maynotnecessarilybetrue.Afterall,my
twenty-firstcenturyunderstandingoftheconceptof“love”maybedifferentfromthe
originalauthor’sconceptof“love.”AndnotonlyistheEnglishword“love”usedto
translateseveraldifferentGreekwords,butdifferentcultures,familiesandreligious
traditions,suchasCalvinismandArminianism,canunderstandtheconceptof“love”in
diverseways.97ThesameappliestootherattributesofGod,suchasHis“justice,”
“goodness,”“sovereignty,”etc.Thebottomlineisthatwearenotusuallyconsciousofthe
factthatwebringourworldview,orculturalpresuppositions,withuswhenweapproach
97JohnPeckhamdealswiththisphenomenonindepthinhismasterfulstudyofGod’slove.TheLove
ofGod(DownersGrove:IVPAcademic,2015).
19
thetextoftheBible.Ibelievethatthisisthekeytounderstandingwhathappenedin
AmericansocietypriortotheCivilWar.
Whileresearchingmaterialforthispaper,Iwasastoundedtofindsomanybiblical
passagesrelatingtoslavery.Ifconsideredintheirentirety,andinisolationfromthe
“abstractprinciples”oftheBible,thesepassagesestablishapowerfulpro-slavery
argument.WhileIknewthatthesepassagesexisted,Ihadalwayssubconsciouslyapplieda
“dynamic”hermeneutictothem,deemingthemirrelevanttomylifeandthesocietyIwasa
partof.ThiswasbecausetheworldviewIgrewupwithprovidedthesubconscious
presuppositionthatslaverywasanabhorrentandinhumanepractice.Interestingly,this
presuppositiondidnotcomefromthechurch,butrather,frompubliceducationin
communistPoland,whereIgrewup.Thethemeofslaverywassodistantandsoirrelevant
tomyChristianlifethatIdon’teverrememberdiscussingitwithfellowbelievers.Itwas
myatheistteacherswhoinstilledinmerepugnanceforslavery.Later,mymaturing
ChristianworldviewalignedwithwhatIhadbeentaughtbymyculturalenvironment.
Similarly,inmodernAmericapeoplearetaughtfromchildhood,athome,schooland
church,through“thenewspapers,thenovel,andthemagazine,”98thatanyformofslavery
isevil.Itisnotsurprising,therefore,thatwhenwereadthebiblicalpassagesonslavery,
wesubconsciouslychoosea“dynamic”or“principled”hermeneutic.
NotsowiththeyouthoftheantebellumSouth,whogrewupaccustomedtoslavery.
Surroundedbyslavenannies,slavecooks,slavehousekeepersandslaveplantation
workers,childrenweretaughtthatslaverywasaninherentpartoftheeconomy,thattheir
wellbeingdependedonslavelabor,andthatGodhadordaineditthisway.Theyalsogrew
upbelievingthatslaverybenefitedtheirslaves;thatbecauseslaveswereadifferent
categoryofhumanbeings,a“permanentlyinferiorandbrutishseparatehumanspecies,”99
theyneededbondagetobringoutthebestinthem.100 ThomasJefferson,oneofAmerica’s
FoundingFathers,believedthat“blacksabilitytoreasonwasmuchinferiortothewhites,
whileinimaginationtheyaredull,tasteless,andanomalousandinferiortothewhitesin
theendowmentsofbodyandmind.”101ForJefferson,“theequalityofmankind”couldonly
beachieved“byexcludingblacks.”102Asaresult,manySouthernChristiansviewed
AbrahamLincolnasanuncontrollable,hypocritical,anti-Christianvillainwhostartedan
“unnaturalwar”thatwoulddestroythedivinelyestablishedsocialorder,ratherthanasa
hero;103UncleTom’sCabinasa“powerfulpropagandaweaponfortheNorth,”ratherthan
asaliterarymasterpiece104andabolitionismasanideologythatstruckattheheartoftheir
98Seefootnotesand8and9above.
99WaldoE.Martin,TheMindofFrederickDouglass(ChapelHill:TheUniversityofNorthCarolina
Press,1984),231.FrederickDouglassdedicatedhislifetocountersuchmisconceptions;cf.,Discussionson
AmericanSlavery:InDr.Wardlow’sChaper,BetweenMr.GeorgeThompsonandtheRev.,R.J.Breckinridge
(Glasgow:GeorgeGalliePublisher,1836),136.
100 Cumming,158.
101 PaulFinkelman,SlaveryandtheFounders:RaceandLibertyintheAgeofJefferson(London:M.E.
Sharpe,2014),197.
102 Ibid.
103 Cumming,14-15,158-159,174-176.
104 Ibid.,175.
20
Christianworldview.ThiswaswhatthechildrenoftheantebellumSouthweretaughtat
home,schoolandchurch,through“thenewspapers,thenovel,andthemagazine.”This
shapedtheiradultworldview,their“normal,”thelensthroughwhichtheyreadtheirBibles.
Conclusion
In495AD,theRomanwriterPlautusutteredthefamouswordsHomohominilupus,
i.e.,“Maniswolftoman.”Sincethattime,thisphrasehasbeenusedtodescribethevarious
atrocitiescommittedbyhumansagainstotherhumans.ThroughoutChristianhistory,
manysuchatrocitieswerecommittedinthenameofScripture.Themodernslavetrade,
whichtookmillionsofhumanbeingsfromtheirAfricanhomelandtoAmericanslavery,was
onesuchatrocity;thehorrifictreatmentofslavesbytheirSouthernmasterswasanother.
Eventhosewhomightbeconsidered“good”mastersbelievedslaverytobedivinely
sanctioned.Whiletheyagreedthatslavesshouldnotbemistreated,theybelievedthat
these“isolated”incidentscouldbedealtlocallywithanddidnotwarrantawar.
Wemustalwayskeepinmindthat,intermsofhumancruelty,Americanslaveryis
onparwithatrocitiessuchastheArmeniangenocide,theHolocaustorthegenocidein
Rwanda.Notoneofourmodern,intra-churchdisagreementsevencomesclosetothe
inhumanityoftheseconflicts.InthecaseofSouthernslavery,however,wemusttakeinto
accountthatmostslaveownerswereChristianswhojustifiedtheirpracticesbywhatthey
believedwerethe“plain”teachingsoftheBible.Thus,whileunderscoringtheinhumanity
ofSouthernslaveryandembracingthea-prioripositionthatmodernslaveryis
incompatiblewiththebiblicalprincipleofGod’slove,itisimportantforustodrawsome
lessonsfortoday.Otherwise,wemightbeindangeroffulfillingGeorgeSantayana’s
aphorism:“thosewhocannotrememberthepastarecondemnedtorepeatit.”
Sowhatcanwelearnfromthisinvestigation?Mostimportantly,wewoulddowell
torecognizethatweallapproachtheBiblewithavarietyofpresuppositions,whichare
shapedbyourprenatalandchildhoodexperiences,ourpersonalities,ourinteractionswith
familiesandfriends,oureducationandbythemedia.Asaresult,weallapproachScripture
withadifferentsetofintellectualtools.Iamconvincedthattherearenotwoindividuals
whoareperfectlyhermeneuticallyaligned.ThisiswhatIconsideras“hermeneutical
misalignment,”aconceptthattherearetoomanyvariablesinourindividualdevelopment
forChristianstoallarriveatidenticalunderstandingsofcontroversialbiblicalpassages.
Afterall“allcannotseeinthesamelineofvision.”105Whileagroupofbelieversshould
agreeonthegrandthemesoftheBibleandarriveatasetoffundamentalteachingsof
Scripturesbasedonthesethemes;andwhileitisreasonabletoexpectthatallwhobelong
toagroupordenominationagreewithitsfundamentalbeliefs;itisbothfutileandharmful
tothecommunitytoexpectthateveryoneagreeontheinterpretationofallscriptural
passages.“Wecannotthentakeaposition,”wroteEllenG.White,“thattheunityofthe
churchconsistsinviewingeverytextoftheScriptureintheverysameshadeoflight.”106
105 EllenG.White,FaithandWorks(Nashville:SouthernPublishingAssociation,1979),14.
106 EllenG.White,“BiblicalCounselonSolvingChurchDifficulties,”inManuscriptRelease15,no.1158
(SilverSpring:E.G.WhiteEstate,1993),150;cf.,EllenWhite,SelectedMessages,vol.1(Washington,D.C.:
ReviewandHeraldPublishingAssociation,1958),22.ForanexcellentexpositionofEllenG.White’sviewson
Scripturalinterpretation,aswellastheissuesofunityanddiversity,seeJerryMoon’sarticle“Unityin
21
WithintheunifyingboundariesofagreementonfundamentalChristiandoctrines,
hermeneuticalmisalignmentisagoodanddesiredphenomenon.Itis,afterall,aresultof
God’sdesignforhumanindividuality.Thus,Christiansfunctioninginanenvironment
characterizedbythegrandthemesofGod’sloveforhumanityandhumanloveforGodand
foroneanother(John3:16;Matt22:37-39)shouldcelebratehermeneutical
misalignment.107Withinsuchanenvironment,believerscanbeencouragedtorecognize
therealityofitsexistenceandtoexploreitsbenefits,includingmutualunderstanding,
possibleadjustmentofone’spresuppositions,constructiveconflict,theological
development,andthejoyofbelongingtoacommunityofdiversepeoplewhobelieveinthe
conceptof“presenttruth.”
Whilenecessaryandbeneficial,hermeneuticalmisalignmentcanalsoproduce
unhealthyconflict.ThisoccurswhentheoverarchingprinciplesofGod’slovetowards
humanityandhuman’slovetowardsoneanotherareneglectedwithinthecommunity.
Individualbelievers,orsmallgroupofbelieverswithinadenomination,becomelockedup
withintheprisonoftheirownworldview,attimesevendenyingthattheyapproach
Scripturefromwithinaparticularworldview.Undersuchcircumstances,dogmatism
trumpsothervalues;theaphorism“mywayorthehighway”becomesareality;personal
andcommunalgrowthisstifled;theologicaldevelopmentsuffers;andtheconceptof
diversitybecomesanathema.Ultimately,suchcommunitiestearthemselvesapart,allfor
thesakeofanideology.Alonelydriverwithastickeronhishatchdoorproclaiming“The
Biblesaysit!Ibelieveit!Thatsettlesit!”becomesjustthat-alonelydriveronthehighway
ofhisorherownpresuppositions.
Second,consideringthereasonsoutlinedabove,itbehoovesustoprayerfully
acknowledgethefactthatnoneofusapproachesthebiblicaltextwithablankslate.108We
musteachaskfortheHolySpirittohelpustorecognize,understandand,ifnecessary,give
usstrengthtoalignourpresuppositionsaccordingtoGod’swill.109Recognizingthatour
worldview,aswellastheworldviewofthosewhoopposeourpositions,influencesthe
readingoftheScripturemayhelpwithhealingwoundsandmovingforward.
Third,wemustalwaysbeawarethateisegesisisanever-presentdangerforall
studentsoftheBible.LiketheChristiansoftheantebellumSouth,allwhostudythe
Scripturesfacethetemptationto“bringcertainScripturestogether,andinterpretpassages
oftheBible,soastogivecoloringto[our]views.”Wemustthusbecarefulnottoengagein
“wrestingtheScripturestomakethemappeartosaythatwhichtheydonotsay.”110
Diversity”inTheEllenG.WhiteEncyclopedia,ed.byDenisFortinandJerryMoon(Hagerstown:Reviewand
HeraldPublishingAssociation,2013),1241-1244.
107 EllenWhitethuswrote:“OnemanmaybeconversantwiththeScriptures,andsomeparticular
portionoftheScriptureisespeciallyappreciatedbyhimbecausehehasseenitinacertainstrikinglight;
anotherseesanotherportionasveryimportant;andthusoneandanotherpresentstheverypointstothe
peoplethatappearofhighestvalue.ThisisallintheorderofGod.”White,“BiblicalCounselonSolvingChurch
Difficulties,”149-150(italicssupplied).
108 White,SelectedMessages,vol.1,19-21.
109 Cf.,EllenG.White,CounselstoParents,Teachers,andStudentsRegardingChristianEducation
(MountainView:PacificPressPublishingAssociation,1913),463.
110 EllenG.White,CounselstoWritersandEditors(Nashville:SouthernPublishingAssociation,1946),
153.
22
Andfinally,wemusthumblyacknowledgethatGodmightchooseculturetoprovide
awake-upcallforChristians.Itisnotalwaysaone-waystreet.Christiansarecontinually
admonishednotto“conformtothepatternsofthisworld”(Rom12:2)andrejectthe
practicesthatareclearlycontrarytotheWordofGod.Atthesametime,however,wemust
beawarethatGodcanuseculturetonudgeChristianstocarefullyre-examinetheir
“cherishedopinions”111inthelightofScripture.ThisiswhathappenedduringtheSecond
GreatAwakening.TheNortherncultureofanti-slavery,whetherinfluencedbytheBibleor
secularhumanism,ultimatelyprevailedintheSouthandthroughouttheWesternworld.A
testimonytothisfactisthat,today,atheistsandChristiansalikeagreethatslaverywasan
inhumaneinstitutionandastainuponthefabricoftheAmericannation.
91.
111 EllenG.White,ChristObjectLessons(BattleCreek:ReviewandHeraldPublishingCompany,1900),
23