Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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