Does the Bible Endorse Slavery?
Confronting One of the Most Controversial Attacks on Christianity
"Christians should perhaps consider admitting that their Bible was written in a primitive, barbaric age and as such represents the primitive, barbaric attitudes of that age," says Austin Cline, a regional director for the Council for Secular Humanism and About.com's Guide for Agnosticism and Atheism.
Critics are correct that the Bible contains numerous references to slavery (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon), and many of these references imply an acceptance of the institution. The danger is that when Americans think of "slavery," they conjure up an image of whites enslaving Africans - the institution of slavery that our nation experienced. This is NOT the type of slavery referred to in the Scriptures.
The only sane, valid way to interpret and understand the Bible is the historical-grammatical method. You must understand the historical context of the Bible's references, determine the timeless principle, and go from there. The Bible's matter-of-fact or sympathetic references to slavery do not automatically mean a comprehensive and complete endorsement for all forms of slavery throughout all of time. Slavery in the Bible is mostly of the indentured servitude variety, and was almost always on a term basis - 7 years, 14 years, and so forth.
It is true that 18th century southern plantation owners used the Bible to excuse slavery and talk their slaves into submission, but this does not make their twisted interpretation valid. Permanent, race-based, comprehensive slavery is NOT endorsed by the Bible.
Most critics of the Bible who resort to the slavery argument probably know this, but they are serving an agenda that goes far beyond issues of racial justice and equality. They are not interested in condemning slavery so much as they are in undermining the Bible, and they will resort to whatever means necessary to do so - even distorting its meaning to make it stand for something it does not.
Published by Brian Tubbs
Brian Tubbs is the Feature Writer & Columnist for Protestantism at Suite101.com, the principal blogger for the American Revolution & Founding Era blog, and the founder and course manager for ChristianMarriag... View profile
- Economic Factors That Contributed to the Adoption of the Slave PracticeHow much did slave contribute to the economy of the South or to the national economy? How did the rapid expansion of the country through the Louisiana Purchase and the end of the Mexican-American War aggravate the sl...
- Only Through the Rejection of Love Are Women Equal to MenUsing a 16th Century French author and a 20th century Egyptian author, I prove that women must reject "soft" emotions, like love, in order to be able to fight for equal status with men.
- Sectional Compromise Over the Issue of SlaveryIn the 1850s, while the American north and south seemed to compromise on the issue of slavery, the storm clouds for widespread dispute on the issue were forming, which in fact was the beginning of the issues that woul...
- Why Slavery Never EndedExplains why the Founders failed to address the question of slavery in a definitive way
- Curriculum: Race to the White House 2008This is a a piece of curriculum written about the Race to the White House, with answers given.
- Genovese's 'Consuming Fire' Tracks South's Commitment to Slavery
- Slavery in the Constitution
- Was the Apostle Paul Pro-Slavery?
- Religious Authority
- The Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage, II: Christi...
- Economic Factors that Contributed to Slavery in the U.S.
- Slavery and the Constitution
- Critics are correct that the Bible contains numerous references to slavery.
- The only valid way to interpret the Bible is the historical-grammatical method.
- The Bible is often twisted to mean something it does not in order to undermine it.
20 Comments
Post a CommentI have questioned. How did the Israelites obtain slaves? If I was someone's slave back then, was I forced to be their slave , or did willing sell myself to them for financial reasons?
Aren't you too serving an agenda by justifying slavery in the bibile, Mr. Tubbs? You resort to the, well that's just how it was in those days argument. The who, what, when and where of slavery does not matter. Nor does the fact that it was common practice at the time make it right in hindsight. As we humans evolve, we become more intelligent in many ways. As a result we now see slavery as wrong. Instead of going to such ignorant lengths to defend your faith, why not just admit the wrong and that you know better now? At least that would be honest and not undermine signifigance of slavery.
Evilbible.com is Dead
Large portions of evilbible.com have been considered, dissected and declared fallacious on very many levels.
The evidence of this is found at this URL:
http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/07/evilbiblecom-is-dead.html
Even if it was temporary, it was still OK to beat them to death if they didn't succumb to their wounds within two days.
Quick response to "Critical Thinking," you're incorrect about nothing ever being rescinded. The Old Testament mosaic code no longer applies in its specific terms and methodology. Paul makes this pretty clear in his epistles. Certainly, the principles underlying much of the OT carry over, such as the prohibition on adultery, honoring one's parents, and so forth, but the specific laws about stoning adulterers and rebellious teens do not.
So its okay to enslave someone as long as it is only for 14 years? What the heck kind of reasoning is that? Also since nothing is EVER rescinded from the Bible, this law is STILL to be followed, is it not? Show me an amendment to this slavery section and it better be in the New Testament .. far far in the back.
Quick response to 'A Thinking BUM' - I don't think the Bible is obligated to speak on democracy. You're incorrect that it doesn't address the equality of the sexes (Galatians 3:28), although I will grant it assigns different roles for husbands and wives in the family (and THAT is perceived by many as sex discrimination). The mosaic law did permit slavery for the ancient Hebrews (with certain conditions and restrictions), but the Bible emphatically condemns the type of cruelty that characterizes most forms of slavery the world has experienced SINCE the Bible was completed.
Read Leviticus 25:44-46. It's very clear:
44 " 'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
(NIV)
"They are not interested in condemning slavery so much as they are in undermining the Bible..."
The Bible fails to say a word toward the equality of the sexes, not a word against slavery, not a word for democracy, not a word for religious tolerance.
Those facts alone should be enough to convince a modern person that the Bible does not have the last say in morality.
What makes Jefferson Davis' interpretation of the Bible correct and Reverend Henry Ward Beecher's wrong? (Beecher, of course, a staunch abolitionist minister).