Slavery: The Bible Used to Support Evil

Like the Biblical arguments cited by American Christians in support of laws against interracial marriage, Christianity today must answer for support of slavery given in previous eras by many preachers. Preachers who supported slavery were in many ways the spiritual forebears of the modern Fundamentalists, in that they saw the Bible as literally true and inerrant.

The passage traditionally cited as demonstrating God's support for slavery is this cryptic passage in Genesis:

[Genesis 9:20] Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard.
[21] When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent.
[22] Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside.
[23] But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.
[24] When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him,
[25] he said, "Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers."
[26] He also said, "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
[27] May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be his slave."

This passage was frequently cited in apologetic defense of slavery before the American Civil War, although this interpretation of the passage actually has a very long history, dated by some to the writing of the Babylonian Talmud and to prominent early Christian thinkers like Origen and Augustine.

There is a lot of speculation on why seeing his father drunk and naked was such a serious crime that Ham's descendents deserved to be punished in perpetuity for it. The original meaning of this passage seems to be lost in antiquity. It seems fair to argue that this passage has value primarily as an odd relic left over from a culture that faded away long ago.

If only this passage had faded away along with the culture that produced it! It single-handedly stymied opposition to slavery by many Jews, Christians, and Muslims over the last two millenia, and even led many theologians to support the institution of slavery. If the purpose of religion is to inspire people to stand opposed to injustice, then this passage is a collosal breakdown. The institution of slavery has led to unimaginable amounts of suffering over thousands of years, and because of this passage it is only in the present era that most theologians would agree that slavery is inherently unjust.

This passage brings us deeper into the question of inerrancy and Biblical morality. Nowhere in the Bible are we are told that slavery is wrong. The Bible, as a relic of a past age, teaches that slavery is just or at least acceptable. Modern theologians are forced to part with the Biblical text if they oppose slavery.

On this and many issues, modern notions of justice are held in spite of Biblical guidance. If God never supported slavery, how are we supposed to know it is wrong from the Bible? If God does not directly speak God's mind on an issue like this, but "out of the hardness of our hearts" (as Jesus said) allows us to do things like own slaves, take more than one wife, and divorce when he actually disapproves, how are we to know what God's real opinion is on any issue?

Another argument frequently heard in pulpits throughout the South was that since God regulated slavery, he not only condoned it but practically mandated it.

[Leviticus 25:39] " 'If one of your countrymen becomes poor among you and sells himself to you, do not make him work as a slave.
[40] He is to be treated as a hired worker or a temporary resident among you; he is to work for you until the Year of Jubilee.
[41] Then he and his children are to be released, and he will go back to his own clan and to the property of his forefathers.
[42] Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves.
[43] Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God.
[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.

In the New Testament, we find the Epistle of Paul to Philemon, regarding a slave named Onesimus. This could be taken either way; but Paul did not directly question the existence of slavery, he merely asked for mercy towards one particular person who was a slave.

For the Christian who claims today that God doesn't really agree with slavery, the problem is that there is little in the Bible to back that up. All parts of the Bible accept slavery as a part of life. God had no problem outlawing things he didn't want people to do, so why not slavery too?

What this points to is a dilemma we face if trying to use the Bible as a moral guide for modern life. It's not enough to wonder what God wants regarding issues that did not exist when the Bible was written (like violence in movies and television); there are a number of issues where modern Christians disagree with scripture.

If God does not now want slavery, but allowed it in the past, then did God change his mind? Or was God unclear in the first place? Or is modern anti-slavery morality against God's will? In any of these cases, it casts doubt on the idea that scripture gives us an image of unchanging morality. For we must ask: how can we know that other laws won't turn out to be in opposition with God's will as well? How do we know which laws are truly in accord with God's will and which ones are not?

Top / Biblical Inerrancy / Jesus and Paul were Not Literalists / An Alternative to Fundamentalism / Biblical Morality vs. Modern Ethics / Jesus' Litmus Test