- Feb 5, 2002
- 190,230
- 70,404
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The Presbyterian Church in America recently disciplined Pastor Zachary Garris for “unwholesome speech.” I am not a Presbyterian, so I have no interest in denominational politics, but I am a Christian, and I care when my faith is made to launder evil.
Garris posted on X that the Bible contains “chattel slavery” and that some antebellum Presbyterians defended slavery because of “the Bible’s teaching.” That framing is exactly where the Lost Cause loves to hide. It baits Christians with reverence for Scripture, then switches the object of our sympathy from Moses’ law to Mississippi’s slave code.
Lost Cause propaganda works by wrapping falsehoods around partial truths. Yes, the Old Testament regulated forms of servitude. Yes, some of those forms were severe. But that does not make biblical servitude morally identical to the racialized, hereditary, man-stealing slavery of the Old South.
Garris’s use of the word “chattel” is the sleight of hand. In Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy 15, Hebrew slaves were to be released after six years, in the seventh year, and were protected against abuse. That is far closer to the indentured servitude many white settlers originally came to America under, in the colonial era. If someone replies that these protections applied only to Israelites, the answer is that Israel was not a racial state. A foreigner, like Rahab, could join Israel’s covenant life by confessing faith in the Lord and submitting to his law (Ex. 12:48-49). That alone makes Israel unlike the Old South.
The Old South did not allow enslaved Africans to confess their way out of bondage. Its system was racial, hereditary, and originated in “man-stealing,” which Exodus 21 condemns as deserving death, even for the one in possession of a slave originally caught that way, like many Southern plantation owners. Hence, John Wesley called American slavery “the vilest that ever saw the sun.” [1] He was right.
So, the issue is not whether Scripture uses the word “slave.” The issue is whether two systems that share a broad label are the same object. They are not. To treat them as equivalent is equivocation by generic leveling. It is like saying a kitchen knife and a murderer’s knife are morally the same because both are knives. The label remains, but the thing itself has changed.
Continued below.
www.christianpost.com
Garris posted on X that the Bible contains “chattel slavery” and that some antebellum Presbyterians defended slavery because of “the Bible’s teaching.” That framing is exactly where the Lost Cause loves to hide. It baits Christians with reverence for Scripture, then switches the object of our sympathy from Moses’ law to Mississippi’s slave code.
Lost Cause propaganda works by wrapping falsehoods around partial truths. Yes, the Old Testament regulated forms of servitude. Yes, some of those forms were severe. But that does not make biblical servitude morally identical to the racialized, hereditary, man-stealing slavery of the Old South.
Garris’s use of the word “chattel” is the sleight of hand. In Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy 15, Hebrew slaves were to be released after six years, in the seventh year, and were protected against abuse. That is far closer to the indentured servitude many white settlers originally came to America under, in the colonial era. If someone replies that these protections applied only to Israelites, the answer is that Israel was not a racial state. A foreigner, like Rahab, could join Israel’s covenant life by confessing faith in the Lord and submitting to his law (Ex. 12:48-49). That alone makes Israel unlike the Old South.
The Old South did not allow enslaved Africans to confess their way out of bondage. Its system was racial, hereditary, and originated in “man-stealing,” which Exodus 21 condemns as deserving death, even for the one in possession of a slave originally caught that way, like many Southern plantation owners. Hence, John Wesley called American slavery “the vilest that ever saw the sun.” [1] He was right.
So, the issue is not whether Scripture uses the word “slave.” The issue is whether two systems that share a broad label are the same object. They are not. To treat them as equivalent is equivocation by generic leveling. It is like saying a kitchen knife and a murderer’s knife are morally the same because both are knives. The label remains, but the thing itself has changed.
Continued below.
Why biblical servitude is not American chattel slavery
Yes, the Old Testament regulated forms of servitude Yes, some of those forms were severe But that does not make biblical servitude morally identical to the racialized, hereditary, man-stealing
www.christianpost.com
