Bible vs. Bible

[DanF]

"The Northern States, in dispensing with slavery, have destroyed order, and removed the strongest argument to prove the existence of Deity, the author of that order."

— Richmond Enquirer, 1855.

 

[James B White]

Here's an excerpt of a typical pro-slavery argument, taken from two letters published in 1840, one from The Presbytery of Tombechee in Mississippi and the other from the General Conference of Congregational Churches in Maine on the topic of slavery, this being from the Mississippi side, of course:

That slavery is not a moral evil, is evident from the fact, that it is no where condemned by the Redeemer, or his apostles in the New Testament . All principles, and all practices, which would exclude from the favor of God, and the kingdom of Heaven, are recorded with great plainness without respect of persons. Witness the manner in which the Scribes and Pharisees were addressed, "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into he kingdom of Heaven," Matthew 5: 20. In a long catalogue of denunciations against various sins by the Redeemer himself, contained in the 23d chapter of Matthew, and from the 13th to the 33d verses inclusive, not a word is said against the sin of slavery.

How does all this come to pass, if it be so "great an evil" as our Brethren seem to think? In the sermon on the Mount not a word is uttered against the sin of slavery. A Centurion came to Jesus in Capernaum, beseeching him, and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. The Centurion answered and said, Lord am not I worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof, but speak the word only; and my servant shall be healed. For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me, and I say unto this man, go ; and he goeth ; and to another, come, and he cometh; and to my servant, do this; and he doeth it. The Lord said, "I have not found so great faith, no not in Israel." Matt. 8: 5—10. The Centurion was a slaveholder, and instead of being reproved by the Savior, he received the highest commendation.

Let us hear the mind of the Spirit by the mouth of the Apostle Paul. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred,, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murder, tirunkenness, revellings, and such like; of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things, shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Gal. 5: 19—21. In the whole catalogue of prohibitions which disqualify for the kingdom of Heaven, slavery is not once named. Did the Apostles say any thing on the subject that justifies its existence among a Christian people?

This Presbytery believes they did.— Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called....

Slaves are directed in what manner they are to demean themselves, as members of the civil and social compact. Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with eye service, as men pleasers, but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men. knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether bond or free. And ye, masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening; knowing that your master also is in Heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him. Ephesians 6: 5—9. Society is a whole, formed by infinite wisdom, with all its functions and functionaries. No honest calling is degraded, or degrading.— Each member of the social compact is to be honored and esteemed, while he continues to move cheerfully and usefully in his proper sphere.

 

[jgoodguy]

An Oddity.

Pro-slavery Bible.
by American Anti-Slavery Society 1839

 

[matthew mckeon]

An Oddity.

Pro-slavery Bible.
by American Anti-Slavery Society 1839

Got some good sarcasm going there.

 

[matthew mckeon]

If you look at a lot of secessionist documents, the text they strike at, is not the Bible, but the Declaration of Independence. When Lincoln states he wants to return to "the faith of our fathers" in rejecting slavery, he is talking about the Declaration.

 

[James B White]

Got some good sarcasm going there.

There's a nice little catechism in the back, where the reply to everything, good or bad, about slaves is "because they are black."

 

[DanF]

Got some good sarcasm going there.

Indeed, a textbook example of Aristole's maxim.

"wit is educated insolence. "

 

[jgoodguy]

From
A Southern Christian View of Slavery

One of the many bonds between the North and the South that was broken by the
Civil War was religious unity. On May 16, 1861, the Presbyterian Assembly met in Philadelphia. Only a minority of Southern presbyteries was represented. When a Northern clergyman called for an oath of allegiance to the Federal government, the Southern clergymen defected. On December 4, Presbyterian clergymen of the
South met at Augusta, Georgia, to establish the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America. The Assembly adopted a statement drafted by James Henry Thornwell, a prominent South Carolina Presbyterian clergyman, the purpose of which was to justify the church's secession from the parent church. A political moderate and opponent of the church's participation in secular affairs such as the slavery issue prior to 1860, Thornwell became a champion of the Confederacy and one of the strongest advocates of slavery in the South. The part of the Address dealing with the slavery question is reprinted here.

Source: Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America, Vol. I, Augusta, Ga., 1861, Appendix, pp. 55-59.

Archived publication https://archive.org/details/minutesofgener1861pres

The Northern section of the church stands in the awkward predicament of maintaining, in one breath, that slavery is an evil which ought to be abolished and of asserting, in the next, that it is not a sin to be visited by exclusion from communion of the saints. The consequence is that it plays partly into the hands of Abolitionists and partly into the hands of slaveholders and weakens its influence with both. It occupies the position of a prevaricating witness whom neither party will trust. It would be better, therefore, for the moral power of the Northern section of the church to get entirely quit of the subject.

At the same time, it is intuitively obvious that the Southern section of the church, while even partially under the control of those who are hostile to slavery, can never have free and unimpeded access to the slave population. Its ministers and elders will always be liable to some degree of suspicion. In the present circumstances, Northern alliance would be absolutely fatal. It would utterly preclude the church from a wide and commanding field of usefulness.

This is too dear a price to be paid for a nominal union. We cannot afford to give up these millions of souls and consign them, so far as our efforts are concerned, to hopeless perdition for the sake of preserving an outward unity which, after all, is an empty shadow. If we would gird ourselves heartily and in earnest for the work which God has set before us, we must have the control of our ecclesiastical affairs and declare ourselves separate and independent.
....

Now, when it is said that slavery is inconsistent with human rights, we crave to understand what point in this line is the slave conceived to occupy. There are, no doubt, many rights which belong to other men to Englishmen, to Frenchmen, to his masters, for example which are denied to him. But is he fit to possess them? Has God qualified him to meet the responsibilities which their possession necessarily implies? His place in the scale is determined by his competency to fulfill its duties. There are other rights which he certainly possesses, without which he could neither be human nor accountable. Before slavery can be charged with doing him injustice, it must be shown that the minimum which falls to his lot at the bottom of the line is out of proportion to his capacity and culture a thing which can never be done by abstract speculation.

 

[dvrmte]

Could you give an example of someone in the period claiming that what abolitionists were doing was false prophesying?

I posted this earlier in the thread with a link.

http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/archive/resources/documents/ch15_03.htm
So, if slavery had commenced even contrary to the laws of God and man, and the sin of its introduction rested upon our heads, and it was even carrying forward the nation by slow degrees to final ruin—yet if it were certain that an attempt to remove it would only hasten and heighten the final catastrophe . . . then we would only be found to attempt the extirpation but we would stand guilty of a high offense in the sight of both God and man if we should rashly made the effort. But the original sin of introduction rest not on our heads, and we shall soon see that all those dreadful calamities which the false prophets of our day are pointing to will never, in all probability, occur.

 

[James B White]

I posted this earlier in the thread with a link.

http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/archive/resources/documents/ch15_03.htm
So, if slavery had commenced even contrary to the laws of God and man, and the sin of its introduction rested upon our heads, and it was even carrying forward the nation by slow degrees to final ruin—yet if it were certain that an attempt to remove it would only hasten and heighten the final catastrophe . . . then we would only be found to attempt the extirpation but we would stand guilty of a high offense in the sight of both God and man if we should rashly made the effort. But the original sin of introduction rest not on our heads, and we shall soon see that all those dreadful calamities which the false prophets of our day are pointing to will never, in all probability, occur.

Thanks! I missed that earlier.

Can someone with more religious knowledge than me explain the connotation(s) of "false prophet"?

I've run across period examples similar to the above, where abolitionists predict a specific thing (dissolution of the nation, uprisings, etc.) and that thing doesn't occur. Literally, what the person prophesied is false; they made an inaccurate prediction; they're a false prophet.

But then there seems to be another connotation where the person is a false (imitation) prophet of God, meaning they claim to speak for God but don't. That seemed to be the meaning in post #71. "Apostles" was even substituted for "prophets" in one quote, getting even further from the meaning of prophesying a specific event.

I was hoping for period examples that fit the second connotation, as implied in post 71. But is there no difference? Are both the same?

 

[jgoodguy]

Thanks! I missed that earlier.

Can someone with more religious knowledge than me explain the connotation(s) of "false prophet"?

I've run across period examples similar to the above, where abolitionists predict a specific thing (dissolution of the nation, uprisings, etc.) and that thing doesn't occur. Literally, what the person prophesied is false; they made an inaccurate prediction; they're a false prophet.

But then there seems to be another connotation where the person is a false (imitation) prophet of God, meaning they claim to speak for God but don't. That seemed to be the meaning in post #71. "Apostles" was even substituted for "prophets" in one quote, getting even further from the meaning of prophesying a specific event.

I was hoping for period examples that fit the second connotation, as implied in post 71. But is there no difference? Are both the same?

A false prophet is one whose prophesies failed misleading those who depended on them. One who misleads. One who is demonized by his opponents.

The problem with religion in general and these claims in specific is the lack of tangible evidence. In theory, a prophet could make a true prophecy and the deity change his 'mind' making a true prophecy a false one.

The summary is to regard all mention of false prophets and apostles as rhetoric.

 

[John Hartwell]

Here's an 1863 article, Abolition Preachers versus Christ and the Apostles printed in New York in the Democratic journal "The Old Guard." An example of pro-slavery Bible interpretation.

 

[dvrmte]

"The Northern States, in dispensing with slavery, have destroyed order, and removed the strongest argument to prove the existence of Deity, the author of that order."

— Richmond Enquirer, 1855.

The order that is spoken of is the Divine Order or Great Chain of Being, it is based on the concept formed from Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, etc., and developed further during the Middle Ages by the Neoplatonists.

http://faculty.up.edu/asarnow/GreatChainofBeing.htm
The fear of "disorder" was not merely philosophical--it had significant political ramifications. The proscription against trying to rise beyond one's place was of course useful to political rulers, for it helped to reinforce their authority. The implication was that civil rebellion caused the chain to be broken, and according to the doctrine of correspondences, this would have dire consequences in other realms. It was a sin against God, at least wherever rulers claimed to rule by "Divine Right." (And in England, the King was also the head of the Anglican Church.) In Shakespeare, it was suggested that the sin was of cosmic proportions: civil disorders were often accompanied by meteoric disturbances in the heavens.

The ranking was based on the amount of spirit.
God
Angels
Humans
Animals
Plants
Non-living objects(rocks, metals, etc.

Humans:
Kings
Queens
Nobles
Merchants
Peasants

Households:
Father
Mother
Sons
Daughters
Slaves

 

[dvrmte]

Thanks! I missed that earlier.

Can someone with more religious knowledge than me explain the connotation(s) of "false prophet"?

I've run across period examples similar to the above, where abolitionists predict a specific thing (dissolution of the nation, uprisings, etc.) and that thing doesn't occur. Literally, what the person prophesied is false; they made an inaccurate prediction; they're a false prophet.

But then there seems to be another connotation where the person is a false (imitation) prophet of God, meaning they claim to speak for God but don't. That seemed to be the meaning in post #71. "Apostles" was even substituted for "prophets" in one quote, getting even further from the meaning of prophesying a specific event.

I was hoping for period examples that fit the second connotation, as implied in post 71. But is there no difference? Are both the same?

I would have to see what it was translated from, because I find warnings of false prophets, teachers, apostles, etc., all used. But since the punishment is the same for each, it doesn't really make much difference.

 

[hrobalabama]

A "False Prophet" would be someone who poses as a prophet or has the gift of prophecy but uses that gift for gain or self aggrandizement. A Biblical example would be Balaam in the Book of Numbers 22:2 through 24:25; He was hired by Balak, at that time king of the Moabites, to prophecy against the Israelites. I have no idea what this has to do with the issue of slavery in antebellum America.

 

[jgoodguy]

A "False Prophet" would be someone who poses as a prophet or has the gift of prophecy but uses that gift for gain or self aggrandizement. A Biblical example would be Balaam in the Book of Numbers 22:2 through 24:25; He was hired by Balak, at that time king of the Moabites, to prophecy against the Israelites. I have no idea what this has to do with the issue of slavery in antebellum America.

It is a handy rhetorical weapon against your opponents who are using the Bible as justification.

 

[James B White]

A "False Prophet" would be someone who poses as a prophet or has the gift of prophecy but uses that gift for gain or self aggrandizement. A Biblical example would be Balaam in the Book of Numbers 22:2 through 24:25; He was hired by Balak, at that time king of the Moabites, to prophecy against the Israelites. I have no idea what this has to do with the issue of slavery in antebellum America.

dvrmte said in post #71 that abolitionists' "misuse" of the Bible made them false prophets. He seemed to be stating his own opinion, rather than giving a period one, and added false apostles with false prophets, so I was trying to get more clarificatiion.

Then please show us where the Bible condemns slavery or s. You won't find it.

However, helping fugitive slaves escape from fellow citizens was theft, and the abolitionists misuse of the Bible is false prophesying.

Matthew 7:15
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves."

1st John 4:1
Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

1st Corinthians 11:13
For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ.

 

[jgoodguy]

As info.
Antislavery view.

Slavery and the Bible.
Published 185-?
Topics Slavery -- United States, Slavery in the Bible

SLAYERY AND THE BIBLE.
Three millions and a half of our countrymen are slaves.
Some of them are made such by the direct action of the
General Government. In various ways, the great political
parties uphold and extend slavery. Large portions of the
Northern church, are in full fellowship with slaveholders,
and with dealers in human flesh. The whole country
is therefore involved in the system. And it becomes
greatly important to understand what the Scriptures
teach concerning slavery, and what, if any thing, is
Christian duty with reference to it.
What then is American slavery ?

This, then, it is, to be an American slave. And we
shall search in vain, the records of the darkest ages and
most barbarous states,—to find any system of oppression
or tyranny, more crashing to body and soul, more terribly
armed with cruelty to its victims,—or more disastrous in
its effects upon the master than this.
Does the Bible give any sanction or tolerance to such a
system ?

Every seventh year, Hebrew born servants were
set free ; and every fiitieth year, liberty was to be proclaimed
Through all the whole land, and to all the inhabitants
thereof." See Levit. xxv, 8-13. No year of
release ever comes to the American slave, but the year of
his death.

 

[southern blue]

There's a nice little catechism in the back, where the reply to everything, good or bad, about slaves is "because they are black."

I remember seeing that in a movie. If I remember correctly the scene was of William Garrison leading a meeting in a church full of African Americans. He would ask the questions and they would all reply in unison 'Because we're black'. There was someone (the main character of the story perhaps) in the background watching all this.

I can't remember anything else about it though....

 

[OpnCoronet]

If you look at a lot of secessionist documents, the text they strike at, is not the Bible, but the Declaration of Independence. When Lincoln states he wants to return to "the faith of our fathers" in rejecting slavery, he is talking about the Declaration.

I believe your basic premise is correct, at least for the leadership of the secessionist movement. Calhoun, found it necessary to refute the reasoning of his idol Jefferson for the writing of the DoI.
It was obvious to Calhoun, if not always to Jefferson, that all Men were not created Free or equal.