"Just as the Bible condones slavery and is wrong, so is the Bible wrong about..."
I've heard this argument so many times as an attempt to prove that the Bible is wrong about [you fill in the blank]. So does the Bible really condone slavery? Watch this great video from Wayne Grudem (a top evangelical theologian and general editor of the ESV Study Bible). It is the first 4 minutes and a great articulation of what the Bible really says about slavery. I strongly suggest you watch this because this assertion is probably one of the most overused and abused. Tell me what you think!!
posted by Christopher Yuan | 10:35 PM
4 Comments:
Better theologians than Wayne Grudem used the Bible to condone slavery in the 1800s. I think evangelicals have retrospectively decided that the Bible is crystal clear on the slavery issue because a Bible that can be ambiguous, interpreted in many ways, and that intelligent people can disagree about doesn't fit with their theology.
So I guess you've conveniently forgotten about all those Christians who fought to abolish slavery.
And you've conveniently forgotten an entire book in the NT which talks about the freedom of a slave. That would be Philemon if you didn't know.
But that's precisely my point. Yes, the Bible can be used to support abolition and yes it can be used to support slavery, just like a piece of art or a movie can legitimately be interpreted in several ways. Which position a given reader takes on the matter isn't decided by the Bible, but by the complex of assumptions, theology, and cultural values the reader brings to the Bible. Suggesting that the Bible clearly condemns slavery fails to explain why the leading theologians of the day thought otherwise. And, as a matter of fact, many biblical scholars have argued, including, for example, Dale Martin and Wayne Meeks (both at Yale), that from a purely historical critical point of view, the defenders of slavery had better arguments.
I'm not saying that the Bible has position X on slavery. I'm arguing that, precisely because the Bible can be interpreted in both helpful and harmful ways, on a range of issues, Christians have some moral responsibility for how they interpret it. Interpreting the Bible requires the employment of principles and values to choose between different possible interpretations. As Augustine wrote in Christian Doctrine: "Whoever, therefore, thinks he understands the divine Word or any part of it so that it doesn't build double love of God and neighbor does not understand it at all."
I'd recommend you check out Sex and the Single Savior by Dale Martin, an NT professor at Yale. I think it will give you some helpful perspective on the topic.
BTW, and I mean this in all seriousness. I think it's admirable that you are choosing a sexual lifestyle that I'm sure is more difficult than, say, finding a male partner and getting married. It's admirable when someone denies their basic impulses because they prioritize their moral values over their own comfort. What I worry about is that the moral values of a given culture, even a culture, such as evangelicalism that claims to just take the Bible at its word, can arise from prejudice and fear of social change, and needlessly impoverish the lives of many who choose to follow them. Don't forget that today's evangelicals also opposed the Civil Rights movement and fought for legislation that would deny gays and lesbians basic civil liberties.
Hey jcd46:
Thanks for your thoughts and appreciate or see the tension that I live in with my impulses and my faith. But it is a tension that actually leads me into a deeper appreciation for the hope that I have in Christ.
Post a Comment
<< Home