[Vision2020] Oh, It's about slavery all right

[Steve Wells]

--------------040700080907030207060003
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 >I'm wondering if some of these passages from Wilson's book are not 
taken out of context and if read in whole would paint a different picture?<

That's a fair question. Let's take a look at what Steve Wilkins and 
Douglas Wilson actually say in their pamphlet "Southern Slavery: As It 
Was". I'll try to include enough to get the context, but I encourage 
those who are interested (especially Christ Church members) to read 
short (33 page) pamphlet.

 From page 10:

"It is obvious that in a fallen world, an institution like slavery will 
be accompanied by many attendant evils. Such evils existed with ancient 
Hebrew slavery, ancient Roman slavery, and with American slavery. The 
issue is not whether sinners will sin, but rather how Christians are 
commanded to respond to such abuses and evils. And nothing is clearer - 
the New Testament opposes anything like the abolitionism of our country 
prior to the War Between the States. The New Testament contains many 
instructions for Christian slave owners, and requires a respectful 
submissive demeanor for Christian slaves. See, for example, Ephesians 
6:5-9, Colossians 3:22-4:1, and 1 Timothy 6:1-5."

Pages 11-12:

"The reason why many Christians will be tempted to dismiss the arguments 
presented in this booklet is that we will say (out loud) that a godly 
man could have been a slave owner. But this "inflammatory" position is 
the very point upon which the Bible speaks most directly, again and 
again. In other words, more people will struggle with what we are saying 
at the point where the Bible speaks most clearly. There is no exegetical 
vagueness here. Not only is the Bible not politically correct, it was 
not politically correct one hundred thirty years ago.

"This points to the need for Christians to learn the biblical way of 
avoiding "problem texts." This is the way of a priori submission. 
Christians must recognize that they are under the authority of God, and 
they may not develop their ideas of what is "right" and "fair" apart 
from the Word of God. And when the Bible is our only standard of right 
and wrong, problem texts disappear. This entire issue of slavery is a 
wonderful issue upon which to practice. Our humanistic and democratic 
culture regards slavery in itself as a monstrous evil, and acts as 
though this were self-evidently true. The Bible permits Christians to 
own slaves, provided they are treated well. You are a Christian. Whom do 
you believe?"

Pages 17-18:

"The slavery of Rome was anti-scriptural, and because of the evil of the 
slave trade, the larger system of slavery on the South was certainly 
sub-scriptural. Nevertheless, the Bible prohibits us from saying that 
slave-owning in such contexts is sin.

"The bible teaches that a man may be a faithful Christian and a 
slave-owner in a pagan slave system. If he owns slaves, then Scripture 
does put a series of requirements on him, with the church of Christ may 
and must insist upon. But beyond those requirements, the church may not 
presume to legislate."

Page 21:

"The slave trade was an abomination. The Bible condemns it, and all who 
believe the Bible are bound to do the same. Owning slaves is not an 
abomination. The Bible does not condemn it, and those who believe the 
Bible are bound to refrain in the same way. But if we were to look in 
history for Christians who reflected this biblical balance - i.e. a 
hatred of the slave trade and an acceptance of slavery in itself under 
certain conditions - we will find ourselves looking at the ante bellum 
South."

Doug Wilson's words are especially interesting in light of the current 
(It's not about slavery: Pay no attention to that man behind the 
curtain) advertisement in the Daily News from the Board of Christ 
Church. The ad says "that slavery has always been an evil needing to be 
abolished" and "that has been our position from the start."

Well, that may be the position of the board of Christ Church, but it's 
contrary to the (out loud) position that their pastor, Doug Wilson. 
Isn't it strange that board and pastor could disagree so completely on 
Wilson's "wonderful issue" of slavery?


--------------040700080907030207060003
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
  <title></title>
</head>
<body>
&gt;I'm wondering if some of these passages from Wilson's book are not taken
out of context and if read in whole would paint a different picture?&lt;<br>
<br>
That's a fair question. Let's take a look at what Steve Wilkins and Douglas
Wilson actually say in their pamphlet "Southern Slavery: As It Was". I'll
try to include enough to get the context, but I encourage those who are interested
(especially Christ Church members) to read short (33 page) pamphlet. <br>
<br>
>From page 10:<br>
<br>
"It is obvious that in a fallen world, an institution like slavery will be
accompanied by many attendant evils. Such evils existed with ancient Hebrew
slavery, ancient Roman slavery, and with American slavery. The issue is not
whether sinners will sin, but rather how Christians are <i>commanded</i>
to respond to such abuses and evils. And nothing is clearer &#8211; the New Testament
opposes anything like the abolitionism of our country prior to the War Between
the States. The New Testament contains many instructions for <i>Christian
</i>slave owners, and requires a respectful submissive demeanor for Christian
slaves. See, for example, Ephesians 6:5-9, Colossians 3:22-4:1, and 1 Timothy
6:1-5."<br>
<br>
Pages 11-12:<br>
<br>
"The reason why many Christians will be tempted to dismiss the arguments
presented in this booklet is that we will say (out loud) that a godly man
could have been a slave owner. But this "inflammatory" position is the very
point upon which the Bible <i>speaks most directly</i>, again and again.
In other words, more people will struggle with what we are saying at the
point where the Bible speaks most clearly. There is no exegetical vagueness
here. Not only is the Bible not politically correct, it was not politically
correct one hundred thirty years ago.<br>
<br>
"This points to the need for Christians to learn the biblical way of avoiding
"problem texts." This is the way of a priori submission. Christians must
recognize that they are under the authority of God, and they may not develop
their ideas of what is "right" and "fair" apart from the Word of God. And
when the Bible is our only standard of right and wrong, problem texts disappear.
This entire issue of slavery is a wonderful issue upon which to practice.
Our humanistic and democratic culture regards slavery <i>in itself</i> as
a monstrous evil, and acts as though this were self-evidently true. The Bible
permits Christians to own slaves, provided they are treated well. You are
a Christian. Whom do you believe?" <br>
<br>
Pages 17-18:<br>
<br>
"The slavery of Rome was anti-scriptural, and because of the evil of the
slave trade, the larger system of slavery on the South was certainly sub-scriptural.
Nevertheless, the Bible prohibits us from saying that slave-<i>owning </i>in
such contexts is sin.<br>
<br>
"The bible teaches that a man may be a faithful Christian and a slave-owner
in a pagan slave system. If he owns slaves, then Scripture does put a series
of requirements on him, with the church of Christ may and must insist upon.
But beyond those requirements, <i>the church may not presume to legislate</i>."<br>
<br>
Page 21:<br>
<br>
"The slave trade was an abomination. The Bible condemns it, and all who believe
the Bible are bound to do the same. Owning slaves is not an abomination.
The Bible does not condemn it, and those who believe the Bible are bound
to refrain in the same way. But if we were to look in history for Christians
who reflected this biblical balance &#8211; i.e. a hatred of the slave trade and
an acceptance of slavery in itself under certain conditions &#8211; we will find
ourselves looking at the<i> ante bellum</i> South."<br>
<br>
Doug Wilson's words are especially interesting in light of the current (It's
not about slavery: Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain) advertisement
in the Daily News from the Board of Christ Church. The ad says "that slavery
has always been an evil needing to be abolished" and "that has been our position
from the start."<br>
<br>
Well, that may be the position of the board of Christ Church, but it's contrary
to the (out loud) position that their pastor, Doug Wilson. Isn't it strange
that board and pastor could disagree so completely on Wilson's "wonderful
issue" of slavery?<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------040700080907030207060003--