You might be aware of the fact that many Christians used the Bible to support southern slavery in early U.S. history. Did you also know that many people used the Bible to support abolition? How is it possible that groups of people can all believe in the basic truth that the Bible is God’s word, communicating truth to us, and yet reach opposite conclusions on such huge issues?

We can see the same thing playing out with respect to many other issues today: customs for worship, preaching, and church life. Doctrines surrounding sacraments, church government, salvation, and the moral law. Political issues such as immigration, financial policy, and foreign intervention. Social issues such as abortion, race relations, homosexuality, and gender ideology. On nearly any issue, it is not difficult to find people who claim to believe the Bible, who also make use of the Bible to support contradictory positions from one another.

Why is that? How can the same book be used for so many contradictory perspectives?

An Answer Worth Considering

While there is a complex range of factors contributing to such a complex situation, there is at least one factor we ought to give more attention to: How are people reading and understanding the Bible? What assumptions do they bring to this ancient book that shape the very methods by which they employ it in support of one position or another?

For example, one person presumes that the most literal, surface reading of a given text ought to be the most persuasive reading. Another person wants to string together a collection of verses that all appear to address a particular topic. Another focuses on their systematic theological system as the governing framework for reading any part of the Bible. Another wants to read the text the same way the heroes of old (or a subset of heroes of old) read it. Yet another wants to read the Bible in tandem with other ancient or modern texts that seem to be saying similar things.

My point is simply that we must not only observe the fact that someone makes use of the Bible to support a position. We must also take note of how they are using the Bible to support a position.

A Conversation Worth Your Time

The thing that spawned these reflections within me was a conversation I just listened to, published by the Mars Hill Audio Journal as one of their Friday Features. The host, Ken Myers, interviewed historian Mark Noll regarding his research on how nineteenth-century Americans went about using the Bible in support of either slavery or abolition in their debates. For now, you can find the interview here. I recommend listening to it as soon as you can, as I cannot promise how long it will remain on their site.

Noll discusses how Christians on both sides of the slavery debate resorted to “proof-texting” to make their case, yet the pro-slavery side tended to be better at it (i.e. more persuasive). Many of the proof-texted arguments in favor of the institution of slavery had no clear rebuttal, and as a result many abolitionists were forced to confess that, while the Bible permits the institution of slavery, they just couldn’t support the American expression of it. This led the pro-slavery camp to instill fear that abolition was simply the beginning of the slippery slope toward denying biblical authority at all.

There were a few shining (abolitionist) stars along the way, however, who were able to demonstrate abolitionist conclusions from biblical texts, through careful contextual study of those texts, tracing the unfolding revelation of God over time. In that day, however, proof-texting was believed to be the best way to arrive at truth, so such careful theological and contextual arguments often went unnoticed or unregarded.

I am confident I am not doing full justice to Noll’s research. So again, I commend to you the recording of his conversation with Myers for more detailed nuance and explanation. I commend it to you highly, as an example of why it is crucial that we not merely quote Bible verses but study them in context so as to grasp the larger arguments of the original authors. How we study the Bible matters.