Book covers Civil War in Baptists' own words

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ahimsa

Guest
How biblical literalism and moral theology are intertwined:
Gourley said the term “states’ rights” appeared occasionally in Baptist writings during the war, but it was used as a legal term to preserve slavery. Even while southerners invoked states’ rights defending slavery, he said, they appealed to the federal government to override laws passed in northern states that allowed people not to return escaped slaves to their owners.

“What many people in the South believe about the reason for the Civil War is different than what people were saying during those historical moments,” Bruce Gourley, executive director of the Baptist History and Heritage Society said during a breakout session at the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of Georgia annual meeting, Nov. 7 in Atlanta.

Gourley contends in a book due out later this month, Diverging Loyalties: Baptists in Middle Georgia during the Civil War, that formation of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845 signaled the inevitability of war, slavery was the central issue and the Confederate States of America was God’s kingdom on earth. Gourley says Baptists’ historic emphasis on separation of church and state took a back seat as religious leaders embraced a Christian nationalism.

“It cannot be denied that the institution of slavery is the cause of the war,” wrote Christian Index Editor Samuel Boykin. “With the world opposed to us, with the whole North in arms against us, with 500,000 bayonets bristling upon our borders, we have boldly seized the Bible in one hand and the sword in the other and plunged into this struggle resolved to maintain our cause or die martyrs with the sincerity of our convictions.”

Ironically, Gourley said, Baptists in the South had the Bible on their side. With no explicit teachings in Scripture banning slaveholding, Southern Baptists became biblical literalists. Gourley said he traces the emphasis on literalism that carried over into the 20th century back to the Civil War.

“Slavery forms a vital element of the Divine Revelation to man,” Ebenezer Warren, pastor of First Baptist Church of Christ in Macon, Ga., once preached. “It is necessary for ministers of the gospel to teach slavery from the pulpit as it was taught by holy men of old.”

“Slavery is right,” Warren continued, “because their Maker has decreed their bondage.”

After the war, Gourley said, Southern whites were not repentant about being pro-slavery but set out to create a “new narrative” about states’ right or the “lost cause.” He said Leon McBeth’s 1987 Baptist history was the first textbook used in Southern Baptist seminaries to correctly identify slavery as the central reason the Southern Baptist Convention was formed.
 
American slavery was ***so not ***Biblical slavery. I hate it when people confuse the two. Nobody who has ever defended the American version of slavery has ever read a word of the Bible on the subject. I mean really, just from the outset, Genesis 9:25, where it all starts: “And Noe awaking from the wine, when he had learned what his younger son had done to him, he said: Cursed be Chanaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” … Umm, the black Africans are ***not ***descendants of Canaan, look it up people. The descendants of Canaan are … wait for it … the Canaanites, and where did they live? In the land of Canaan. Not sub-saharan Africa. And besides, the Cannanites were basically exterminated when the Israelites conquered the Holy Land, so apart from a few stragglers there were basically no Canaanites left long before the Europeans started kidnapping people off the beaches of west Africa.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top