Recent Posts

Archives

Topics


« Crippled Spirits | Main | There is Magic in Forgiveness »

The Devil Can Cite Scripture for his Purpose

By Administrator | September 10, 2007

The Devil Can Cite Scripture for his Purpose

A sermon based on Philemon

September 9, 2007 at Palm Bay, FL

by Rev. Scott Elliott Alicia just read most of a kind of obscure book in the New Testament, Philemon. This “book” is a letter from Paul to Philemon, a slave owner.

It is a letter about one of Philemon’s slaves, a fellow named Onesimus, who sought refuge with Paul. Paul sends Onesimus back to Philemon with a letter asking him to see Onesimus “[n]o longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother– especially to me but how much more to you, both in flesh and in the Lord.” Paul goes so far as to ask Philemon to welcome the returning Onesimus as he would welcome Paul himself.

I hear in this letter a renouncement of slavery. Paul seems to be saying “Accept this slave, not just as a brother, but as your beloved brother, the same as you would accept me.”

Such a renouncement is in line not only with Jesus’s command to love your neighbor, but with many comments by Paul himself on slavery. For example in Galatians 5 (1) Paul writes ” For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore and do not submit to a yoke of slavery.” In 1 Corinthians 7 (21, 23) he writes “whoever was called in the Lord as a slave is a free person . . . do not become slaves of human masters.” And perhaps most famously in Galatians 3 (28) “There is no longer . . . slave or free . . . for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”

It will probably comes as little surprise to you that Philemon was often cited and quoted in the civil war by those who opposed slavery.

It might surprise you, though, that it was also quite often cited by those who favored slavery: In The Rights and Duties of Slaveholders George Freeman in 1836 that in Philemon

we are furnished with one remarkable instance, in which an Apostle appears to have been instrumental, not in setting at liberty, (as some over-benevolent persons in our day are forward to do) but in reclaiming and sending back to his master, A FUGITIVE SLAVE! . . . Phile[m]on, it appears, was a Christian . . . His slave Onesimus had eloped from his master; but meeting St. Paul in his travels, he became a convert to the Christian Faith, and now, under the influence of Christian principle set home to his conscience, doubtless by the faithful exertion of the Apostle, he resolved on returning to his master’s service. . . Freeman adds this “*Footnote: Some strenuous advocates of emancipation, . . . have sought to give this transaction a somewhat different aspect. From the expressions used by the Apostle . . . they have inferred that he did not mean to consign Onesimus again to bondage; confidently trusting that since his conversion he would no longer be regarded by Philemon as a slave, but be received and acknowledged not only as a Christian brother, but as an equal. A candid examination of the Epistle, however, must, it is thought, satisfy every impartial mind that the view [I’ve stated] is the correct one. ” 1. Frederick Douglass an ex-slave, articulate voice and hero of the anti-slavery movement responded in general to this type of argument on a number of occasions. Here is an excerpt of one argument: The leading Doctors of Divinity in America, and the Professors in the Colleges, were in favour of slavery. There was Professor Stewart, of the Andover seminary, one of the first Biblical schools in New England——that gentleman had committed to him the instruction of the Ministers of a large portion of the congregational denominations, and he was an advocate for slavery. The Rev. Dr. Fisk, who some time ago, was welcomed by the Methodist Church, in Dublin, though they had shut [me] out,——this Doctor Fisk became uneasy, when he heard it said that slavery was a sin, and, not willing to commit himself on the question, wished to have the opinion of Doctor Stewart on the subject. This man, who would have said that sheep-stealing was a sin, and would have decided so at once, had to consult a learned Doctor as to whether man-stealing was a sin . . .. . . Doctor Stewart sent him a reply, in which he referred to the case of Onesimus, whom he stated Paul had sent back to Philemon for life. [I] would be glad to know where Dr. Stewart learned that Onesimus was sent back into slavery for life; was it, [I] would ask, from the law? If it was, [I] would tell him, that Jewish slavery was not for life; there was no such thing known among the Jews as slavery for life, except it was desired on the part of the servant himself. What did the Apostle say himself? He said, he sent back Onesimus greater than a servant; and told Philemon to receive him as he would receive him, Paul; not as a slave who could be sold in the market, but as a brother beloved. 2

One Christian camp in our nation’s history claimed the bible supported slavery. Another camp claimed it opposed slavery.How could the bible be read to bolster such opposing purposes? How could one book be construed in such drastically different ways?

Didn’t Moses lead the Hebrews out of the evil of slavery in Egypt? Yes he did. Didn’t Israel lament the captivity of her people in Babylon? Yes they did.

But the bible also remembers that Abraham took and impregnated a slave girl and it remembers that Solomon built his great temple on the back of thousands of slaves.

There are stories in the bible that can be used to support and condemn slavery.

The bible is a collection of experiences from very distance times and places. It contains the echos of many voices.

Among the many voices are those that include support for domination systems like slavery. In Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, Marcus Borg refers to this generally as “Royal Theology.” 3 We can hear this voice particularly strong in the King Saul and King David stories, where God is experienced as appointing, supporting and siding with the monarchy. Royal Theology legitimates power structures including systems of domination like slavery.

Also among the many voices in the bible are those that oppose domination systems, Borg refers to these generally as “Prophetic Theology,” the voices that protest and seek to subvert the power structures and systems of domination like slavery. 4 We can hear these voices in the Moses traditions and later in the prophets who oppose those in power. And we can hear these protests against power and domination in the words of John the Baptist, Paul and Jesus –each of whom was put to death by the domination system of Rome because they opposed that system and the religious elite who supported it.

Royal theologies and Prophetic theologies are in tension throughout the bible.

Despite what you may have heard there are in fact many contradictions in the bible. Interestingly, there is not a passage in the bible which claims every word is inerrant without contradiction– that is a doctrine made up by men about 150 years ago.

The words in the bible come from many different people with many different perspectives. If you think about it, it really should come as no surprise that they do not all jibe with one another. The stories of those who experienced enslavement in Egypt and virtual enslavement under Rome’s rule of Palestine are going to see things differently than wealthy tribal leader Abraham or King Saul, King David or King Solomon and their peers.

What we have in the bible are recordings over time of different experiences of God, what Professor John Bracke at Eden Seminary refers to as “witnesses.” These witnesses come before us in scripture and when they contradict other views of God WE must judge which witness to believe, which witness points us toward the God we know.

I trust that each of us in this room would reject slavery as acceptable in the eyes of God and to this community. I trust that we would not accept that God speaking through biblical sources calls us to support slavery in any fashion anywhere. What we hear is a call to love God, ourselves and our neighbors and we understand that slavery is far, far from that call to love on each of those levels.

Slavery is an easy issue for us to judge today. As a culture we have come to abhor it. When we can bear it we look back at our history and we are rightfully ashamed of our past, of our capture, torture, killing and enslavement of thousands and thousands of human beings. How could we have done this? How could churches, clergy or Christians have allowed it? How could the bible have been quoted to support it?

Shakespeare’s character Antonio, in The Merchant of Venice, notes that “The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.” It’s true, listen to these words of Adolph Hitler:

My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders.5. History evidences that slave owners and even the likes of Adolph Hitler often turn to scripture for justification of their ungodly acts – the devil can indeed cite scripture for his purpose. That’s pretty depressing. That’s pretty scary. How can we know when scripture is valid or being used validly?

Well, for starters in this church I can assure you that Alicia and I always use scripture right, unless we are in disagreement, then you should only trust me.

I am kidding of course, you should not just follow my word or Alicia’s but test what you hear against other biblical texts, church traditions, reason and your own experiences.

John Wesley the founder of the Methodist church came up with this method for theological reflection that mainstream seminaries like Eden (where Alicia and I went) teach. It’s called the “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” what you do is take the bible, church tradition, reason and personal experience and use them as checks and balances to help determine where Truth can be found in the scriptural witnesses that come before you.

Let’s take Philemon and seek Truth there: are we called to or away from slavery by God? We all know the answer is we are called away from slavery. We get there intuitively by a short cut.

But we can see how the Wesleyan Quadrilateral works to get us there. Let’s begin with the bible leg of the Quadrilateral. In this church we ground our theology in the biblical witnesses in 1 John (4:8) that “God is Love” and Jesus great commandments to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.” [and] “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Slavery is in opposition to these biblical groundings. Our God of Love could never condone slavery. And how could we love our neighbor as our self, if we have allowed her to be enslaved?

Tradition, the second leg of the Quadrilateral, helps in this regard as well, for over a thousand years many portions of the church have called for abolition of slavery and in the last century church tradition has come to almost uniformly abhor slavery.

The third leg, reason – that is rational thinking– tells us today that slavery is an awful, horrid, inhumane and immoral thing to do to another human being.

Finally the last leg is experience: our personal and communal experiences of God tells us that slavery is ungodly and awful.

From these four legs of Wesley’s Quadrilateral– scripture, tradition, experience and reason– we find that the truth in Philemon is that slavery is not good, that God through the apostle Paul called Philemon away from seeing Oneismus as a slave and toward seeing him for what he was: a beloved brother.

It is easy for us to look back and shake our heads at those in America who claimed slavery was okayed by the bible and therefore by God. We have the vantage point of history. We have the advantage of living in a culture that has evolved to the point of teaching us slavery is awful.

Before we get too smug in our righteousness on the issue of slavery, what things today do we hear the bible being touted in favor of that history – and I dare say God– will look back at us and wonder how a people of God could ever have so misused the bible?

Are their such misuses today?

It’s not an unfair question. We don’t need a crystal ball to know what is wrong. After all Lincoln said “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Lincoln lived during slavery he knew it was wrong. Douglass and other abolitionists knew it was wrong–for goodness sake Paul knew it was wrong when he wrote Philemon 2000 years ago!

Is the bible being misused today to support wrongs? There is no denying that the bible is being used on both sides of a number of issues. For example you can hear or read biblical arguments for and against evolution, the death penalty, women’s rights, natural resources, abortion, war, peace, welfare, Israel, immigration, and homosexuality– just to name a few.

To answer the question: is the bible being misused today to support wrongs? we cannot rely on the arguments of others. When we hear the bible touted on behalf of one side or another, we have a duty to search for truth in the scripture and to clearly hear the God of Love’s call and act upon it.

One way time honored way to do this is to turn to the bible, to tradition, to reason and to your own experience and determine where God is calling on the issues of our day.

The devil can cite scripture for his purpose. It’s our job, not to listen to the devil, but to seek out and listen to God’s call. May all of us do just that. AMEN.

– Endnotes–

1. Excerpts from The Rights and Duties of Slaveholders: Two Discourses Delivered on Sunday, November 27, 1836, in Christ Church, Raleigh, North-Carolina, By George W. Freeman, (Charleston: A.E. Miller, Printer to The Protestant Episcopal Society for the Advancement of Christianity in South-Carolina, 1837): p.5-11.

2.Frederick Douglass, “Baptists, Congregationalists, the Free Church, and Slavery: An Address Delivered in Belfast, Ireland, on December 23, 1845.” Belfast News Letter, December 26, 1845 and Belfast Northern Whig, December 25, 1845. Blassingame, John (et al, eds.). The Frederick Douglass Papers: Series One–Speeches, Debates, and Interviews. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979. Vol. I.

3. Borg, Marcus, Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, HarperSanFrancisco, (2001), 298

4. Ibid,

5. Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

Copyright Scott Elliott © 2007 

Topics: Uncategorized |

WordPress database error: [Can't open file: 'wp_comments.MYI' (errno: 144)]
SELECT * FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = '15' AND comment_approved = '1' ORDER BY comment_date

Comments