To view the English translation, please scroll down to the bottom.
現今的基督徒宣稱，舊約利未記25：44-46裏提及──把買來的奴隸和兒童當作家產，是一種古代過時的做法。他們說，當年這種事是家常便飯，但現今如此做法是不可能被接受的。他們還說，這種殘忍的人口販賣，也絕不是聖經的闡述與啟示。其實聖經裡有許多經節，指示奴僕要如何服從他們主人，「凡事聽從肉身的主人，總要存心誠實敬畏主。」（歌羅西書3：22）
許多世紀以來，基督徒侵略性的行為，不只侷限於佔領殖民地 （參部落格：殖民主義）。他們身負重任，強迫其他國家的人民成為他們的奴隸，為的是要「擴展教會的界限，向無知與野蠻的國民宣告基督信仰的真理。」（阿德里安四世教皇詔書 “The Bull of Pope Adrian IV” 受權予亨利二世，於1155年攻打愛爾蘭）1600年間，上百個奴隸，從非洲被運到美洲來伺候基督徒奴主。基督徒認為，當他們在馴服這一群野蠻人之時，其實是在為異教徒效勞。因為異教徒在他們的眼中，又邪惡、又卑賤，與動物沒兩樣。「這些黑人，無論是以道德、社會或身體的準則來說，住在美洲遠比他們住的非洲優越太多了。他們身為奴隸所受的的痛苦和紀律會幫助他們裝備好自己，並引領他們走向更美好的事物。」羅伯特 · 李將軍（Robert E. Lee）在1856年寫給他妻子的信中如此說。據說，這位美國南北戰爭聯盟軍的總司令，是一位虔誠的基督徒。他不止每日讀經，甚至在每場戰爭之前，都還會跪在地上跟神祈求、禱告。然而，歷史記錄顯示，這位表面上虔誠的將軍實際上是一位嚴格的紀律主義者，經常命令對嘗試逃脫的奴隸進行嚴厲的鞭打。生活在當時的奴隸，經常飽受兇殘、暴虐無道的待遇。許多女黑奴，若不聽從她主人的話，必須承擔被強暴的後果。有的被公開掛在樹上，用炭火燒死。令人不解的是，這些基督徒的奴主，仍認為這些非洲人住在美國，遠比住在非洲蠻荒叢林來得好太多了。他們説，在美國，這些野蠻人有機會學習文明，還能改正他們往昔的野蠻行為舉止。白人奴主甚至還覺得這些黑奴欠他們被救援之恩情呢！
把奴役制合理化的理念來自對聖經被廣傳的曲解，就是創世記裡記載的挪亞故事。挪亞的兒子──含，犯了罪。當挪亞酒醉時，含「看見他父親赤身」（創世紀9 :22）。這段經文後來被一些基督徒、穆斯林和猶太教徒扭曲，認為黑皮膚的祖先來自挪亞的兒子──含。正因如此，這個咒詛就傳承在黑奴身上。這種說法來自創世記9：25-27。聖經記載，挪亞有三個兒子：閃、含、雅弗。據稱，這三個兒子成為人類民族與種族的起源：雅弗產生歐亞後代（白人）；閃產生閃族後代（中東/印歐人），而含產生非亞後代（黑人）。 因此，以下挪亞所說的咒詛，可如此用來做詮釋（見括弧）：
「迦南（黑人）當受咒詛（註：迦南是含的兒子，也就是挪亞的孫子），他必給他弟兄作奴僕的奴僕；耶和華──閃（中東人）的神是應當稱頌的！願迦南（黑人）做閃（中東人）的奴僕。願神使雅弗 （白人）擴張，使他住在閃（中東人）的帳棚裡；又願迦南（黑人）作雅弗（白人）的奴僕。」
雖然反對這種虐待狂做法的基督徒相當多，但支持奴役制的基督徒，卻如巨浪般，壓倒那些力竭聲嘶，想廢止奴役制度，卻微不足道的聲音。幾百年來，許多基督徒的奴主，一直在找各種理由來與那些跟他們有異議的人爭辯、提出質疑。1835年，有兩篇刊登在美國南卡羅萊納州（South Carolina）查爾斯頓〈水星時報〉（Charleston Mercury）的文章內容，都提到舊約跟新約聖經如何支持奴役制。文章記載：如果你視奴役制為「反基督教主義」──一種藐視、不敬的制度，這表示你的論點與神的教導相互牴觸。1963年，有一位名叫休·大衛斯 （Hugh Davis）的白人男子，因為跟一位黑女人發生關係而被鞭打。集會者斷定大衛斯跟黑人發生性關係，等於是「玷污了自己的身體，對上帝不敬的行為。」最令人遺憾的是，像大衛斯這種的例子比比皆是。雖然美國憲法修正案在1865年已廢除了奴役制，但對黑人及其他外國移民的種族歧視，仍不斷上升。在白人的基督徒當中，他們覺得「隔離但平等」(Separate but Equal) 的做法是最公平的妥協。
當年，美國南部的法庭裡，都會擺兩本按手起誓用的聖經：一本讓白人使用；另一本讓黑人使用。以往，黑奴是不準學習聖經的。如果他們去參加聚會，必須坐在走廊或是最後一排座位。基督徒對這樣的座位安排感到非常滿意，畢竟這個規則是他們訂的。「別指望一個人能擺脫黑皮膚和鬈曲的頭髮......作為一個種族[黑人]， 與生俱來就是最合適作為被支配的角色。這個命題不值得浪費時間或爭論...種族隔離是上帝的恩賜。」這句話是1900年早期密西西比州州長詹姆斯·發達曼（James K. Vardaman）所說的。他也是一位循道會的教友。
1911年，美國國會「狄林哈姆報告」(Dillingham Report）推薦遣回、限制新移民配額，因為這些移民是「劣等公民」，是「不受歡迎的人」。許多基督徒牧師不只公開支持這個政策，甚至還把這種信息放在他們教會主日講章信息的內容。伊莎白·威克森（Isabel Wilkerson）所著一書《 種姓：我們不滿的根源 》（Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents） 裡面記載了這樣的一個實例：1910年，美國賓州哈里斯堡（Harrisburg）的第一位牧師──李里特牧師（Rev. M. D. Lichliter）在一個聚會中說了這麼一段話：「我們國家的道德和品德已被削弱。我們的生命、我們的血，一波接一波，被東方來的殘渣廢物給污染了... ... 我們身體裡面流的是亞里安（註：“Aryan” 指印歐族）偉大始祖的血，絕不可以跟以伯立（註：“ Iberic” 指西班牙、葡萄牙等）族混種。」
在聖經中，照顧貧苦孤兒寡婦、外族人的經文舉不勝舉，卻完全被漠視。可悲的是，許多白人福音派基督徒，仍認為他們一點都沒有虧待這些外族的難民。現在已經是2020年代了，這些基督徒還是高聲在支持前總統川普提倡的「零容忍移民政策」。這種歧視的態度還要蔓延下去多久呢？
Slavery and Discrimination
Contemporary Christians argue that the practice mentioned in Leviticus 25:44-46—treating purchased slaves and children as property—was an ancient and outdated custom. They say that such actions might have been commonplace in those times but are entirely unacceptable today. They also contend that this cruel human trafficking is not reflective of the teachings or revelations in the Bible. In fact, the Bible contains many verses instructing servants on how to obey their masters, such as "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord." (Colossians 3:22)
For centuries, Christians' aggressive actions extended beyond colonial occupation (Please refer to my blog post: Colonialism). They were responsible of coercing the people of other nations into slavery, all in the name of expanding the boundaries of the Church and proclaiming the truth of the Christian faith to the ignorant and barbarous nations, exemplified in documents like "The Bull of Pope Adrian IV," issued to Henry II in 1155 during the invasion of Ireland.
During the 1600s, hundreds of slaves were transported from Africa to serve Christian masters in the Americas. Christians believed that when they were subduing this group of "savages," they were actually doing the pagans a big favor. In their eyes, pagans were wicked and contemptible, no different from animals. "The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially, and physically, and their painful discipline as slaves will prepare, and lead them to better things", wrote Robert E. Lee, the commanding general of the Confederate Army during the American Civil War, in a letter to his wife in 1856. It is reported that this devout Christian not only read the Bible daily but also knelt in prayer to God before every battle. However, historical records suggest that this seemingly pious general was, in fact, a strict disciplinarian, often ordering severe whippings for slaves who attempted to escape. Slaves of that era frequently endured brutal and unforgiving treatment. Many female slaves, if they did not obey their masters, had to endure the consequences of rape. Many were publicly lynched and burned alive.
What remains perplexing is that these Christian slave owners still believed that these Africans were far better off living in the United States than in the jungles of Africa. They argued that in America, these barbaric individuals had the opportunity to learn civilization and correct their previous uncivilized behavior. White slave owners even felt that black slaves owed them gratitude for being "rescued" from their previous way of life.
The idea of justifying slavery through the Bible stems from a misinterpretation of a story in Genesis concerning Noah. It is based on the incident where Noah's son, Ham, sinned, and when Noah was found drunk and naked, Ham "saw his father's nakedness" (Genesis 9:22). This passage has been distorted by some Christians, Muslims, and Jews to suggest that people with dark skin descended from Ham, one of Noah's sons. Consequently, this alleged curse was believed to be passed down to black slaves. This interpretation comes from Genesis 9:25-27.
In the Bible, Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. It is believed that these three sons became the ancestors of different human races and nations: Japheth's descendants (Caucasian) populated Europe and Asia; Shem's descendants (Middle Eastern and Indo-European) became the peoples of the Middle East; and Ham's descendants (African) were associated with Africa. Therefore, the curse that Noah is said to have uttered can be interpreted as follows (notations added for clarity):
"Cursed be Canaan ( Ham’s son/Noah's grandson, descendants of African); he shall be a servant of servants to his brethren. Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem (descendants of Shem, the Middle Eastern people); and may Canaan (descendants of Ham, African people) be his servant. May God enlarge Japheth (descendants of Japheth, Caucasian people), and may he dwell in the tents of Shem (descendants of Shem, Middle Eastern people); and may Canaan (descendants of Ham, African people) be his servant."
It is essential to note that interpreting this passage to justify slavery is a historical distortion and a misapplication of biblical text to support an unjust practice. Many people, both past and present, reject such interpretations and affirm the equality and dignity of all human beings.
It's true that many Christians opposed the abusive practices of slavery, but those who supported slavery often had a louder and more influential voice, overwhelming the efforts of those who sought to abolish it. For centuries, Christian slaveholders used various arguments to defend their position and challenge those who opposed them. For example, in 1835, two articles published in the Charleston Mercury newspaper in South Carolina argued that the Old and New Testaments of the Bible supported slavery. These articles suggested that if someone viewed slavery as "anti-Christian" — a system that showed contempt and disrespect for the Bible's teachings — it meant their arguments were in conflict with God's guidance. Another example. In 1963, there was an unfortunate incident involving a white man named Hugh Davis, who was whipped for having a relationship with a Black woman. The assembly that punished Davis believed that engaging in a sexual relationship with a Black person was seen as defiling one's body and showing disrespect to God. Regrettably, examples like this involving racial discrimination and mistreatment were all too common.
It's essential to recognize that while some Christians used religious arguments to justify slavery, many others believed in the principles of equality and human dignity and fought against slavery's injustices. The history of slavery within Christian communities is complex and includes both those who supported it and those who worked tirelessly to end it.
While the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution abolished slavery in 1865, racial discrimination against Black people and other foreign immigrants continued to rise. Among white Christian communities, the doctrine of "Separate but Equal" was seen by some as a fair compromise. In the Southern United States, courts would often have two Bibles for swearing oaths—one for white individuals and another for Black individuals. In the past, Black slaves were not allowed to learn the Bible, and if they attended religious gatherings, they had to sit in the hallway or at the back of the seating area. Many white Christians were content with such seating arrangements, as they believed that this was God's intended design for Black people, useful for labor but otherwise inferior.
Statements like "There is no use to expect a man to live down a black skin and a kinky head…as a race, [Black people] are fitted for subjection. There is no use to waste any time or argument on this proposition…Segregation was a gift of God" as uttered by James K. Vardaman, the early 1900s Governor of Mississippi and a Methodist, reflecting the deeply ingrained racial prejudices that persisted despite the abolition of slavery. It's important to note that these views were not representative of all Christians, as many opposed racial discrimination and worked for equality and justice.
In 1911, the U.S. Congress issued the "Dillingham Report," which recommended deportation and restrictions on new immigrants. Many Christian pastors not only openly supported this policy but also incorporated such messages into their Sunday sermons. Isabel Wilkerson's book "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents" highlights an example of this. In 1910, Reverend M. D. Lichliter, the first pastor of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, said in a gathering that the morals and character of our nation have been weakened. “Our lives, our blood, wave after wave, are polluted by the scum and offal of the Orient... The blood in our veins is the blood of the great Aryan (referring to Indo-European) ancestors, and it should not be mixed with the Iberic (referring to Spanish and Portuguese) race.”
These sentiments reflect the racial prejudices and discriminatory beliefs held by some individuals, including within Christian communities, during that era. It's essential to recognize that these views were not universal among Christians, as many opposed such discriminatory practices and worked for social justice and equality.
The Bible contains numerous passages emphasizing the importance of caring for the disadvantaged, including the poor, orphans, widows, and foreigners. Unfortunately, these principles are frequently disregarded. When refugees seek assistance, many white evangelical Christians still maintain the belief that they have not mistreated them. Now that it is the 2020s, these Christians are still loudly supporting former President Trump's "zero tolerance immigration policy." It is important for Christians to ask themselves how much longer will they allow this discriminatory attitude to continue to spread?
Comments