How did Southern Whites justify slavery with Christianity?

Back in the day, slavery drove the southern economy. The North was trying to abolish it because they depended more on manufacturing and less on agriculture. The slaves who converted to Christianity leaned more toward the evangelical side which supported the idea of everyone, even blacks and whites, being equal. They thought it made a lot of the plantation owners seem pretty hypocritical... so how did the southern whites justify slavery with Christianity?How did Southern Whites justify slavery with Christianity?
There was no shortage of excuses. Many were economic, and many were claims that the slaves were much better off in a Christian nation than they ever were in their heathen home.



But one of the most bizarre defenses was the "Curse of Ham," which is a strange interpretation of a strange story in Genesis 9.



The story goes that sometime after the flood Noah was lying drunk and naked in his tent. Noah's son Ham laughed at his father's nakedness, but Ham's brothers Shem and Japheth walked backward into the tent with a blanket to cover the old man's business.



When Noah woke up and found out what had happened, he cursed Ham,



25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

27. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.



Canaan was Ham's son, and according to Christian mythology was the father of all the peoples of Africa. So by enslaving Africans, the white Southerners were simply enforcing God's will, so the argument went.
In addition to examples in the Bible promoting slavery, the Southern slave owners knew that if slavery were abolished then they would not have enough workers to harvest and pick their crops and they would have to pay others to come onto their property and do this service for them.



Kinda like how contractors and landscapers will bring over Mexicans to work for them cheap because they can't get anyone else to do the job. Americans have always been lazy and greedy. Abolishing slavery never changed this.How did Southern Whites justify slavery with Christianity?
True! But there were also many Christians who fought to end slavery. (see link!)



Additionally, where the Bible talks about slavery, it tells masters to treat their slaves kindly. Not that God was advocating slavery, but that if humans were going to insist on keeping slaves, He insisted that they at least treated them with kindness. (Which they did not always do....) :(
What nobody seems to be saying is that the slave owners didn't think of Africans, Asians, or American Indians as really being human at all. Though they might, if pressed admit that they were, they instead made up names like n*gger, g**k, and "injun" in an effort to dehumanize the other races so they could feel less guilty about conquering, enslaving, and even eliminating them as a people as in the American Indian, and the Australian Aborigine.
Read the book of Philemon. It's only one chapter and a short one at that. It deals with three Christians: an apostle, a master, and a slave. I would imagine that it was quoted and used to justify a lot concerning slavery.
Unfortunately you can justify just about anything with the Bible if you pull out a small section and twist it the right way.
they found verses telling slaves to obey their masters and used that to say that God endorsed slavery.



Even Jesus's parables talk about this "master-servant" relationship.



Pretty warped, eh?
White slave owners often made the argument that there was slavery in the Bible to justify their actions.
They quoted incidences of slavery in the Bible. Pretty thin, but it worked for them.
Why would you want to justify yourself when you own another human?
Good question, This is refreshing to see, compared to the numerous "Am I good looking or not?"-type questions that are far too widespread here.

And many, in their minds, if not openly (although some were open about this), seemed to equate the notions of light and dark to their skin tone.

Many Europeans openly believed that they were in fact superior to "dark-skinned" people, equating blacks and others to animals, or even lesser than animals.

And because they believed these people to be sub-human, it was OK to torture them, rape them, kill them.

If people today truly learned about how destructive, evil and inhuman that slavery and its aftermath was, they most likely would have a different view on society now.

If there was any way to destroy a people, slavery was it. Slavery was designed to destroy any social fabric that might hold blacks together as a community -- strip them of their identities, their self-respect, self-worth, any sense of religion, any sense of togetherness, keep them from being educated so they couldn't assimilate into society.... and even after slavery was abolished, a system of enslavement and repression still existed. Without slavery, blacks were unwanted, and southern whites worked hard to keep blacks "in their place." And problems we see now within many black communities and households stem from slavery. Most of us who aren't black, or who aren't American Indian, no matter how tough our ancestors had it, didn't have it as hard as those who were slaves, or descendants of slaves.

People within my family were in the American internment camps, where Japanese-Americans were sent after Pearl Harbor. And as bad as that was, as much as that was a violation of the Constitution, what happened with those camps, both on the inside and outside, were really no match for how destructive slavery was.

I know I'm going off the topic here, but I think it's worth saying.

Even nowadays, we have a modern-day form of minstrelsy in gangsta rap in the media, and in numerous black comedies.

The North didn't care much for blacks either. Abolishing slavery was the means to keep the country together. Not black liberation.
The Bible makes many references to master and slave and gives instructions on how a master was to treat their slave and how the slave was to be loyal and obey his master. Likewise, the Plantation owners, particularly the better educated and more enlighten ones, viewed slavery as just a norm of society because prior societies had slaves as well. Through Christianity, the Master was obligated to treat his slaves with compassion and to teach them Christianity. In God's eyes, they would be equals spiritually but on earth, it was God's will that slavery remain for society to function. Give you an example: On his death bed, Andrew Jackson, 7th US President, called his slaves together and told them that he wished to see them all in heaven and that in heaven, God is no respecter of man. The theology of the day held that what happens on earth happens because it is God's will in heaven for it to be that way. These same slave owners would read classic works of Aristotle, Plato, and others that justified slavery. These notions of God's will, etc. actually fostered the feeling of superiority of whites, that of the poor white class, because they were one step above the slaves.



I would note that not all slave owners were abusive to the slaves. What I have observed in my reading of plantation life is that the slaves were used to work the fields, as domestic servants, and some trained as skilled labor such as masons, blacksmiths, and so on. Poor whites often found themselves as tenants or employees of the plantation owner working livestock like cattle, horses, and hogs. These poor whites were in debt to the plantation owner who was their creditor, landlord, and employer. While the poor whites were paid wages, they worked for next to nothing and therefore were jealous of the slaves who had a roof over their heads and food to eat no matter what. When slaves got old, the master would see to it they were taken care of. When a poor white got old, hurt, sick, behind on rent, they had no such security. Many cases of abuse, beatings, rape, that happened against the slaves didn't happen by the owner, but by the poor whites on the plantation. Particularly by those employed as an overseer and given free run of the plantation by the owner.
The American Civil War was fought over an area larger than Europe. In an area this size, the lay of the land was of critical importance to the outcome of the war. The Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River divided the Confederacy into three sections. In each section, the terrain is very different. Consequently, the way the war was fought in each section was different. The game map shows those features which make each area unique, such as the rivers, mountains, cities, swaps, and rail lines. One of the main elements of this game is an attempt to realistically portray terrain and show its effect on the strategies of both sides. If this is your first game, then the map probably looks very strange. Adventure board games usually use hexagons to divide the map into space. The hexagon is used because it is the only shape which comes together on sides. Thus, each hex is always adjacent to six others, and there are no diagonals. If this is your first historical game, let me welcome you to the world of historical board gaming. Historical board gaming is one area of a larger hobby, known generally as Adventure Gaming. There are several types of Adventure Games, each of which comprises an almost distinct hobby in its own right. These types include historical board games (such as The Civil War), contemporary military board games, science fiction board games, fantasy board games, and role-playing games. There are several hundred thousand gamers in the United States alone. These people have found gaming to be a rewarding hobby that provides hours of pleasure. Now that you have opened this box and begun to peruse the rules booklet, it is important that you do not panic. You may be dismayed by the length of the rules, by the alien appearance of the playing pieces, and by the strange hexagon-mottled mapsheets. These components are all standard fare for the usual historical game. The rules are long, because an historical game must inject a healthy amount of detail into its design in order to realistically simulate a richly complex topic. The playing pieces, representing historical armies with all their manifold strengths, weaknesses, and quirks look odd at first glimpse, but as you read the rules it will become clear that the function of each number and symbol on each counter is designed to fulfill a logical purpose. As you read these rules and play your first game, remember that the game is a simulation of reality. The concepts of how pieces move and engage in combat are basically similar from one game to another. Once you have learned to play The Civil War, your second historical game will be much easier to learn. An average historical board game usually takes an average gamer at least one entire evening to learn, that is, to learn the urles, without necessarily mastering the subtleties of play. Your first game will probably take you longer to grasp, but with a bit of patience, you will be playing The Civil War in less time than you might think. Gamers are notoriously patient people, because they consider the games worth the time spent learning them. The best way to approach this game is to read the Designer's Notes at the beginning of each chapter before reading the bulk of the rules. (Please do not read or attempt to play the Far West Option until you feel confident with the rest of the game.) Then start at the beginning of the rules and read each chapter carefully. When you come to an example, punch out the depicted counters, set them up on your map, and go through the example. Repeat the example and try variations until you understand what is happening. If some point is unclear, do not let yourself be bogged down; make a note to yourself and read on because the answer to your question is most likely in one of the following chapters. Once you have finisthed your first reading, set up the 1861 scenario and begin playing. If you have an opponent for your first game, you will find playing cooperatively rather than competitively will be much more educational; save the head-to-head contest for your second play-through. As you play, look up the rules you need and stick to the Sequence of Play. Play a turn or two, until you become familiar with what is happening. Many gamers re-read the rules after their first trial game to find thier mistakes and to clarify complex procedures. Thanks for buying The Civil War, and I hope that it brings you many hours of entertainment. If you have comments about the game or want to know more about Victory Games, feel free to write me.