Pared To Truth

To outsiders, the claim of some evangelicals that the U.S. Constitution is a Christian document raises immediate—and understandable—concerns. A brief examination shows that such a notion overlooks glaring historical realities, none more striking than the Constitution’s explicit provisions for slavery (the Three-Fifths Clause and the Fugitive Slave Clause). These provisions stand in direct contradiction to the biblical commands of love for neighbor, justice, and human dignity. One need not be a Christian to see that.

Deflections such as, “The document, like all things, was imperfect,” are woefully inadequate—just as is the common fallback, “If not Christian, at least it is based on Christian principles.” 

To call a document that sanctioned racial chattel slavery the fruit of biblical Christianity is, frankly, unconscionable and deeply offensive. Laws that consigned an entire people and their descendants to perpetual bondage—tearing mothers from children, denying education to suppress hope of freedom—these things are an abomination before God (as Scripture makes plain) and repugnant to anyone with a functioning moral conscience. No further appeal to the century-long oppression of people of color, or to the treatment of Native Americans, should be needed to press the point home: this was not Christian.

In fact, the Constitution’s provisions permitting slavery failed the moral test—even by the standards of some of its own authors. The historical record amply confirms this for anyone willing to examine it. How much more, then, should we—living today, with far broader access to information and the perspective of time—recognize that chattel slavery, rooted in racial distinctions, was an offense against the law of God?

The impulse to argue otherwise arises only from a failure to grasp the true gravity of American and Transatlantic slavery.

If the offense in question were not slavery but the Constitution had instead sanctioned the exploitation of the vulnerable for sexual gratification—protecting an entire system of abuse under the law—would anyone dare call such a document ‘Christian’? Certainly not. Such an endorsement would stand in blatant contradiction to Christ’s teachings on purity, justice, and the protection of the vulnerable. Yet the same is true of slavery. How is it, then, that so many—especially from Christian backgrounds—struggle to affirm this wholeheartedly and without reservation?

Attempts to minimize this injustice are rightly met with suspicion. At best, they betray a tone-deafness to the suffering of fellow image-bearers; at worst, they reflect a numbness to grotesque evils—utterly at odds with the Christian call to love one’s neighbor. In this, our unbelieving friends are right to call out our hypocrisy.

It seems to me, however, that those who struggle to form a sound biblical view of slavery often do so because they tend toward polarized thinking in other areas of life. Their downfall—if we can call it that—is an inability to divide the Word of truth with nuance. Difficult topics demand a deeper grasp of the whole counsel of God on the matter at hand. Lacking that, they fall into crude reasoning: “Well, slavery is clearly sanctioned by the Old Testament, which must mean God is not against it.” Yet a moment’s thought reveals the flaw. By regulating a particular form of servitude under specific historical conditions, God was not endorsing all forms of slavery for all time. The same principle applies to other Old Testament laws—given for Israel, in a covenantal context, and not universally binding.

The painful corollary, however, is this: one cannot escape the impression that many evangelicals of European descent today would swiftly recoil at any attempt to justify slavery—if the victims were drawn from among their own. Imagine, for instance, if the so-called “peculiar institution” had required the enslavement of the firstborn from every family in the slave-owning and broader colonial class—the blue-eyed sons and daughters of the colonies. The outcry would be swift and absolute, denounced as abhorrent and unbiblical. Yet, somehow, that same moral clarity and outrage often falter when the victims bear darker skin.

Objections and Responses

Objection 1: Doesn’t this view reduce the nation-building process to a failed and evil experiment, as deconstructionists claim?

Answer: No. It simply acknowledges that the process was both human and flawed—marked by noble ideals as well as grievous failures. No nation’s laws, government, or history should be labeled Christian. And even if Scripture endorsed the concept of a Christian nation (which it does not—more on this in this post), the Constitution’s sanctioning of slavery is far too grave an offense to be redeemed as worthy of the title Christian document.

Objection 2: Slavery appears in the Old Testament, with God Himself giving laws to regulate it. Doesn’t this mean slavery is not inherently sinful, and that we must judge it within its own context?

Answer: An unequivocal No. As mentioned above, Scripture’s regulation of slavery is not an endorsement of all forms of slavery in any age.

Even in the founding era, many contemporaries recognized chattel slavery as a profound injustice—and their writings remain accessible today. And despite the zeal of Lost Cause sympathizers to obscure the truth, the United States ultimately fought a war over this very issue, showing that not every conscience was dulled by the darkness of the time.

Most importantly, nowhere does Scripture justify slavery on racial grounds. The Bible affirms no hierarchy of human worth based on ethnicity or race. To suggest otherwise is an affront to the very heart of the Gospel.

Furthermore, both the Old and New Testaments explicitly condemn kidnapping and enslaving human beings:

“He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.” (Exodus 21:16)
“If a man is found kidnapping any of his brethren… then that kidnapper shall die; and you shall put away the evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 24:7)
“The law is made for… kidnappers… and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine.” (1 Timothy 1:10)

These passages alone should silence any sincere attempt to search the Scriptures to determine whether the transatlantic slave trade stands condemned by them.

And even if one were to draw comparisons, the Old Testament sharply limited servitude and guarded the dignity of those bound to it:

• Mandatory release after a fixed period (Exodus 21:2; Leviticus 25:10)
• Provisions for the freed (Deuteronomy 15:13–14)
• Protections for female servants (Exodus 21:7–11)
• Prohibition against returning escaped slaves to their masters (Deuteronomy 23:15–16)

This stands in stark contrast to American slavery—driven by greed, rooted in race, and bent on stripping an entire people of dignity, humanity, and the hope of freedom by denying them even the right to be educated. Wickedness beyond measure—especially from a people who claimed to walk in the light of Scripture.

It is true that many clergy twisted Scripture in order to defend this system—men like Dabney, Thornwell, and Palmer. Their zeal only deepened their guilt: leveraging their stature and influence, they cloaked grotesque injustice with the language of religion, their consciences disturbingly untroubled.

Biblically speaking, American slavery was a vile impostor.