Last year, I posted the testimony of a former southern slave on my Facebook timeline, at a time when Joel McDurmon’s The Problem of Slavery in Christian America book was making its rounds. The fruit of his book, as I saw it, was to make some of my-then-friends angry. Angry at the past. Angry at the present. Angry at America. Angry at white people. Angry at other Christians. Not edified, not informed. Just angry.
This anger was peddled as a righteous indignation that resulted in many friendships destroyed, the reason being “if you don’t agree with my interpretation on these events, then you are a slavery apologist.” It was akin to millennials watching “The March Of The Penguins” and then claiming to be experts in zoology. Cue my post, and my comment threads were subsequently a-twitter with discussion, ranging from “hmm”s to pitch-fork style accusations.
Why the controversy? Well, the testimony I had relayed to the wonderful world of opinionated Facebook users was a positive testimony of a slave owner, voiced by one of his former slaves. To give a picture of the tone, here is an excerpt from the woman, about her “master”:
“When Master told us we was free it didn’t take much effect on us. Told us we could go where we pleased and come when we pleased, that we didn’t have to work for him any more ‘less we wanted to. Most of us slaves stayed right there and raised our own crops. Master helped us much as he could. Some of us he gave a cow or a mule or anything he could spare to help us. Some of us worked on the same plantation and bought our own little farms and little log cabins, and lived right there till Master dies and the family moved away. Some of us lived there right on.” (from Voices from Slavery: 100 Authentic Slave Narratives)
Well, you can probably guess what the SJWs were thinking after reading this. The most common question/accusation was “why are you defending slavery?” even when I posted the testimony without commentary. Truthfully, I posted the it in hopes of generating discussion, because all I was seeing and hearing about slaves was worst case scenario, a picture that seemed to contradict the above testimony. I thought, “I wonder what people will say about this?” Well, I got my answer.
The crime was dissenting with the narrative. The Bible obviously condemns what happened in America during chattel slavery. But in a Christian SJW’s mind, their narrative = their Bible. For them, to post an account like the above is to go against the Bible.
The testimony that I posted was largely viewed as being untrustworthy. Stockholm syndrome and fear were fingered as the reasons why this former slave woman would write such a sinful account. Clearly, she was lying, delusional, or afraid.
I could not help but wonder how these SJWs would approach this woman. “Oh sweetie, stand aside while we kill this man. No, no, you don’t know what you are talking about. There, there, we know better. Obviously, you can’t be trusted. You see, we read a book and now we know more than you…”
It was very ironic to observe those who claimed to stand up for the widow and the orphan stomp all over this woman’s story, even mocking it. They certainly didn’t approach it ethically/judicially. To deny the testimony of “two or three witnesses” and claim that 150 years of separation grants magical insight into such a testimony is very unbiblical. Somehow, I don’t think that a negative account would have generated as much discussion about the reliability of former-slave eye witnesses.
To think ethically/judicially is to simply ask, “how would this play out in a courtroom, with God’s law as the standard of justice?” Let’s play it out. The aforementioned old master 1) must be taken to court by two or three eyewitnesses, 2) must, after a fair trial, be sentenced to death by stoning since that is the penalty for kidnapping, and 3) the witnesses must throw the first stone, with the rest of the people joining in after.
You know, I just can’t imagine this case getting to the courtroom. The testimony of the former slave woman just doesn’t warrant any sort of animosity towards her master, unless one has something like a “pre-indignation” ready and raring to go. However, anyone who has spent time in the remotest vicinity of a salt-worthy SJW knows that this road rage attitude comes standard with the base model. No after-market purchase necessary.
That being said, it’s not enough to point to practical application of theoretical 150-year-old court cases. We must use the Bible as the ultimate source of truth and justice.
Do you remember what happened to Joseph, for example? He fits all of the criteria of being a victim. Let’s go through the list. Oppressed: check. Sold into slavery: check. Oh, that’s all you need? Ok, he is 100%, pure premium, SJW approved, certified victim. He is now eligible to receive reparations. So, from Genesis 45, let’s hear his testimony to his former “masters”:
“And now do not be distressed or angry with yourselves because you sold me here, for God sent me before you to preserve life. For the famine has been in the land these two years, and there are yet five years in which there will be neither plowing nor harvest. And God sent me before you to preserve for you a remnant on earth, and to keep alive for you many survivors. So it was not you who sent me here, but God. He has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler-“
Blah blah blah Joseph! Landsakes, you are a liar, or afraid, or you have Stockholm syndrome! Stand aside, while we dispense with justice and kill these your brothers! If we know anything, it’s that we know more than you. Yeah, we know your over-all situation is better, but that is irrelevant. Yeah, we know God meant it for good, but that is no justification for slavery!
It’s just as bad with Jacob, frankly: “Then Joseph brought in Jacob his father and stood him before Pharaoh, and Jacob blessed Pharaoh” (Genesis 47). Later in the same chapter: “And Jacob blessed Pharaoh and went out from the presence of Pharaoh.”
WHAT??? BLESSING THE POTENTATE OF A SLAVE NATION??? Say it ain’t so Jacob! Don’t tell me that, while this fiend sits upon the backs of thousands of slaves, you add your blessing into the abuse of so many families?
All fist-shaking-role-playing aside, what do we do with these two (trigger warning) patriarchs? Was God displeased with either of them? Did God desire that Joseph would stone his brothers to death right there? Did He wish that Jacob had not blessed so evil a man?
Do not misunderstand: I believe that stoning, fair trials established by two or three witnesses, and casting the first stone are all good, Godly ways to go about justice. “The law of the Lord is perfect,” and many, many of those cruel slave owners deserved to be stoned to death. But, to be consistent with the attack on the aforementioned slave woman is to eventually attack Joseph and Jacob. It’s probably happening already. Goodness knows, scripture is not sacred to an SJW mob.
I don’t think that either Jacob or Joseph did anything wrong (in fact, Jacob’s story is a wonderful example of “I will bless those who bless you”).Nor do I think that that slave woman was wrong in her description of her former master. If we don’t apply a Godly standard to thevoice of the victims that don’t support the narrative, then just phone it in and go home. To deny the testimony of the oppressed is surely an evil thing. If the church does not do it, who will? Certainly not the SJWs. For a group already claiming to listen to the voice of the oppressed, they seem to be chanting “justice” so loud that they have donned earplugs.
Social justice is a wonderful tool for power and control. If someone is not a racist, then they are a sexist. If they aren’t sexist, then they are xenophobic. If they aren’t xenophobic, then they are (insert crime here). This is especially useful when tossing, well, everyone who came before us under the bus.The end result is to condemn the Bible. It will never, ever, fit their narrative. “There is a way that seems right to man, but its end leads to death.” Social justice is/was never about justice: it is all about punishment.