When Scripture Confirms Bias: How the Bible Has Been Used to Justify Slavery, Abuse, and Power
- Marcus D. Taylor, MBA
- Jul 30
- 4 min read
Can the Bible Be Used to Justify Bias?
Yes. But not because the Bible is flawed—because people are.
From slavery in the American South to colonial conquests, the Bible has been wielded—sometimes masterfully, other times manipulatively—to validate deeply held human biases. This phenomenon is a textbook example of confirmation bias, where individuals interpret Scripture through the lens of their own experiences, cultures, fears, or power structures.
In this article, we will explore examples where the Bible has been misapplied to justify:
Enslavement and systemic racism
Gender-based abuse
Religious colonialism
Authoritarian control
We'll also examine insights from respected theologians and historians who call us to a deeper, more honest engagement with sacred texts.
Understanding Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias is a psychological tendency to favor information that supports our existing beliefs, and to dismiss or rationalize contradictory evidence (Nickerson, 1998). In religious settings, this bias becomes even more potent because sacred texts are often seen as beyond critique.
However, Scripture must be interpreted—not just read. As theologian N.T. Wright notes,
“Every time we read the Bible, we are at risk of hearing what we want to hear and missing what God is really saying” (Wright, 2005).
Slavery and the “Curse of Ham”
In the 18th and 19th centuries, many Christian preachers and theologians in the U.S. South defended slavery using verses from both the Old and New Testaments. A common example was the “Curse of Ham” narrative from Genesis 9:25–27, misinterpreted as divine justification for the enslavement of African people.
Slaveholders also quoted:
Ephesians 6:5: “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling…”
Colossians 3:22: “Slaves, obey your masters in everything…”
These were presented as timeless commands, ignoring context or the broader liberatory themes of the Bible.
“The Bible was used as a blunt instrument to protect a way of life, not to challenge it,” writes Dr. James H. Cone, father of Black Liberation Theology (Cone, 2011).
Meanwhile, abolitionist Christians leaned into verses like:
Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free...”
Exodus 3:7–10: God declares, “I have seen the oppression of my people… and I am sending you to bring them out.”
The difference lies not in Scripture—but in lens and motive.
Gender-Based Abuse and Misused Submission
Certain passages such as Ephesians 5:22—"Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands"—have been historically weaponized to enforce patriarchal dominance.
In abusive religious environments, these verses are taught without the equally important verses:
Ephesians 5:21: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.”
Ephesians 5:25: “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.”
Theologian Beth Allison Barr writes in The Making of Biblical Womanhood:“When biblical texts are pulled out of context to demand silence and submission from women, they stop being about God’s order and start serving man’s power” (Barr, 2021).
In some church traditions, survivors of domestic violence have been pressured to stay in dangerous marriages to preserve "God’s design," exposing how Scripture can be misused to protect institutions over people.
Racism, Segregation, and Jim Crow Theology
In the 20th century, Christian defenders of segregation cited verses like:
Acts 17:26: “God has made from one blood all nations… and determined their boundaries.”
They used this to argue that racial boundaries were divinely ordained. Interracial marriage was called “sinful,” and pastors preached that integration defied God’s natural order.
Yet theologians like Howard Thurman—spiritual advisor to Dr. King—warned:“Any religion that professes to be concerned with the souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them… is a dry-as-dust religion” (Thurman, 1949).
This exemplifies the danger of filtering Scripture through cultural supremacy instead of divine justice.
Colonialism and the Conquest Justification
European empires, especially during the Age of Exploration, often cited the Book of Joshua and its “divine conquest” narratives to justify the seizure of indigenous lands. Papal decrees like the Doctrine of Discovery declared it was the Christian duty of colonizers to “bring the light” to non-Christian peoples.
“Colonial missions often ignored the example of Jesus, who empowered the poor, and instead modeled themselves on the empires he resisted,” notes historian Justo González (González, 2010).
Entire languages, traditions, and belief systems were erased under the false idea that God's kingdom must look like European dominance.
Why This Keeps Happening: The Human Lens
The problem is not the Bible. The problem is when:
Verses are removed from context.
Cultural practices are retroactively sanctified.
Power structures are defended with selective theology.
Interpretation is divorced from compassion, justice, and humility.
As Jesus warned in Matthew 23, religious leaders in his time weaponized Scripture for control, laying “heavy burdens” on others while refusing to lift them themselves.
Moving Forward: How to Guard Against Bias
To read the Bible faithfully and responsibly, readers must:
Engage in historical-contextual study. Understand what the text meant to its original audience.
Interpret Scripture in light of Scripture. Do not build theology on isolated verses.
Be self-reflective. Ask: Is this interpretation serving love, justice, and truth—or power, fear, and control?
Welcome diverse perspectives. Study voices outside your tradition, especially those who’ve experienced marginalization.
Embrace humility. As Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:12, “Now we see through a glass darkly…”—we all have blind spots.
Conclusion: The Call to Integrity
The Bible can liberate or dominate—depending on the hands that hold it. Throughout history, people have used it to justify hate and hierarchy—but also to inspire freedom movements, community healing, and radical love.
It is our ethical and spiritual responsibility to ensure our interpretation reflects not our biases, but the heart of God.
References (APA 7th Edition)
Barr, B. A. (2021). The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the Subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth. Brazos Press.
Cone, J. H. (2011). The Cross and the Lynching Tree. Orbis Books.
González, J. L. (2010). The Story of Christianity: Volume 2: The Reformation to the Present Day. HarperOne.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
Thurman, H. (1949). Jesus and the Disinherited. Beacon Press.
Wright, N. T. (2005). Scripture and the Authority of God: How to Read the Bible Today. HarperOne.
Comments