This source is an antislavery argument written by Joseph Parissh Thompson.  In his argument, he writes to Christian men and women, not politicians.  He begs them to redeem Christianity. He argues slavery to be an immoral institution that is not sanctioned by Christianity.  Thompson begins by addressing the claim that Christianity allows and even sanctifies slavery.  After addressing this claim, he explains that some people use the Old Testament to defend slavery.  However, Thompson sees the use of the Bible to sanction slavery as a major problem to Christianity in that slavery attacks the very core and essence of Christianity.  Thompson addresses the fact that slavery existed in Jesus' time.  However, Jesus came to deliver the captive and commands all men to love your neighbor as yourself.  Thomspon repeatedly asks the reader if he believes the gospel sanctions slavery, and if it does, he further probes the reader to ask himself if such a gospel that sanctions slavery could come from God.  Thompson claims that "the religion of the Bible is thoroughly hostile to slavery, in spirit and in principle, in precept and in practice" (15).  He makes this argument by looking at Mosaic law and the teachings of Christ and the apostles of Christ.  Thompson sites the sermon on the mount as a justification for the impossibility of Christianity and slavery as being consistent with each other.  He further argues that no one can use Christ to sanction slavery in saying that "no man would dream of framing a slave-code out of the words of Christ; of buying or selling a human being by a warrant from the lips of Jesus, or of quoting anything that Christ said as a justification of slavery" (17)  Thompson also argues that slavery is inconsistent with Mosaic law and that no ancient religion or legislation could be more opposed to the institution of slavery than Mosiac law.  He bases this argument in the fact that Mosiac law highlights the dignity of the human man in that he is made in God's image.  Thompson explictly states that he is opposed to slavery because of its inconsistency with Christianity when he asserts, "I am opposed to slavery because I am a Christian--a member of that anti-slavery society of which He who came to preach liberty to the captive is the found and the head" (67).  Thompson writes a very adamant argument in which he defies the possibility of slavery being consistent with Christianity.  He backs his argument with biblical scripture and religious background history.  Thompson argues that slavery contradicts the essence of Christianity.  This source is important in that it illustrates the abolition argument that existed during the antebellum as a part of Christianity.

This source addresses the paradox of associating Christianity with slavery.  Ferguson emphasizes that slavery not only existed in a Christian society but slave holders actually used slavery to justify their violence toward slaves.  Ferguson emphasizes the problem of associating slavery with Christianity.  Many slaves came to view Christianity as associated with slavery.  Ferguson emphasizes this by referring to slave narratives.  She refers to Fredrick Douglass’s Slave Narrative in which Douglass stated that he found Christian slaveholders to be the most abhorrent and wretched.  She also references Harriet Jacob’s slave narrative, in which Jacob also experiences a more wretched form of slavery after her slaveholder converted.  Jacob expected her master to be more kind after becoming Christian; however, she found that was not the case.  Furthermore, Ferguson explains that slaveholders used Christianity to justify their terrible treatment of slaves.  The slaveholders focused on the theme of redemptive suffering to justify slavery.  Moreover, Ferguson highlights the paradox in Christian slavery being that the slaveholders become “gods” and the slaves become “Christ-like” sufferers.  Another problem with using Christianity to justify slavery stemmed from the fact that slave holders seemed to view an omnipotent God as Incompetent Creator who created blacks.  Slaveholders separated blacks from the rest of humanity that was considered to be made in God's image.  This view of blackness trickled down to the slaves, as evidenced by Equiano's association of darkness with a deformity.  Furthermore, slaveholders tried to lighten the slaves skin through miscegenation.  The slaveholders took it upon themselves to correct the darkness of black skin, which they viewed to be a mistake.  Ferguson points out that while slaveholders tried to use Christianity to defend slavery, the slaveholders were actually turning themselves into "gods" trying to recreate the slaves in their own image.  Additionally, Ferguson emphasizes the point that because the slaveholders held so much power, the slaves associated the power of the slaveholders with the omnipotence of God.  Ferguson notes that slaveholders used the Christian God to glorify spiritual emancipation and human suffering. They used the image of the suffering servant to justify earthly suffering.  Ferguson declares this view of Christianity to be contradictory to the essence of Christianity.  She illustrates that slaves also saw the disparity between what Christianity claimed to be and the reality of Christianinty, citing Douglass' mention of the huge disparity between the real Christianity of Christ and the practiced Christianity of the land.  Ferguson writes to highlight the violence that exists in slavery within what is claimed to be a Christian context.  This source is important because it illustrates the inconsistency between slavery and Christianity.  Slaveholders would read the Bible to slaves as they beat them.  The Bible verses that were read to slaves always included the verse about slaves being subserviant to their masters.  This type of Christianity as evidenced in this article does not acurately portray Christianity because it turns the slaveholders into "gods."  However, this article is useful in explaining the context of Christianity in perpetuating and sanctioning slavery.

This source reviews Uncle Tom's Cabin and poses the problem of Christianity within a slave society.  Christianity presents problems in how Christians should deal with slavery.  This source presents the question of whether it is moral for Christians to passively allow slavery to occur or if they are morally obligated to fight back.  Bellin explains that in Uncle Tom's Cabin Stowe is struggling to understand the proper role of humanity in God's design.  Stowe wrestles with the idea of whether as Christians people are supposed to passively allow slavery to exist and trust in God's divine providence for the world or if Christians are supposed to actively help society achieve God's plan.  The title of this article comes from Uncle Tom's Cabin in which St. Clare says that he is "up to heaven's gates in theory, down in earth's dust in practice" (276).  Stowe's novel exists in the midst of the debate of how Christianity should properly respond to slavery.  Bellin explains that many religious leaders in the North became advocates for abolition.  However, a debate existed within these religious leaders about how to go about the antislavery movement.  Bellin explains that there existed a "religious paradox-- whether Christians might do violence in pursuit of charitable ends" (277).  Bellin explains the confusion of what the Christian role was within abolition.  Some abolitionists argued that the God's natural law was fighting slavery.  Therefore, the Christian duty consisted in passively allowing God's plan to happen.  Others, however, argued that passivity was not the ideal role for Christians.  There was a call to arms among those with the latter mindset-- not only was it okay for Christians to fight slavery with violence but it was the duty of a Christian.  Bellin also addresses the bind that resulted from the Compromise of 1850.  In light of the Compromise of 1850, both resistance and inaction seemed to be contrary to Christianity because resistence was violent, yet passivity was counter to the civil law.  Bellin explains that Stowe grapples with this problem in Uncle Tom's Cabin with George Harris and Uncle Tom.  George Harris personifies those who feel the call to action, while Uncle Tom exemplifies those adherring passively to God's plan.  Stowe prescribes "right feeling" at the end of Uncle Tom's Cabin.  However, in her novel, St. Clare goes beyond feeling right and does acts of Christian kindness.  Bellin attributes the persuasiveness of Uncle Tom's Cabin to two images Stowe employs-- "the image of a deadly world so far gone that only divine judgment can set things right, and its complement, the image of heaven as pictured by Tom and Eva." (289).  This source explains that Stowe wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin with the question of how Christians should address the problem of slavery.  Even if a Christian maintains that slavery is inconsistent with Christianity, he must grapple with his role in a society that sanctions the institution of slavery.  This illustrates a problem that is inherent with slavery in context of a Christian society.