God Made All Nations from One Blood: The Origins of a Biblical Argument against Slavery

In 1526, William Tyndale’s ground-breaking translation of the English New Testament appeared. In this translation, Tyndale used a unique phrase that was not in John Wycliffe’s original English translation. Instead of translating a key passage from Paul’s sermon to the Athenians in Wycliffe’s original way, “[God] made of one all the kind of men” (Acts 17:26a), Tyndale translated the verse “[God] hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the erthe.”¹ 

The King James would translate the passage in the same, albeit more readable way for contemporaries, “[God] hath made of one blood all nations [Greek: ethnos] of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.” A little more than a century later, this simple English sentence would begin to have enormous implications for the quest for human equality and freedom worldwide.

The Early Puritan Advocates for Human Equality

During the 1500s, we can find the repeated use of the “one blood” reference in sermons and even prayers. For example, a 1586 English translation of an evening prayer from the German Lutheran theologian Johann Habermann starts in this way,

Almighty, and eternal God, Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which together with the Son and the Holy Ghost, didst create man, after thine own likeness, and breath into him the breath of life that which through thy goodness continues at thy pleasure; Thou hast made of one blood all mankind, and assigned times and length of our life in this world. (p. 44)

This type of meditation upon the doctrine of creation prepared a particular strand of Christians to consider what this truth might mean for their social and political relationships.

Appeals to another doctrine of creation, that God made all humans in his image, had already served as a theological basis for arguments against slavery as early as 386 A.D. by Gregory of Nyssa. One then finds this appeal used throughout later Christian history to argue for human equality. For example, I have written about various Catholic thinkers in the 1500s who used this doctrine to argue against the oppression of Native Americans. However, the origins of the use of the Acts 17:26a “one blood” biblical claim to argue against slavery and for the equality of all humans appear decidedly Protestant and largely Puritan in origin.

Possibly the first Puritan thinker to refer to humans being from “one blood” as a basis for arguing for human equality was the famous Puritan scholar and pastor William Perkins (1558-1602). In his commentary on Hebrews published two years after his death, he maintained that this passage from Acts indicated “that in regard of body and birth, there is no difference originally betwixt man and man” (p. 47)² 

A couple of decades later, in 1629, Archibald Symmer, who historians believe was a Puritan pastor, used the reference that we are all made from one blood to argue for charity for the poor and loving one’s enemy “because he is a man of my own nature.” Six years later, the Puritan pastor Richard Bernard (1568-1641) used the same passage to justify compassion to the poor, “He is made of the same mold, hewed out of the same rock thou was, nay, he is thine own flesh (as the Prophet speaks) for ‘we are all made but of one blood’ (Acts 17:26).”

Two years after that, the famous Scottish Reformed minister John Weemes would apply this passage to those with different skin colors. He wrote, “For as, ‘All men were created of one blood,’ Acts 17 [26a], but accidentally they differ in their skin color.” By “accidentally,” he simply meant, “Their color varies in respect of the climate under which they dwell.”³ In all of these instances, the pastors used this appeal to humanize others and argue for moral responsibilities to others outside of one’s particular identity group.

By 1655, the argument was used in politics by the Puritan political leader Oliver Cromwell, who had defeated the King of England in the English Civil War (1645). In a Declaration against Spain’s mistreatment of Native Americans, ten years later, Cromwell argued,

Since God hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; and at one time or another, God will have an account of the innocent blood of so many millions of Indians, so barbarously butchered by the Spaniards, and of the wrong and injustice that hath been done unto them.⁴ 

As can be seen, an emerging pattern of thought and practice was established among these Puritans: using the Acts 17 “one blood” reference to argue for the equality of all humanity, including the poor, one’s enemy, humans with various skin colors, and Native Americans. Paul’s retelling of God’s creation established this comprehensive understanding of who was fully human and deserving of human love and respect.

The Use of the One Blood Argument in Early American Anti-Slavery Writings

Interestingly, this same argument would emerge again among Puritans forty-five years later in the second known anti-slavery publication in the American colonies. The author, Samuel Sewall (1652-1730), was labeled “a typical Massachusetts Puritan”⁵ by one early biographer, but in one respect, he was anything but. He penned the first anti-slavery tract in America that appealed to the whole colonial audience (the first publication appealed only to Quakers).

Sewall published the tract, “The Selling of Joseph” (1700), after finding out that a Boston judge was planning to keep an indentured servant as a lifelong slave. Indentured servants were to be released after a period of time. Thus, he began by declaring,

It is most certain that all Men, as they are the Sons of Adam, are Coheirs; and have equal Right unto Liberty, and all other outward Comforts of Life. God hath given the Earth (with all its Commodities) unto the Sons of Adam, Psal 115. 16. And hath made of One Blood, all Nations of Men, for to dwell on all the face of the Earth; and hath determined the Times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.

He would go on to close his argument with these words, “These Ethiopians, as black as they are; seeing they are the Sons and Daughters of the First Adam, the Brethren and Sister of the Last Adam, and the offspring of GOD; They ought to be treated with a Respect agreeable.” His 1895 biographer observed that he backed up his words throughout his life, “Nineteen years later, when a grandson of his and the daughter of a negro wood-chopper were baptized together in his church, he wrote in his diary, ‘so all are one in Christ.”⁶

To be clear, most Puritan Christians during this time did not see Acts 17:26 as forbidding slavery, even though it indicated we are all equal before God. Unfortunately, most did not equate equality before God with the requirement of equal legal respect and freedom for all humans. Sewall was an exception. Yet, the Puritans’ adherence to the Bible created the possibility for some key leaders to begin emphasizing the equal moral respect and responsibility we have for all humanity.

“One Blood” and the Broader Abolition Movement

From the eighteenth century forward, we find the “one blood” argument picked up and repeatedly used by famous abolitionists such as John Woolman (1754) and John Wesley (1774). Another important individual to make this argument was Lemuel Haynes (1753-1833), the first black American officially ordained as a minister. He argued in his 1776 tract, “Liberty Further Extended, “that a Negro may justly challenge, and has an undeniable right to his Liberty. Consequently, the practice of Slave-keeping, which so much abounds in this land is illicit.”

The basis of his argument was grounded on this passage, “‘It hath pleased God to make of one Blood all nations of men, for to dwell upon the face of the Earth.’ Acts 17, 26–23. And as all are of one species, so there are the same laws, and aspiring principles placed in all nations; and the effect that these laws will produce, are similar to each other” (italics in original).

This biblical appeal later shaped numerous American abolitionists’ arguments. In his book, Of One Blood: Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality, Paul Goodman observed:

The underpinning of their [the abolitionists’] views was Christian faith in the unity of mankind: “God hath created of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth.” To elevate one race over another because of color, hair texture, lip thickness, or nose shape introduced arbitrary and invidious man-made distinctions into God’s creation. Such prejudice was tantamount to blasphemy, they argued, for it degraded part of God’s creation for selfish, prideful, exploitative purposes.⁷

Thus, one finds declarations such as the following required among early abolitionist societies: “We believe, and would do all in our power to convince others, that ‘God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.’”⁸ These societies would also question new members to ascertain whether they believed the “one blood” doctrine. Abolitionists even adorned ceramics and medallions with the image of a kneeling slave with the corresponding plea “Am I not a Man and a Brother?” which was directly connected to the “one blood” doctrine.⁹ Further, leading antislavery leaders such as William Lloyd Garrison used the same scriptural logic to protest segregated church pews in the pre-emancipation North.¹⁰ For many, it was more than just a biblical “tool” to argue against claims of racial inferiority, but a scriptural command to acknowledge there is no such thing.

Because of this, it is no surprise that the phrase would also later be used by Civil Rights leaders in the twentieth century (e.g., for one sample from Martin Luther King see here). Many readers of this blog post are familiar with the courageous work of civil rights leader John Perkins, whose last book was appropriately titled, One Blood: Parting Words to the Church on Race and Love. May we continue to remember this translation of Paul’s words to the Athenians as we continue our work on behalf of recognizing the worth, dignity, and innate equality before God and the law of all humans made in God’s image.

---

1. Apart from this quote, I modified all other quotes from old English in this blog post to modern English.
2. The nonconformist minister Henry Ainsworth (1571-1622) would also use this passage in 1617 to argue for Christians seeing everyone as their neighbor.
3. The works of J. Weemes (1637) Scotland, Collected Works, Observations Natural and Moral [Natvrall and morall], p. 26, volume 1
4. Used by Cromwell in the Declaration against Spain’s mistreatment of Native Americans (1655)
5. John Louis Ewell, Judge Samuel Sewall, 1652-1730 a Typical Massachusetts Puritan. Knickerbocker Press, 1895.
6. Ewell, Judge Samuel Sewall, 39.
7. Paul Goodman, Of One Blood: Abolitionism and the Origins of Racial Equality (University of California Press, 1998), 58.
8. Goodman, Of One Blood, 132.
9. Sam Margolin, “And Freedom to the Slave”: Antislavery Ceramics, 1787–1865
10. See Archibald Henry Grimke, William Lloyd Garrison, The Abolitionist (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Co., 1891), 159-160.