What biblical passages did Klansmen cite to defend racial hierarchy?

1. The “Curse of Ham”: a short, persistent scriptural engine for racial hierarchy

The “Curse of Ham” from Genesis 9:25–27 was widely deployed historically to claim African descent meant subordination; modern summaries and surveys identify that passage as the most commonly used biblical support for enslavement and white superiority ^{[1] [6]}. Scholarship cited in the literature shows Klan theological arguments drew on this legacy of exegesis to make a genealogy‑based case for racial hierarchy ^[4].

2. New Testament instructions on servants and social order were repurposed

Texts that instruct servants or slaves to obey masters—Ephesians 6:5, Colossians 3:22, 1 Timothy 6:1–2, Titus 2:9–10—appear on surveys of verses historically used to defend slavery and racial subordination in the Americas; such proof‑texts were available to and used by racially conservative preachers and lay movements that influenced Klan thinking ^{[1] [2]}. Those selections were combined with cultural arguments to normalize legal and social inequality.

3. Romans 12 and Romans 13: from devotional use to legitimation of authority

Klansmen elevated Romans 12 in ritual contexts—calling it “a compendium of the Bible” and making it central in Klonvokations—while others drew on Romans 13 (submission to governing authorities) as a theological buttress for existing civil structures favoring whites ^{[4] [3]}. Transformations of these passages in Klan settings treated them as moral justification for a conservative social order and for obeying established hierarchies ^{[4] [3]}.

4. The Klan fused biblical proof‑texts with “mytho‑scientific” racism

Academic analysis emphasizes that Klan theology did not rely on Scripture alone; it fused biblical exegesis with Social Darwinism and pseudo‑scientific race theories—what one scholar calls “mytho‑scientific racism”—to present a system that appeared both religious and scientific in support of white supremacy ^[4]. That ideological cocktail allowed the Klan to claim both divine sanction and empirical legitimacy for segregation and anti‑miscegenation policies ^[4].

5. Clergy and popular religious figures amplified Klan interpretations

The Klan’s theological claims were not isolated: popular revivalists and figures like Billy Sunday, and publishers and preachers sympathetic to the Klan, created a receptive religious culture; Klan literature and allied religious presses circulated essays and sermons that bolstered the Klan’s reading of Scripture ^{[5] [7]}. This made Klan biblical interpretation part of a broader public discourse rather than a fringe hermeneutic.

6. Two competing realities in the sources: misuse vs. faithful reading

Contemporary analysts and church writers cited in the sources stress that these scriptural deployments were misinterpretations serving political ends—The Times of Israel survey and The Banner piece flag the “misuse” of passages like Genesis 9 and slave‑obedience texts to justify oppression ^{[1] [6]}. At the same time, historical researchers document that these readings were sincerely held by many Klansmen and allied clergy, showing a genuine if distorted theological tradition ^{[4] [5]}.

7. Limits of available reporting and what it does not say

Available sources document which passages were commonly cited and how they were woven into Klan ritual and rhetoric, but they do not present an exhaustive list of every verse ever used by individual Klansmen; detailed citations from primary Klan sermons or private lodge records are not included in the supplied materials ^{[4] [5]}. The sources also do not adjudicate theological truth claims—rather they report how scripture was used in service of political and racial aims ^{[1] [4]}.

Sources used: scholarly history of Klan theology ^[4], surveys of biblical misuses ^{[1] [2]}, reporting on religious culture around the Klan ^[5], commentary on Romans passages and structural uses ^[3], and denominational discussion of the “Curse of Ham” misuse ^[6].