|
About Jesus - Steve Sweetman
My
commentary on written
2021 Unless
otherwise stated, the Biblical text used and quoted for this commentary is the
Christian Standard Bible (CSB) as seen in the authorization statement below. Scripture
quotations marked CSB have been taken from the Christian Standard Bible®,
Copyright © 2017 by Holman Bible Publishers. Used by permission. Christian
Standard Bible® and CSB® are federally registered trademarks of Holman Bible
Publishers. Table
Of Contents PART
ONE verses
1 through 3 Chapter
2 - Paul And Philemon Chapter
3 - Paul's Appeal Chapter
4 - Final Greetings PART
TWO Chapter
6 - The Bible And Slavery Chapter
7 - The Human Condition Chapter
8 - Slavery In The American South Chapter
9 - Slavery Banned In England Chapter
10 - Slavery In Noah's Day Chapter
11 - Slavery In The Law Of Moses Chapter
12 - Diakonos And Doulos Chapter
13 - Slavery And Jesus Chapter
14 - Slavery In The Roman Empire Chapter
15 - Ephesians 6:5 Through 9 Chapter
17 - Paul's Letter To Philemon Chapter
18 - My Biblical Based Conclusion Other
Books By Stephen Sweetman PART ONE I
began writing Biblical commentaries in 2002.
This particular commentary on Paul's letter to Philemon is a total
revision of my original commentary written in 2004. Due
to the fact that I have been legally blind since birth, that I am not a
professional editor, and, this book has not been edited by an outside source,
you may, how about probably will, find some grammatical errors as you read.
Hopefully and prayerfully there aren't too many mistakes for you to
muddle your way through. If you do
encounter some while reading the following pages, I hope they do not detract
from the content of the book. This
commentary is divided into two parts. Part
one is a verse by verse commentary while part two is a reprint of my book
entitled "What The Bible Says About Slavery."
In part two I outline from both the Old Testament and the New Testament
the pertinent information concerning the subject of slavery.
I attempt to show that even though the Bible does not command "thou
shall not own slaves," the Bible does oppose slavery.
When
it comes to the topic of slavery, Paul's letter to Philemon becomes extremely
important. It is my opinion that
what Paul wrote about Philemon concerning his slave Onesimus, is the fundamental
view concerning what the Bible says about the practice of slavery.
So, consider what you are about to read as you do your own study and
research concerning all that the Bible has to teach us.
The Bible is truly God's message to you and I that should form the
convictions of our hearts by which we live.
Of
all of Paul's letters that we read in the New Testament this letter to a man
named Philemon is the shortest of them all, but short does not mean
insignificant. What Paul wrote in
this letter, in my opinion, is vital to how we should understand what the Bible
says about the issue of slavery. Although
there is no specific verse that says "thou shall not own a slave,"
what Paul wrote here tells me that no one should own a slave.
We
know next to nothing about this Christian brother named Philemon to which Paul
sent this letter. A reading of this
letter obviously tells us that he was a Christian and that he owned at least one
slave. We will see that the local
community of believers used his house in which to gather for their meetings.
It appears from what Paul wrote to Philemon that he, in some format had
ministered with Paul. Paul also
seems to suggest that he and Philemon had a very good and productive
relationship as co-workers in the service of the Lord. Beyond
that, much that could be said is speculation, and I will not concern myself with
too much speculation. Paul
mentioned being in prison at the time of writing this letter.
Paul had been imprisoned on a few occasions, but the majority opinion
seems to be that on this occasion he was imprisoned in The
purpose of this letter, concerned a slave named Onesimus who apparently had run
away from Philemon, his owner. Paul
strongly encouraged Philemon to receive Onesimus back as a brother in the Lord,
and beyond that as I believe, to actually free him from slavery.
The
name Onesimus was a common name among slaves in the first-century Greco-Roman
world. The name Onesimus means
"useful" or something along those lines.
You can easily see why the name Onesimus would be a common name among
slaves back then. Commentators
always like suggesting a theme for the books of the Bible in which they comment.
There should be no debate over the theme of this little letter.
The primary theme of the letter concerned slavery, and in particular, one
slave named Onesimus, who had become a dear brother in Jesus, a fellow worker in
the service of the Lord, and a son in the faith to Paul.
For this reason I have titled this book "Appealing For
Freedom." Chapter
1 The
Text 1 Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our
brother: To Philemon our dear friend and coworker, 2 to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow soldier, and
to the church that meets in your home. 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ." My
Commentary Verse
1 "Paul,
a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother: To Philemon our dear friend
and coworker," The first word we read in this letter is the
name Paul. Many people think that
after his conversion to Jesus that Paul changed his name from Saul to Paul.
That was not the case. Saul
was his Jewish name while Paul was his Roman name.
While with Jews he would have been known as Saul and while being with
Gentiles he would have been known as Paul. Paul was a Jew but he was also a Roman citizen
by birth. Either his father or
grandfather would have become a Roman citizen for some reason, and thus the
reason why Paul was born a Roman citizen, as seen in Acts 22:25 through 27 and
Acts 23:27. Acts 23:27 reads: "When
this man [Paul] had been seized by the Jews and was about to be killed by them,
I arrived with my troops and rescued him because I learned that he [Paul] is a
Roman citizen." You can read my book entitled "Who Was
Paul" for more information on the life of who I believe was the most
important, most instrumental, and most productive Christian ever.
The fact that we are reading what he wrote about two thousand years after
his death proves that to be true, or so I believe.
Beyond that, he, more than anyone else, including Jesus Himself, defined
Christian theology and practice for the church to embrace and practice.
I have always said that if Paul got his theology wrong, then we as
Christians are in very sad shape. We
would have based our entire lives on one huge mother of all falsehoods. The name Paul means "little."
Second century tradition states that Paul was little, balding, sunken
eyed, and bull legged. Whether this
is an accurate portrayal of Paul is true, we do not have one hundred percent
proof of this claim. As stated in my introduction and as stated
here in verse 1, Paul was in prison, as he was a few times after giving his life
to Jesus. The majority opinion is
that this imprisonment was probably his time in prison in Paul knew from day one of his new life in
Jesus that he would face many trials and tough times.
He would suffer greatly for his association with Jesus.
We see his God-appointed calling which is recorded in Acts 9:15 and 16.
In this passage a man named Ananias was asked by God to pray for Paul.
Ananias was somewhat reluctant because he knew of Paul's past where he
had persecuted Christians. Nevertheless,
the Lord told Ananias why he needed to pray for Paul.
The text reads: "But
the Lord said to him [Ananias], 'Go, for this man is my
chosen instrument to take my name to Gentiles, kings, and Israelites. I
will show him how much he must suffer for my name.'" Paul called himself a "prisoner of Christ
Jesus." You might ask why he
called himself a prisoner of Christ Jesus when in fact he was a prisoner of the
Roman authorities. The answer is
simple. It was because of his
association and witness for Jesus that he was in prison.
So, in that sense of the word, he was a prisoner of Jesus.
If he had not been a Christian, he would not have been in prison.
A life of suffering was just par for his specific Christian ministry, as
we have seen in Acts 6:15 and 16. We see the name Jesus here in verse 1.
The name Jesus means God saves, or God is saviour, or something similar.
The very name of Jesus that the angel Gabriel told Mary to call her son
speaks to the Deity of Christ, which means, that Jesus was God in a human form
while He was on earth. He is now God
in some kind of spiritual human form in heaven. Luke
1:31 through 33 reads: "Now
listen: You [Mary] will conceive and give birth to a son, and you will name him
Jesus. He will be great and will be
called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of
his father David. He will reign over
the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end."
Jesus being God in a human form is the most
basic aspect of who Jesus is that we must know and believe.
If you do not believe that Jesus was in fact God in a human body while on
earth, and, is now God in some kind of human spiritual body in heaven, you do
not believe in the Jesus of the Bible. In
modern vernacular, you believe in a fake Jesus and a fake Jesus benefits no one.
Jesus' title Christ that we see in verse 1
speaks to the fact that He is the Jewish Messiah, the one God has chosen to
bring salvation, not only to the Jews, but to all people everywhere who will
devote their lives to Him as their Lord and Saviour. Any time you see the title
Christ in the New Testament as it is applied to Jesus, you can think of Jesus
being our Saviour, the One who rescues us from eternal torment in the We see that Timothy was with Paul on the
occasion when this letter was written. Paul
chose Timothy to go with him on his second missionary trip, as recorded in Acts
16. Acts 16:3 reads: "Paul
wanted Timothy to go with him; so he took him and
circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, since they all
knew that his father was a Greek." Paul wrote two letters to Timothy.
You can read those letters and learn more about him.
Paul thought of himself as being a father figure for Timothy.
Paul considered Timothy his son in the faith, as seen in 1 Timothy 1:2. "To
Timothy, my true son
in the faith. Grace,
mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ
Jesus our Lord." Note that Paul called Philemon both his friend
and co-worker. I believe the words
"friend" and "co-worker" are two very good descriptive words
to use for those who share in Christian ministry.
I believe that it is the Lord who draws people together in friendship.
Then, once establishing their relationship, I also believe Jesus would
have the friends work together in a specific God-appointed ministry.
It is what Christian brotherhood is all about.
Jesus joins us as Christians to a few other Christians in the Body of
Christ whereby we can support each other as friends but also support each other
in a common ministry. In short, we
should expect our Christian friends to be co-workers in the work of the Lord.
This was the case with Paul and Philemon.
Our English word "friend" in verse 1
is translated from the Greek word "agapetos."
Paul could have used another Greek word that we could translate as
"friends" but he didn't. Within
this Greek word is the Greek word "agape" that signifies
"sacrificial love." Sacrificial
love is the love of God, meaning that by virtue of His very nature, God is one
who constantly sacrifices Himself for his creation.
Agape is the pure love of God. It
is the love that Jesus desires to be demonstrated in our lives.
If there is no sacrifice in your attempt to love, then you have not
demonstrated the love of God. You
have demonstrated a lesser kind of love that can be expressed in other
first-century Greek words. According
to Paul, he and Philemon possessed this loving relationship where they were
willing to sacrifice themselves for each other.
It is my thinking that the English word
"friend" in the Christian Standard Bible, as quoted above, is a weak
word to use in this particular situation. In
our 2021 culture we talk about friends, and that does not always imply that we
are willing to sacrifice ourselves for those we call our friends.
In our time, there are a variety of levels of friendship, as there
probably was in Paul's day. Paul could have written the Greek word
"philos" that is also translated as friend in the New Testament, but
he didn't. Philos suggests a
brotherly love, a reciprocal love. That
is to say, "I love you as you love me in return."
Philos love is a free flow of love between two or more people.
There can be some sacrifice in philos type love, but it is not implied in
the meaning of the Greek word philos. Paul chose to write the Greek word "agapeto."
In my thinking that meant that both he and Philemon had such a
relationship that they were quite willing to sacrifice themselves for the
benefit of the other. The choice of
Paul's wording here says volumes about his relationship to Philemon. It
says volumes about both Paul and Philemon's friendship.
Although we know little about Philemon and lots about Paul, what we do
know about Philemon from this verse gives us a brief hint into the type of
person he was, and that was, one loving man. Paul
and Philemon certainly had a close net, loving, relationship that clearly
included mutual sacrifice for one another. It
is this kind of friendship that enables us as Christians to be effective
co-workers in the service of the Lord. Verse
2 "to
Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church that meets
in your home." First, of all, note that Paul greets a lady
Christian in this verse, a lady that must have been somewhat important for Paul
to mention her in his opening remarks. There
has been much controversy over the years concerning women in ministry,
especially, women in church leadership. There
are a number of women involved in ministry that we read about in the New
Testament that clearly suggests that women should not be excluded from Christian
ministry in the church. I will now
spend a fair amount of time and space in explaining what I believe the New
Testament has to say about the issue of women in ministry.
Most
segments of the church today employ women pastors.
This has not always been the case. In
many respects, the acceptance of women in ministry has little to do with a
Biblical perspective. It has more to
do with our secular cultural influence on the church that places women in equal
prominence with men. A secular
culture should never determine our theology and practice.
Biblical truth, as best we can understand it, should be the basis for all
we believe and for all we do.
Another
reason for the prominence of women in ministry these days is due to the lack of
men stepping up to the plate of ministry. Kathryn
Kulhman, a well-known lady preacher during the 1950's, 60's and 70's, maintained
she was in ministry because some man refused his calling.
From
my perspective, the fundamental issue to the debate over women in ministry stems
from how you understand the role of God, Christ, man, and woman, in both
marriage and society. Paul addressed
this in 1 Corinthians 11:3. That
verse reads: "But
I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the
woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." What
Paul wrote here is often called "headship," meaning, God is head over
Christ, Christ is head over man, and man is head over woman.
I believe this was fundamental to Paul's thinking concerning men and
women's issues in life, including the church.
The
debate over headship is whether the word "head" should be understood
as "having authority over someone" or "being the source of
something." Both concepts are
possible and are relevant to this discussion.
When
headship is thought of as being authoritative, it often becomes cold-hearted and
dictatorial. As a means of balancing
what he said in verse 3, Paul refuted dictatorial rule of man over woman in 1
Corinthians 11:11 and 12. "In
the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, and man is not independent
of woman. For just as woman came
from man, so man comes through woman, and all things come from God." When
thinking of headship, we now turn to 1 Timothy 2:12 and 13, which, according to
many, denies women any role in Christian leadership.
Those verses read: "I
do not allow a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; instead, she is
to remain quiet. For Adam was formed
first, then Eve." Without
knowing something of first-century paganism, its influence on the church, and
the definition of Greek words and their usage, you will exclude women from
ministry based on this verse. That
is problematic because we see women in ministry, including teaching, throughout
the New Testament. How, then, should
we understand 1 Timothy 2:12 and 13?
Understanding
the words "to teach" in their contextual, cultural, and linguistic
setting may provide a different viewpoint to these verses than what you are used
to hearing. Everywhere we read the
words "to teach" in Paul's writings they are in reference to some
specific teaching. One might
conclude that to be the case here. If
so, what teaching could Paul have had in mind when he penned the above to
Timothy? In
the first-century, Greco-Roman world, women had been experiencing a social
liberation in many aspects of life that included business, sexuality, and
education. This women's liberation
movement began in the mid first-century B C.
Along with that, female goddess worship had been prevalent in some parts
of the Roman Empire, especially around Men
who gave themselves to the goddesses, especially the goddess Cybele, subjected
themselves to these goddesses and their female priestesses.
They would castrate themselves, dress like women, and do their best to
live like a woman. Inherent in
goddess worship was the teaching that woman was "the source" of all
life, including man. Eve (Eve means
life) was a goddess, and she, along with the serpent god gave Adam his life.
Woman was seen as both "the source of man" and "the
authority over man," and thus the relevance of the word
"headship" noted above. Women,
in this form of paganism, effectively killed the role of men in the society in
which this form of religion prevailed. Prior
to the first-century A D, some men were literally killed as an act of worship to
Cybele. In Paul's day, men were
symbolically killed in the process of worship of Cybele.
When
Paul wrote his letters to Timothy, some older Christian women were mixing
Christian doctrine with paganism. If
the words "to teach" in other Pauline passages refer to a specific
teaching, the heresies associated with goddess worship as they applied to men
could be what Paul told women not to teach in 1 Timothy 2:12.
The point to be made here is that Paul was not telling women they could
not teach. He was telling women not
to teach this specific heresy. This
is significant because in verse 13 Paul made reference to Adam being created
before Eve. In other words, Eve was
not the source of man. Adam was the
source of woman, thus refuting the heresy certain women were teaching.
The
phrase "to have authority over" in 1 Timothy 2:12 is also relevant to
our discussion. Many Greek words had
a variety of meanings which have to be considered in translating the text.
The Greek word "authenteo" translated as "have authority
over" can mean to dominate, to kill, or to be the source of something.
All three of these definitions must be considered when translating the
Greek text. All three might be a
valid translation in the verses I am addressing, although one might be more
valid. If
you understand "having authority over" referring to authoritative
domination, as many do, you will believe Paul was excluding woman from
dominating men in ministry. If you
understand "having authority over" to "be killing,' then you will
believe Paul was refuting the teaching that killed the ministry of men.
If, however, you understand "having authority over" to mean
"being the source of something," then you may understand Paul was
saying that a woman cannot think of herself as being the source of man.
This last view seems to fit both the pagan cultural context of Paul's
letter and the literary context of his letter, which was, Adam was the source of
Eve, as seen in verse 13. 1
Timothy 2:12 and 13 might not be denying women from ministry as many believe.
It might be denying women from teaching the heresy that woman is the
source of man, thus subjecting man to woman in every aspect of life.
I
understand this view might b foreign to many who read this book, but, it is a
valid view that needs further thought and attention.
For
an exhaustive commentary on 1 Timothy 2:12 and 13, I recommend "I Suffer
Not a Woman" by Richard and Catherine Kroeger, published by Baker
Publishing Group, 1998. For a
detailed study on the liberation of women that began in the first-century B C, I
suggest reading "Roman Wives and Roman Widows" by Bruce Winter,
published by Wm. B. Eardmans Publishing Company, 2003.
As
an aside, the most impactful pastor in my life as a child was a woman.
She led me to Jesus, and when she laid her hands on me in prayer at the
age of six, Jesus healed me of Juvenile Diabetes.
I would not be alive today, but for the grace of God and this dear lady
pastor. One
New Testament example of women in ministry is seen in Romans 16:1 and 2.
Paul sent a woman named Phoebe on an "apostolic" mission.
Paul called her a servant, "diakonos" in Greek.
Diakonos was also the word used for a deacon in a church, thus the reason
why some suggest Phoebe was a deaconess. Paul
called Phoebe a helper, "prostatis" in Greek, which may also be
translated as patroness. A female
patroness in the first-century, Greco-Roman world would have been one in a place
of authority, even authority over men in some respects.
I suggest that this verse says a lot about how Paul felt about women in
ministry, something we cannot overlook.
In
Romans 16:7 we note the name Junias, a female name.
Paul called this woman an apostle.
We
read the names Pricilla and More
must be considered that is beyond the scope of this commentary when thinking
through the issue of women in leadership ministry.
The little I have written might suggest that we cannot exclude women from
ministry, and that might mean, as well, women as elders/pastors.
In order for you to lead others concerning this issue, it is necessary
for you to be well informed about the issue.
That requires further study than what I have provided here.
Leaving the topic of women in ministry, note
in verse 2 Paul called Archippus a soldier in the Lord.
This should remind us that the Christian life can be seen in terms of a
battle, as in, a battle with ourselves, a battle with the world around us, and a
battle with the devil. Paul wrote
about the issue of life being a battle in Ephesians 6:10 and following.
It is there that he lists all of our weapons of warfare at our disposal
as Christians, weapons, that if you study out, are all defensive, not offensive,
in nature. Who Archippus was, is unknown.
Some suggest that he might have been an elder in the local church.
If that is true, then, the lady named Apphia might well be some kind of a
church leader as well since Paul mentioned her in the same breath with Archippus.
Note the word "church" in this
verse. It is translated from the
Greek word "ekklesia," which in its common usage in the first-century,
Greco-Roman world meant a group of people taken out of a larger group of people
for a specific purpose. In that era
of human history a fishing guild, a farmer's co-operative, the Roman senate, the
Jewish Sanhedrin, or other such groups, were considered an ekklesia.
Ekklesia is a good word to describe the church
because Jesus has taken people for Himself out of the world for a specific
reason, that is, to perform a specific service or task that is to accomplish his
plans on this planet. It is my opinion that our English word church
as we think of it in today's western world, does not look much like how the New
Testament defines and describes church. I
often substitute the words "the community of believers belonging to Jesus
and to each other" for the word church as I read the New Testament because
those words better reflect the Biblical meaning of ekklesia as it pertains to
the people of God. In New Testament terms, there was one
community of believers, one church, for every city or locality.
Elders, not one elder, led and cared for those believers, the church.
Paul said that such a community of people gathered themselves together
for their meetings in the house belonging to Philemon.
We do not know how many believers gathered in his home.
We don't know where his home was located.
We know next to nothing about what Paul called the church that met in
Philemon's home. For further information on the meaning to the
New Testament church you can read my book entitled "The Community We Call
Church," subtitled, baptized into the Body of Christ.
For further reading on church leadership as taught in the New Testament,
you can read my book entitled "Plurality Of Elders." Verse
3 "Grace
to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
Verse 3 is a general greeting that Paul wrote
in most all of his letters. Many
people believe that such a greeting is a combination of both Jewish and Roman
style introductory remarks to a letter that was common in Paul's day.
The word "grace" is used in two ways
in the New Testament. The first way
is defined by God's favour and love directed towards us who do not deserve it.
It is often called "unmerited favour."
The second usage of the word grace seen in the New Testament is defined
by God's ability given us that is able to accomplish His plans and will in our
lives. This second definition of
grace is not always considered when defining grace, but if you read all of the
verses where the word grace is seen in the New Testament, you will note that the
definition of unmerited favour does not fit into all of these verses.
An example of this is found in 1 Corinthians 3:10.
"According
to God's grace that was given to me, I have laid a
foundation as a skilled master builder, and another builds on it. But each one
is to be careful how he builds on it." In this verse God's grace enabled Paul to do
God's will, which was, to become a master builder of the church.
The word "peace" also has two usages
in the New Testament. We have peace
with God, meaning, we are in right standing with Him.
We also have peace in God, meaning, we have peace in our hearts due to
the fact that we are in right standing with Him.
Paul, as he often does, connects God our
Father with the Lord Jesus Christ. This
hints at the Deity of Christ, meaning, Jesus was God in a human form while He
was on earth, and, Jesus is presently God in some kind of spiritual human form
in heaven. This is the Jesus of the
Bible. If you do not believe in and
embrace this definition of who Jesus is, you do not believe in the Jesus of the
Bible. That is a fake Jesus that
offers you nothing because that Jesus does not exist.
Note also that God is our Father.
I tend to believe that when the Bible speaks of God being a father, as
in, the Father of Jesus and our Father, God might be relating Himself to us in
metamorphic terms. That is to say,
He is saying something about Himself in human terms that we can understand.
One of these human terms is father. Father
means that God cares for us as a human father would care for his children.
Of course, God is more than a father, but, in human terms He treats His
people as if they are His beloved children and He is their caring Father. Chapter
2 The
Text 4 I always thank my God when I mention you in my prayers, 5 because I hear of your love for all the saints and the faith
that you have in the Lord Jesus. 6 I pray that your participation in the faith may become effective through
knowing every good thing that is in us for the glory of Christ. 7 For I have great joy and encouragement from your love, because the
hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you, brother. My
Commentary Verse
4 and 5 "I
always thank my God when I mention you in my prayers, because I hear of your
love for all the saints and the faith that you have in the Lord Jesus." Note the word "thank" in verse 4.
It is translated from the Greek word "eucharisteo."
This word simply expresses thankfulness.
We derive our English word "Eucharist" from this Greek word.
The word "Eucharist" is another word for a Communion Service,
also called, the Lord's Supper. So,
the next time you partake in a communion service, you should express
thankfulness to Jesus as you eat the bread and drink the wine because the bread
and the wine represent Jesus sacrificial death.
He took the penalty for our sin so we would not have to experience the
wrath of God. The Greek word "theos" is translated
as God in the New Testament, as it is in this verse.
This is where we derive our English word "theology" that means
the study of God. The word
"theology" has taken on a negative meaning in our post modern day, but
that is a tragedy. There is
absolutely nothing negative about studying God from the Bible.
There is no growth as a Christian without the study of Biblical theology.
Paul appears to be always praying.
You might wonder how that could be. There
are a number of kinds of prayers seen throughout the Bible, from simply talking
to Jesus or God to on-your-knees intercession type prayers.
The word prayer mention here seems to suggest to me the type of prayer
that Paul might speak to God in the routine of everyday life.
That is to say, when the thought of Philemon came to his mind, Paul
thanked God for him. On the other
hand, I'm sure Paul spent time on his knees, interceding, even with tears for
those he had been called to care for. As
Christians we should always be directing our thoughts to Jesus.
After reading Brother Lawrence's book entitled
"The Practice of the Presence of God" decades ago, I have attempted to
direct my thoughts to God instead of to myself.
That is prayer. Far too often
as Christians we say a morning prayer when we wake.
We may not say it, but since we don't think much about praying to God
during the day, we might as well say, "See you tonight God." I
will be back this evening." Biblical
prayer is not that kind of prayer. It
is a constant, being in the moment, type of prayer, and this is what Brother
Lawrence, a monk who lived in the 1600's understood prayer to be.
It is how I understand prayer to be as well.
It is from this simple type of prayer that we develop more interceding
praying in our lives.
The word love in verse 5 is translated from
the Greek word "agape," meaning, sacrificial love.
Paul was saying that Philemon was willing to sacrifice his own will for
the sake of Jesus and also for the sake of his brothers and sisters in Jesus.
This sacrificial love is the only kind of love the Bible speaks of and it
is the kind of love that Jesus desires for us to have for Him and for each
other. The highest form of love
demands some kind of sacrifice, and without any sacrifice, Biblical love is not
expressed. The Greek word "hagios" is
translated here as saints. We should
know that all true Christians are saints. The
Catholic understanding of the word "saint," that is, a special holy
person, is not Biblical. The Greek
word "hagios" simply means one who God has set aside for Himself.
If you are a Christian, God has set you aside, taken you out of the
world, for Himself. That means you,
if you are a Christian, are a saint, and you certainly do not have to die to
become a legitimate saint, as did the Catholic saints. The Greek word "pistis" is
translated here as faith. Pistis
means trust. Most every time you
read the words faith or believe in the New Testament, it is translated from the
Greek word pistis. The concept of
faith, in my opinion, has been greatly devalued in much of the western-world
church. For the most part in our
modern culture, and that includes church culture, faith just means giving mere
mental assent to something, and that is not what pistis means.
That is to say, if you just mentally assent, or agree to the fact of
Jesus' existence and the gospel message, you will be saved.
That is a false faith. You
will not be saved because of mere mental assent to the Biblical facts.
Salvation is based on trusting Jesus with your
life, not just believing He exists. It
is what the Greek word pistis is all about.
Good hermeneutics, that is, Biblical interpretation, demands that we must
understand words and concepts as the Bible understands them, not as we
understand them in today's world. Without
trusting Jesus with your life, there is no salvation.
John 3:16 states that whoever believes in
Jesus will not perish but have everlasting life.
This means that whoever trusts his life with Jesus will not perish but
have everlasting life. This is one
of those fundamental Biblical truths that we must get right.
With this in mind, and according to what Paul wrote here, Philemon
trusted his entire life with Jesus, his Lord and Saviour.
Verse
6 "I
pray that your participation in the faith may become effective through knowing
every good thing that is in us for the glory of Christ."
The word "participation" in this
verse is translated from the Greek word "koinonia."
This word is a very important word in the Greek New Testament.
It means to hold certain things in common with others.
Koinonia, as it applies to church, is important because it speaks to all
of the things we as Christians hold in common, not the least of whom is the Holy
Spirit who lives within the individual believer and among the corporate
expression of the church. There are
many other things we hold in common as well.
They are such things as, our mission, heaven, the gospel message, our
witness, church, and as Paul wrote here, our faith.
What does it mean to participate in faith, or,
hold our faith in common? Since
faith means trust, each Christian holds his trust in Jesus in common with other
Christians. In fact, as an
individual Christian trusts Jesus with his life, so the church collectively
trusts its life with Jesus. It is
this second aspect of faith that I understand Paul might well have had in mind
as he penned these words. Understanding
faith in this corporate sense is not always thought about these days, and that
is due to our secular culture's over-emphasis of individualism that has
infiltrated the church in the West. This participation of faith, or, holding in
common our corporate trust in Jesus, should be effective as we collectively
serve Jesus as the church. Genuine
faith, whether individual faith or collective faith, will produce genuine works
of love. It is what the New
Testament letter of James is all about. Faith
produces works of love is what I believe Paul meant with the use of the word
"effective" in this verse. Both Christians and the church are to be
effective representatives of Jesus. That
means both the individual Christian and the church are to put their faith, their
trust in Jesus into action that results in an effective accomplishing of God's
will. Salvation is more than just
receiving all we can from God. Salvation
is about doing all we can for Jesus. It
is being effective people of faith. This
is what the word "effective" implies here in verse 6.
The word "thing" in this verse is
translated from the Greek word "agathos" that speaks to the benefits
we receive from Jesus, and their are many of these benefits.
The point to be made here is that because of our relationship with Jesus,
both individually as a Christian and collectively as the church, all of what we
receive from Jesus can produce that which we need to effectively accomplish
God's will on earth. We often pray for this and for that to help us
in the work of the Lord. The fact of
the matter is that we already have what we are praying for.
Look at what 2 Peter 1:3 says about this. "His
divine power has given us everything required for life and godliness through the
knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness." When thinking of all of the good things in us
as Christians, whether that means Paul and Philemon as seen in verse 6, or us as
a local expression of church, each person in church has good things that
contribute to the health of the church and the work of the Lord.
This is seen in 1 Corinthians 12:4 through 6.
That passage reads: "Now
there are different gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different ministries,
but the same Lord. And there are different activities, but the same God produces
each gift in each person." Note the word "activities" in the
above passage. It is translated from
the Greek word "emergema" where we derive our English word
"energy." In short, and in
context, our English word "activities are in reference to our abilities and
talents that God puts within us at conception. Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 12:4 through 6
is that all three persons of the Trinity give us something good for the health
of the church and the work of the Lord that we are to facilitate.
God, the Father, provides us with talents, Jesus appoints us with
ministries, while the Holy Spirit gives us His gifts of the Spirit.
These, I believe, at least in part, are the good things Paul wrote about
here in verse 6. Paul ends this thought in this verse by saying
that this effectiveness that we have as Christians and as the church should be,
and will be, to the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Glorifying Jesus is the purpose for our very lives as Christians.
It is the reason why the church exists in the first place.
In Biblical terms, the word "glory"
means to speak well of someone or something.
As applied in this verse, both our lives and the life of the church must
speak well of Jesus. Our lives are
not about getting a good job, a house, a new car, a partner, children, and
whatever else you can think of. Our
lives are to make Jesus look good before all who come in contact with us.
It is the same with the church. All
that church does is to speak well of Jesus so the surrounding culture can see
Jesus as He really is. So, this is
the question. Does your life make
Jesus, who is your Lord and Saviour, look real good? Here
is another question. Does church
make Jesus look good? I will let you
answer these two questions for yourself. Verse
7 "For
I have great joy and encouragement from your love, because the hearts of the
saints have been refreshed through you, brother." Our English word "joy" in this verse
has nothing to do with happiness. The
state of being happy is a fleeting state of being.
It is an emotion that may leave us at a moment's notice.
Happiness is superficial. Happiness
is not what Paul had in mind when he penned the word "joy."
The Greek word "chara" translated as
joy throughout the New Testament speaks of an inner, deep-seated, heart-felt,
contentment within the midst of any and all situations.
Whether a situation is good, bad, or ugly, we have an inner contentment.
That is Biblical joy. The Greek word "splagchn0n" is
translated here as "hearts." This
Greek word is in reference to our bowels. In
metamorphic terms, much of the ancient world understood the seat of our emotions
and convictions was found in a person's bowels, not his heart, as we understand
it today. The translation of this
Greek word into our English word "heart" concerns our philosophy of
Biblical translation. If we were to
translate the Greek text in this instance literally, we would have to use our
English word "bowels," but that would make no sense to us in our
twenty-first century western world. We,
therefore, translate this Greek word into an English word that does make sense
to us, and that is the word "heart."
In our western-world day, the heart is the seat of emotion and
conviction. Today, a husband might say this to his wife.
"I love you with all of my heart."
A husband in the first-century, Greco-Roman world might tell his wife
this. "I love you with all of
my bowels." Today's husband
might say that he gives his heart away to his wife, whereas, in Paul's day he
might say that he gives his bowels away to his wife.
Try telling that one to your wife and see how she responds. As previously stated, our English word
"saints" is translated from the Greek word "hagios" that
simply means those who are holy, as in, separated from a larger group of people.
In the case of Christians in their relation to God, all Christians are
seen in the eyes of God as being holy, as being separated from the world and
given to Himself. The Catholic
stance that states only certain special Christians are holy saints is not
Biblical. Before we understand holiness in moral terms,
we need to first understand holiness in relational terms, that is, as Christians
we have been separated from the world and placed into the presence of God.
Then, once we understand our placement before God, we live as those who
are in God's presence, which is the secondary meaning of the word
"holy." Verse 7 tells us something about Philemon.
It tells us that he had a loving, even sacrificial loving, heart for his
fellow Christians. Some might think,
then, that this suggests that he was an elder of the local church.
That is speculative. We do
not know this for sure. Whatever the case, such a heart-felt love for fellow
believers should be demonstrated in the lives of all Christians, not just
leaders of the church.
Our English word "refreshed" in
verse 7 is translated from the Greek word "anapauo."
This Greek word implies a rest, as strengthening after doing much work.
You might think of it in terms of relaxation after a hard and difficult
day at work. Somehow, and we do not
have the details, Philemon was able to offer this rest to his brothers and
sisters in the Lord. Maybe it had
something to do with the fact that he had a large enough home to entertain his
brothers and sisters. Of course,
that is speculative.
Paul's
Appeal verses
8 through 22 The Text 8 For this reason, although I have great boldness in Christ to
command you to do what is right, 9 I appeal to you, instead, on the basis of love. I, Paul, as an
elderly man[c] and
now also as a prisoner of Christ Jesus, 10 appeal to you for my son, Onesimus. I became his father while
I was in chains. 11 Once he was useless to you, but now he is useful both to you and to
me. 12 I am sending him back to you—I am sending my very own heart. 13 I wanted to keep him with me, so that in my imprisonment for the
gospel he might serve me in your place. 14 But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that
your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will. 15 For perhaps this is why he was separated from you for a brief time,
so that you might get him back permanently, 16 no longer as a slave, but more than a slave—as a dearly loved
brother. He is especially so to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and
in the Lord. 17 So if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would me. 18 And if he has wronged you in any way, or owes you anything, charge
that to my account. 19 I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it—not to
mention to you that you owe me even your very self. 20 Yes, brother, may I benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart
in Christ. 21 Since I am confident of your obedience, I am writing to you,
knowing that you will do even more than I say. 22 Meanwhile, also prepare a guest room for me, since I hope that
through your prayers I will be restored to you. My
Commentary Verses
8, 9 and 10 "For
this reason, although I have great boldness in Christ to command you to do what
is right, I appeal to you, instead, on the basis of love.
I, Paul, as an elderly man and now also as a prisoner of Christ Jesus,
appeal to you for my son, Onesimus. I
became his father while I was in chains." Note the words "for this reason."
What reason was Paul writing about here?
The answer to this question goes back to verse 7 where Paul commended
Philemon for his sacrificial love that he had for his brothers and sisters in
Jesus. Because of this love, and the
relationship Paul had with Philemon, he was about to make an appeal for Philemon
to seriously consider. At this point
in the letter, Paul began a systematic step by step prologue to his appeal.
This was meant to encourage Philemon to act on Paul's appeal.
You will notice that each verse, each step that Paul takes, puts a little
more pressure on Philemon to respond to Paul's request in a positive way.
Paul told Philemon that he had the right to
command him to do as he says. Where
does Paul get this right? What right
does Paul have to make Philemon do anything?
I believe this right that Paul asserts here is based on his apostolic
authority. A serious reading of the
New Testament will show us that there is such a thing as apostolic authority.
One who has been called by God to be an apostle has a measure of
God-appointed authority over the church in which the apostle cares for, and the
words "care for" are primary. Apostolic authority has been abused by a
heavy-handed, dictatorial authority in the church over the centuries.
I believe the Catholic system of ecclesiastical authority is based on
this unbiblical, dictatorial, view of authority, and it all stems from the Dark
Age of the church after pagan influences inflicted the church during the forth
century and beyond. An apostle, pastor, or church leader, rightly
possesses a measure of authority, but he does not violate this authority by
being a dictator. His authority
comes from Jesus and he exercises this authority out of a pure, genuine love for
those in his care. Authority is
based on sacrificial love, not on a self-promoting dictating of one's will onto
another. This is exactly what Paul
was doing in this portion of his letter. He
had apostolic authority, but he would not base his appeal on authority.
Paul's appeal was based on the love of God
that had been clearly demonstrated in his life, a love by which Philemon had
greatly benefited. Paul had a
choice. He could demand obedience
from Philemon, or, he could make a loving appeal, based on their reciprocal
loving relationship. Paul chose the
second way, the right way, the most effective way to make any kind of appeal.
It is something that we should all put into practice, but far too often,
selfish ambition gets in the way. Paul called himself an elderly man and a
prisoner of Jesus in these verses. The
term elderly man is somewhat of a relative term.
What is elderly to one person might not be elderly to another.
That being said, culturally speaking, most agree that a man or a woman
aged forty years or older in the first-century Greco-Roman world was considered
elderly. This would, then, help us
understand what Paul might have meant when as a prisoner of Christ, he was an
elderly man. It might just clue us
in a bit concerning his age when he penned this letter and how old he was when
he died. Let us say that Paul, being an elderly man,
was forty five years old when he wrote this letter to Philemon.
Let us also say that he wrote this letter in AD 62, which is a good
possibility. When you subtract forty
five years from AD 62, Paul would have been born in or around the year AD 17.
If Paul died in AD 66, he would have been forty nine years old when he
died. All of this being the case,
and we cannot be certain, Paul would have been around eleven years old when
Jesus began his ministry. In
first-century Jewish tradition, young boys at the age of thirteen would normally
have begun to learn his life's career. We
know that Paul went to Paul had been imprisoned a number of times
for his association with Jesus. You
might ask how he could be a prisoner of Jesus when in fact most of his
imprisonments were in a Roman jail cell. Would
not he have considered himself a prisoner of the Roman authorities?
I am sure he would have, but the reason why he was in prison in the first
place was because of his association with Jesus.
For that reason, he viewed himself as a prisoner of Jesus.
Due to the fact that Paul was now an elderly
man, the imprisonment he was probably referencing was when he was put in prison
in Rome around AD 61 to AD 63, just a couple of years before his execution.
This seems to be the majority opinion among Bible scholars. In verse 10 we are now introduced to the name
Onesimus for the first time. We will
learn that Onesimus was a slave owned by Philemon.
Paul said that Onesimus had become his son while Paul was in prison.
Of course, Paul was not saying that Onesimus was his biological son.
Onesimus had become Paul's son in the Lord, which probably meant that
Paul led Onesimus to the Lord. We note from 1 Timothy 1:2 that Paul also
considered Timothy to be a son in the faith, although we know from Paul's first
letter to Timothy that Timothy had already been a Christian when Paul met him.
1 Timothy 1:2 reads: "To
Timothy, my true son in the faith. Grace,
mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord." Verse
11 "Once
he was useless to you, but now he is useful both to you and to me." Verse 11 tells us something about Onesimus in
relation to Philemon. For some
reason that we know nothing about, Onesimus seemed to be of no practical use for
Philemon. What that exactly means,
we do not know. He was just an
unproductive slave that apparently, or most believe, had run away from his
owner. Due to that, maybe Onesimus
was somewhat rebellious and did not do as he was told, and thus, made him
useless. I cannot say that to be
true for sure. It is speculative,
but Paul does say that Onesimus was of no use as a slave when it came to
Philemon. Onesimus might have been useless in the eyes
of Philemon, but he was very useful in the eyes of Paul.
In my thinking, Onesimus might well have become a Christian when he met
up with Paul, and just how these two met, we don't know.
I picture Paul leading Onesimus to Jesus while in prison.
At that point Onesimus became Paul's beloved son in the Lord, and thus,
Paul wanted the best for Onesimus. We
will see also that Onesimus became not only useful to Paul in a ministry sense,
but he became useful for Jesus as well, and that was important.
Onesimus was called by Jesus to some kind of ministry that Paul wanted to
be fulfilled in his life. Although Paul said that in the past Onesimus
was not very useful to Philemon, that was no longer the case.
Onesimus, now being a Christian, would have become very valuable to
Philemon, not just as a slave, but in the work of the Lord to which Philemon
himself had been called by Jesus. Onesimus
was no longer just a slave. He was a
fellow Christian. He was a fellow
minister of the Lord, one who would work alongside of Philemon in ministry, as
apparently was the situation with Paul. Verse
12 "I
am sending him back to you — I am sending my very
own heart." Here we see that Paul was sending his son in
the Lord, Onesimus, back to his slave owner Philemon.
Remember, at this point, Onesimus is still Philemon's slave.
Nothing had changed in this respect.
I wonder what thoughts went through Onesimus' mind and what feelings
penetrated his heart. Would he have
been a bit reluctant to return to his master?
Would he have been a bit afraid? They
are just a couple more questions for which we have no answers.
You see Paul's loving and gracious heart in
this verse. He was not only sending
Onesimus back to Philemon, but along with Onesimus, was Paul's very heart.
Paul came to love Onesimus. This
was typical Paul. Anyone who takes
the time to seriously study Paul, especially hi's second letter to the
Corinthian church, knows that Paul's loving heart drove all that he did. Verse
13 "I
wanted to keep him with me, so that in my imprisonment for the gospel he might
serve me in your place." I believe we learn a few things in the short
verse. Paul, not being a selfish man
returned Onesimus to Philemon, despite the fact that he was extremely beneficial
for Paul. It's what agape, selfless
love is all about, and again, that is the only kind of love the Bible knows. The fact that Onesimus could continue to
serve the needs of Paul and his ministry in the place of Philemon suggests to me
that Philemon was a co-worker in ministry with Paul.
Whatever ministry Philemon was called to administer, it seemed to have
been in conjunction with Paul and his ministry.
This is further to the reason why Paul would make this appeal to
Philemon. Verse
14 "But
I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed
might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will." At this point we still have not read just
what Paul's exact appeal to Philemon was. He
was still building his case prior to actually making his appeal.
Paul, as we have seen in his letter to the Romans, would have made a very
good lawyer. He was good at
systematically setting forth all that is necessary to build a successful case.
In part, that might well be why he chose to appeal his illegal
imprisonment by the Jews to the court in Remembering that Paul did have the use of
apostolic authority, Paul did not use it in this instance.
He would make this appeal with the consent of Philemon.
There is no hint of dictatorial authority here.
It was all about brotherly love, about ministering together in a
community of believers where co-workers talked things over and made joint
decisions.
Paul then told Philemon that he did not want
him to do his good deed out of obligation. This
good deed had to be made from Philemon's free will, not from a sense of
obligation. Lots can be said about
this verse in terms of free will. Paul alluded to this good deed, but as yet,
he has not told Philemon exactly what this good deed was to be, but I am sure
that Philemon could have easily guessed. He
was still building his case so it would help Philemon to do the right thing. Here we see the concepts of obligation and
free will, something we see throughout the entire Bible.
I believe the concept of free will goes right back to the Genesis account
as we read in Genesis, chapters 1 and 2. There,
most would say, that God gave Adam free will to either be obedient to Him or not
to be obedient. God warned Adam not to eat from the tree of
the knowledge of good and evil, and if he did choose to eat from the tree, he
would die. Without getting into all
of the theological technicalities of this event, I believe God gave Adam the
choice to obey or disobey. Adam had
free will. God did not make Adam
obey. God did not create Adam
without any means to make a personal choice.
It was Adam's choice to obey or not to obey based on his free will to
choose. From that point on, humans
have free will to obey God or disobey Him, understanding that there are
consequences for disobeying. We see free will in the life of Jesus.
He freely gave Himself to the will of God, His Father.
This freedom of choice became a real struggle while Jesus prayed in the All we do as Christians are to be done out of
free will, not out of obligation or constraint.
It was for this reason that Paul was making his appeal to Philemon based
on their loving relationship, and not on dictatorial authority that Philemon
would have been obligated to obey. This
is what agape style love is all about. Agape
love, meaning sacrificial love, is love that is demonstrated from a heart that
chooses to demonstrate sacrificial love. It
is not based on someone demanding you to love.
2 Corinthians 5:14 makes this clear in the life of Paul.
That verse reads: "For
the love of Christ compels us, since we have
reached this conclusion: If one died for all, then all died." Paul experienced the love of God in a most
dramatic and real way. It was this
love, this sacrificial love on God's part, that motivated Paul to do all that he
did. It is this love that should
motivate us to serve Jesus and all those who cross our paths at any given time.
It is God's love, not some kind of dictatorial mandate that should
motivate us to do the good deeds we are called to do.
I admit that at times we must force ourselves to love, but that initial
forcing to love is meant to stimulate us to love out of a heart that wants to
freely love. If a Christian leader, a pastor, an apostle,
dictates his will, then what he dictates is done out of wrong motives.
He needs to see the error of his ways and the one being dictated should
think seriously how he should respond to the dictatorial request.
I have learned over the years that you cannot
make someone love you. You can't
dictate love. Love must freely be
expressed from a heart of love. You
cannot demand your spouse, for example, to love you.
I think you would agree with me on that point. On
the other hand, when your spouse, out of the goodness of his or her heart,
freely expresses love to you, how great that feels.
Once again, Paul had apostolic authority over
those to whom he was called to lead, but how he used his authority is an example
to be followed by all church leaders. 2
Corinthians 10:8 clearly speaks of apostolic authority.
That verse reads: "For
if I boast a little too much about our authority,
which the Lord gave for building you up and not for tearing you down, I will not
be put to shame." Apostolic authority is all about doing
whatever is best to build up those to whom God has given the apostle the
responsibility to care for and lead. It
is not about the apostle building his own kingdom.
Verse
15 "For
perhaps this is why he was separated from you for a brief time, so that you
might get him back permanently," Clearly, there was a separation between
Philemon and Onesimus. What caused
this separation is not known. The
passive voice of the Greek verb "was separated" might suggest, and I
do say might suggest, that this separation was not caused by Philemon but by
Onesimus, and thus, some Bible teachers believe Onesimus ran away from Philemon
for one reason or another. Whatever caused this separation between
Philemon and Onesimus, Paul felt that it had a good purpose, and even a
God-inspired good ending. It is
quite possible that God had something to do with this separation, and that was
to bring Onesimus to Jesus so he could return to Philemon as a Christian brother
and co-worker in the service of the Lord. This might tell us something about Paul's
thinking processes concerning such things as bad situations.
That is to say, not all that appears to be bad always ends up being bad.
Bad can lead to good. God can
use bad situations and bring about a good ending.
So, I would be careful how you view unpleasant situations.
They might well be a tool in the hand of the Lord to bring about his will
in your life. Let us not always
blame the devil for the bad things or situations that come into our lives. Verse
16 "no
longer as a slave, but more than a slave — as a
dearly loved brother. He is especially so to me, but how much more to you, both
in the flesh and in the Lord." As far as I am concerned, this verse presents
the fundamental Biblical view concerning the issue of slavery.
As I said earlier, even though there is no specific Biblical command that
says, "you shall not own a slave," the Bible teaches that ownership of
a person is not acceptable in the sight of God.
Also, 1 Corinthians 6:20 tells us that Jesus
has purchased the true Christian with His death on the cross.
If, then, Jesus now owns the Christian because of this purchase, a slave
owner would be robbing Jesus of a Christian person if he claimed ownership of
that person. 1 Corinthians 6:20
reads: "for
you were bought at a price. So glorify God with your body." Paul told Philemon to receive Onesimus back
to himself, not as a slave, but as a dearly loved brother in the Lord.
The phrase "no longer as a slave" says it all. It
is my opinion, then, that Paul was telling Philemon to free Onesimus from
slavery so he could be the productive servant of Jesus that he had proven to be.
Onesimus now belonged to Jesus. Jesus,
not Philemon was Onesimus' master. If
Philemon kept Onesimus as a slave, he would be robbing Jesus of His slave, and
the word "slave" here is an appropriate word.
I will comment on the word "slave" as it has come to be known
in part two of this book.
Paul said that Onesimus would be useful to
Philemon, both in the flesh and in the Lord.
Useful in the flesh would probably mean that Onesimus might still carry
out some of the activities of service for Philemon as if he were still a slave.
That might be the case, but he could still freely do these activities as
a free brother in Christ who had a heart to serve Philemon, and just maybe with
a paycheck. Paul also said that Onesimus would be useful
to Philemon in the work of the Lord. This
would make Onesimus a co-worker and a co-worker who is one on the same cultural
level as his fellow co-workers. Again,
in my thinking, that hints at freedom for Onesimus.
If Onesimus was an equal co-worker in the service of the Lord with
Philemon, does not that suggest freedom on the part of Onesimus? The bottom line to this verse is that even if
you think that Paul was not directly telling Philemon to free Onesimus, although
I do not see it that way, you must admit that Onesimus must be treated as if he
was a free brother in Jesus. Verse
17 "So
if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would me." We are now getting to Paul's appeal to
Philemon. The words "welcome
him as you would me" confirms to me that Paul wanted Philemon to release
Onesimus from slavery. I wonder what
went through Philemon's mind when he read these words. Could
he have thought, "but Onesimus is my slave and you are my fellow worker in
the Lord, Paul. Do you really want
me to free him? Can I afford
that?" We don't know how
Philemon responded to Paul's appeal, but it is my guess that he did respond to
this appeal in a positive way. I
picture Onesimus returning to Philemon and upon his arrival, fell into the
loving arms of Philemon, his brother in Jesus.
What a reunion that must have been.
It is my opinion that when Paul wanted
Philemon to receive Onesimus as he would receive himself, that meant, receive
Onesimus as a free man, not a slave. Paul
was a free man, a Roman citizen. Paul
wanted the same for his son in the Lord. This,
I believe, is the bottom line to what the Bible says about slavery.
Since there is no specific Bible verse that says "you shall not own
a slave," the Bible does oppose the ownership of slaves.
Paul's words tell me this. Once again, what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians
6:20 adds to what I have just written. I
will repeat what Paul wrote in that verse. "for
you were bought at a price. So glorify God with your body." Anyone who is a truly born-of-the-Spirit
Christian, and that is the only kind of Christian there is, is one whom Jesus
has bought with His blood. He or she
no longer belongs to himself or herself. In
short, Jesus died on the cross in order to own as many people as possible.
Jesus now owns every Christian. That
being the case, how can a Christian own another person, especially another
Christian? That would be robbery.
If, then, Philemon did not release Onesimus and set him free, as Paul was
free, then Philemon would be robbing Jesus of one of His prize possessions.
Again, in my thinking, this is the bottom line to how the Bible views the
practice of slavery. In Part Two of
this book I will explain this in much more detail.
Note the word "partner" in this
verse. This tells us that to one
degree or another, Paul and Philemon were co-workers in the service of the Lord.
They shared in a common ministry. The
Greek word "koinonos" is translated as partners in this verse.
As previously stated, the various forms of the Greek word
"koinonia" mean to share something in common with others.
Christians share many things in common, not the least of which is the
Holy Spirit. In the way Paul used
this word here tells us that Paul and Philemon shared a common ministry, but
what form that ministry took, we do not know.
Verse
18
"And
if he has wronged you in any way, or owes you anything, charge that to my
account." Again, we learn something about Paul in this
verse, and that is, he was more then willing not only to admonish Philemon in
what he should do, but he was willing to repay Philemon for any wrong or
anything Onesimus owed him. Paul was
backing up his words with concrete actions.
It would be, thus understood, that Onesimus did not have the ability to
repay Philemon for any wrong done to him, or, any money or items that he might
have taken from Philemon. This does
suggest that Onesimus was in some kind of debt to Philemon.
We see the sacrificial love of God in Paul's
life. He was more than willing to
repay another person's debt, and isn't that just like Jesus Himself.
That is exactly what Jesus' death on the cross did for you and I.
There is an old Christian song that put it this way. "He paid a debt He did not owe. Verse
19 "I,
Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay
it — not to mention to you that you owe me even your
very self." Further to build his case, Paul told Philemon
that this letter was written with his own hand writing.
Paul did not dictate this letter to someone to write as he often did.
This sentence was written to put a bit more pressure on Philemon to do
the right thing, as Paul said back in verse 8.
Beyond that, Paul added a good bit of pressure by reminding Philemon that
Philemon owed himself to Paul. Paul
was not using his apostolic authority here, but this verse does make it clear
that Paul was applying the pressure on Philemon.
Such pressure might be considered culturally incorrect these days, but
sometimes such pressure is needed to convince a person to do the right thing.
What Paul meant when he said "you owe me
even your very self" we do not know. Obviously,
Paul and Philemon had built up a working relationship in some way or another.
Paul was clearly alluding to some past event.
Maybe Paul led Philemon to Jesus, and in that sense of the word, Philemon
owed his life to Paul. That is a
good possibility. Paul was more than willing to pay Philemon
what Onesimus owed Philemon. With
this act of love, in combination with Philemon owing his very life to Paul,
Philemon had a double reason to receive Onesimus back as a free brother in
Christ and not as a slave. Paul
certainly was applying the pressure on Philemon at this point in the letter.
You might even say that Paul was twisting Philemon's arm, so to speak. Verse
20 "Yes,
brother, may I benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart in Christ." The Greek word "adelphos" is
translated into English here as brother. This
Greek word comes from the Greek word "philos" that means brotherly
love, or reciprocal love. That is to
say, philos is a free flowing exchange of love between two or more people.
We are not talking about agape love, that is, sacrificial love here.
Paul is making the point that he and Philemon have a brotherly exchange
of reciprocal love built into their relationship.
This means, therefore, that as Paul gives himself to Philemon, so
Philemon gives himself to Paul. So,
as Paul gave himself to Philemon in this particular situation, so Philemon could
return the favour, or, refresh Paul's heart while he was in prison by freeing
Onesimus, his son in the Lord from slavery.
In this way, Philemon would be doing something good for Paul.
This speaks to the brotherly love and compassion that we as Christians
should have for one another. With the above paragraph in mind, every time
you call a fellow Christian a brother or sister, understand that the words
"brother" and "sister" imply that you have a loving,
reciprocal relationship with that brother or sister in Jesus.
Words do matter, and when it comes to the words "brother" and
"sister," how often do we think about those words being words that
represent a free flow of reciprocal love?
We should note that back in verse 1 Paul
called Philemon his friend. As I
mentioned back in my commentary on verse 1, our English word "friend"
is translated from a derivative of the Greek word "agape," which
means, sacrificial love. So, Paul
wrote in terms of both sacrificial love and brotherly love, when it came to his
relationship with Philemon. I would
suggest that both aspects of love are important in a successful relationship.
Sacrificing yourself for another in connection with a free flow of love
is important in maintaining a healthy relationship.
One thing that will certainly kill a
relationship is when love only flows from one direction without being returned.
Sooner or later such a one way expression of love saddens the one
expressing the love. Free flowing
love is essential to a good relationship. Brotherly
love, is thus, reciprocal love flowing between two or more people.
Verse
21 "Since
I am confident of your obedience, I am writing to you, knowing that you will do
even more than I say."
Paul went a bit farther here in applying the
pressure on Philemon. As I have
previously said, Paul could have used his apostolic authority to demand that
Philemon receive Onesimus as a brother in the Lord and not a slave.
Paul felt that strongly to be the will of God.
Paul did not demand anything from Philemon. He appealed to Philemon on
the basis of being a brother in Christ, a co-worker, and those who had a
reciprocal love for one another. By
doing this, Paul was applying a good measure of pressure with his request.
Even the word "obedience" in this
verse puts added pressure to Paul's request.
Paul's appeal was more than a suggestion that Paul was requesting of
Philemon. It was something to be
obeyed because it was the right thing to do.
The fact that Paul had confidence in Philemon
to obey him on this particular point is yet another bit of additional pressure.
Philemon would have read this letter and maybe he would have thought
something like this. "Paul has
confidence in me. I should then do
as he says." Maybe you have never noticed this before, but
every sentence that Paul wrote here applies a bit more pressure on Philemon than
the previous sentence. Nevertheless,
this pressure was based on the relationship Paul had with Philemon, a
relationship that Paul must have known could stand the pressure.
This verse ends by Paul saying that he
believed that Philemon would even go beyond Paul's request to receive Onesimus
back as a brother in Christ. What
Paul said here can easily be understood in terms that Paul expected Philemon to
free Onesimus from slavery. Receiving
Onesimus back as a brother in Jesus is one thing, but freeing Onesimus from
slavery goes a step beyond that, and freedom for Onesimus, I believe, is what
Paul was really asking Philemon to do.
Verse
22 "Meanwhile,
also prepare a guest room for me, since I hope that through your prayers I will
be restored to you."
In the greeting of this letter we learned
that the Christians routinely gathered for meetings in Philemon's house.
Here, we see mention of this house again, and apparently it was a good
size house. The CSB uses the words
"a guest room" that might suggest that this house was big enough to
have more than one guest room. That
being said, the Greek word translated as "guest room" in the CSB
simply means a lodging place. That
does not necessarily mean that
Philemon had multiple guest rooms as we would understand guest rooms in our day.
It does mean that this house was big enough for a few guests.
Philemon had to have been financially well off to have a large house and
at least one slave. Wealthy people
can be useful in the service of the Lord and this is one case where monetary
wealth became beneficial in the service of the Lord. Paul's hope, as seen here, was to be released
from prison so he could visit with Philemon once again.
Whether Paul ever got to see Philemon again, is unknown.
Much speculation has been given to the idea
if Paul was ever released from his imprisonment in and around AD 61 to AD 63.
Some suggest that he was never released but stayed in prison until his
execution in and around AD 64 to AD 66. Others
suggest that he was released from prison and headed to "... whenever
I travel to Romans
15:28 also tells us that it was Paul's desire to preach the gospel of Jesus in "So
when I have finished this and safely delivered the funds to them, I will visit
you on the way to Many people believe, as I tend to believe,
that Paul did make it to Chapter
4 verses
23 through 25 The
Text 23 Epaphras, my
fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends My
Commentary Verses
23 and 24 "Epaphras,
my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings, and so do Mark,
Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my coworkers." Church
is the community of Christians belonging to Jesus and also belonging to each
other. The word
"belonging" is important here. There
should be a supportive and functional relationship built between the individual
Christian and Jesus. There should
also be a supportive and functional relationship built up between the individual
Christian and those to whom he or she has been placed alongside in the Body of
Christ. Implied in both of these
supportive and functional relationships is the sense of belonging.
Christians
are not to be isolated from other Christians.
Christians are not islands unto themselves.
We see this Biblical truth here in verses 23 and 24.
Paul never ministered alone. He
served Jesus with others, those to whom Jesus had place him alongside in the
Body of Christ. It is what Paul
taught, as seen in 1 Corinthians 12. You
could call it teamwork, and these two verses show us the team that Paul had been
working with in this period of is life.
We
see that Paul was not the only one in prison on account of Jesus.
A man named Epaphras was also in prison.
It was the time in the early church that imprisonment was commonplace.
Between this time in history and about AD 300 there were ten periods of time
when Christian persecution was common in the Verse
25 "The
grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit." Paul ends his short letter to Philemon with a
graceful ending. The Bible defines
grace in two ways. The first way is
God's unmerited or undeserved favour directed towards us.
The second way is God's divine ability given to us to accomplish His will
in our lives. In both senses of the
word grace, Paul's prayer for Philemon was that God's undeserved favour would
continue to be directed towards Philemon as Philemon continued to receive the
divine ability to do God's will. God's
will in this particular instance was to receive Onesimus back as a brother in
Jesus and free him from the bondage of slavery, and thus, the reason for this
letter. Paul ends this letter with the words
"with your spirit." Any
growth as a Christian will only come through our spirit's interaction with the
Holy Spirit. Of course, this does
not mean we disregard our intellect. It
is with the Holy's Spirit's help, along with our God-given intellect that
produces spiritual growth. When it
comes to the Word of God being realized in our lives, I believe it enters our
mind, and then sinks into our hearts where it becomes the conviction by which we
live. Closing Remarks Paul had only one reason to write this letter
to Philemon, his fellow co-worker in the gospel of Christ.
Philemon was to receive his slave Onesimus back as a dearly beloved
brother in Jesus, which I believe, implies that Onesimus should be released from
slavery, or at the least, treated as if he was not a slave.
We learn from Paul that he did possess
apostolic authority that he could have used to command Philemon to treat
Onesimus as a free brother in the Lord. Paul
refused to exercise this authority, as was his normal routine.
Instead, he appealed to Philemon on the basis of their relationship, a
relationship rooted in both sacrificial love and brotherly reciprocal love.
That being said, it is clear that Paul applied much pressure on Philemon
to do, as he put it, the right thing. The
right thing was to treat Onesimus as a free brother in the Lord. How Paul dealt with this particular issue
with this particular brother in Christ is an example for us all today, and that
includes church leaders. Church
leaders serve Jesus by serving, not dictating, those to whom Jesus has called
them to love, care, and lead. A study of this little book of our Bible
leaves us with much to consider and put into practice, both in our individual
lives as Christians and our corporate life as the church.
Now, in part two of this book, I will set forth what I believe the Bible
says about the topic of slavery. Slavery
as been an age old topic of discussion. PART TWO The
Bible And Slavery From
time to time I have been asked questions about the practice of slavery and what
the Bible has to say about this disturbing issue.
The following two questions always seem to emerge in any discussion that
I have been involved in concerning this subject.
They are as follows: What
does the Bible really say about slavery? Why
doesn't the Bible overtly oppose the practice of slavery? These
are important questions. Some might
think that the practice of slavery is outdated, and thus, any Biblical study of
the subject is irrelevant, but that is far from the present reality of things.
Slavery did not end with the Civil War in I
will attempt to answer the above two questions in the following brief few pages.
I admit that my answer to these questions, and others like them, may or
may not be acceptable to Biblical skeptics, but they are my answers based on my
present understanding of Biblical theology.
So, consider what I say as you think and study this issue through for
yourself. If
you have never thought about the Biblical view of slavery, this might just be an
introduction for you to continue your search in finding the answers.
Sooner or later, someone may ask you what you think the Bible says about
this issue. It's always better to
know in advance how to answer the questions that will be asked of you instead of
floundering around in the darkness of ignorance. I
am reminded of what the apostle Peter wrote about the Christian being capable of
providing reasonable, thought out, answers to questions posed by critics of
Christian doctrine. 1 Peter 3:15
reads:
"...
but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, ready at any time to give a
defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you." It
has always been my desire to be able to give a reason for why I believe as I do,
and hopefully, as a Christian, you have the same desire.
Here is a brief introduction about what I believe the Bible states about
the practice of slavery. More could
be said, but this is sufficient to begin one's study on the subject.
The
Human Condition Slavery
has been one of several ongoing and persistent disturbing blemishes that have
infected humanity as long as we understand humanity to have existed.
We wonder why people can be so cruel to fellow human beings.
Why do we kill each other? Why
did Cain kill Abel? Why do some
people purchase, sell, enslave, and mistreat his fellow man?
Many of us just can't figure that one out, but there is a Biblical answer
for why man was, is, and ever will be, so brutal to his fellow man.
In
Biblical terms, the fundamental answer to these disturbing questions is found in
Jeremiah 17:9. In one simple
statement, Jeremiah states the Biblical thinking, and thus, God's mindset
concerning the basic underlying condition of man.
Jeremiah 17:9 reads as follows.
"The
heart is more deceitful than anything else, and
incurable — who can understand it?" Jeremiah's
portrayal of the human condition is far from our western-world's cultural
concept of man today. Our
present-day, western-world, cultural consensus in this matter is that man, at
least for the most part, is inherently good at his core.
Obviously, Jeremiah would emphatically disagree with today's cultural
assessment of the human condition, and for good reason.
When push comes to shove, so to speak, how does man behave?
He becomes much more nasty than nice.
As
I type these words in the spring of 2021, the population of the world is caught
up in a dreadful fear because of the spread of the Coronavirus across the globe.
This virus has no national or ethnic boundaries.
Like an invading covert army of terrorists, it is attacking all kinds of
people, in all kinds of places. Whatever
the nationality or the ethnicity, the general public is terrified with a
disabling fear. Everyone seems to be
panicking because of this viral pandemic. Will
I get the virus? Will I die?
Will I lose my job? Will I
lose my life's savings? Will my
mutual funds dry up? Will I have the
money to feed myself? Will I infect
my family with the virus? Will this
lead to a dictatorial government that will force me to do as it demands?
Will this mess ever end? Do I
need to buy more toilet paper? On
and on it goes. The list of
questions with little to no answers seems to be eternal. The
above questions, and others like them, haunt many people throughout the global
community, and a global community it sure has become.
In these fear-filled days, when push comes to shove, people shove back
pretty hard. Things get pretty
nasty, as was seen in the following situation.
My
friend works as a cashier in a local store.
She had a small container of hand sanitizer on the counter to keep her
hands free from the virus. You can't
purchase hand sanitizers anywhere at this point in time.
People are stockpiling all they can get, and they certainly won't share.
The little bottle of hand sanitizer belonged to my friend.
It was not for sale, and that was probably quite obvious.
One
young arrogant young man approached my friend at the counter.
Thinking the hand sanitizer might be for sale, he asked her the price.
She responded by saying that it was not for sale.
It was her personal bottle of hand sanitizer. With a few harsh, ignorant,
pathetic swear words, he grabbed the bottle.
As he rushed out of the store he said this.
"It's mine now." He
left the store in a hurry with a small stolen bottle of hand sanitizer that was
worth, maybe two dollars at the most. When
push comes to shove, people can shove back real hard.
Isn't that, at least in part, what Jeremiah was writing about?
Isn't that what is rooted deep within the human heart?
When things get tough, we don't always rise to the top and respond with
grace. We often sink to the bottom
and explode with all kinds of evil that lurks deep within our souls.
As
Christians, we embrace Jeremiah 17:9 to be foundational when it comes to our
thinking about the human condition. You
may think you are better than Jeremiah's portrayal of man, but you aren't.
You may think you are pretty good compared to most others, and that might
well be the case, but such thinking is problematic.
It's a problem because when God looks at you, He does not compare you
with your nasty neighbour. He
compares you with Himself, and that is where you are a miserable failure.
In that sense of the word, you are as Jeremiah wrote.
Believe me, you really are. Compared
to God, you are no different than your nasty neighbour and when you get pushed,
you push back.
Another
word that Jeremiah does not use in his portrayal of man in Jeremiah 17:9 but is
just as relevant to this discussion is the word "sin."
The basic and simplest definition of the word "sin" as it
applies to man is that man consistently misses the mark of God's righteous
standards by which he should live, and, there is no exception.
Biblically thinking, and I am thinking Biblically, states that we all sin
as the apostle Paul wrote in Romans 3:23. "For
all have sinned and fall short of the glory of
God." The
words "fall short" in the above verse do portray the Biblical
definition of sin as being "missing the mark" of God's righteous
standards expected for us to live out in our lives.
Further to us committing sin, Paul wrote that our very nature, that is,
who we are at our core, is sinful. Romans
7:18 reads: "For
I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh.
For the desire to do what is good is with me, but there is no ability to
do it." Look
also at what Paul wrote in Romans 7:24 and 25.
"What
a wretched man I am! Who will rescue
me from this body of death? Thanks
be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So
then, with my mind I myself am serving the law of God, but with my flesh, the
law of sin." There
is no way around it. As Christians,
our concept of the human condition must comply with what the Bible teaches about
the human condition. Jeremiah, Paul,
and all other Biblical personalities agree; at the core of who we are, we are
more sinful than what we realize, and, there is no human cure for this sinful
sickness that has infected every human being that has ever lived or ever will
live. In Biblical terms, there is
only one hope, one cure for humanity, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ's
presence in one's life, as Paul wrote in Romans 7:25, as seen above.
So
why have I said all of the above? When
thinking of the human condition as defined in Biblical terms, it is no wonder
the pathetic practice of slavery has been, and still is, an ongoing blemish on
humanity. The root cause of this
evil practice is buried deep within the evil heart of man. Slavery
In The American South We
have all read books, watched movies, and heard the brutally sad stories of
slavery in the American south prior to the Civil War.
It is a dismal commentary, a darkened stain, on the history of the While
in "This
room," he said, "was the room where the master of this plantation
would insert a branding iron into the flames of that fireplace you see at the
far end of the room. As if he was
branding his cattle, he'd insert the iron rod into the flames until it was red
hot. He'd pull it out of the fire
and immediately burn his trademark of ownership onto the skin of a fellow
human." The
branding of slaves makes our modern term "pride of ownership"
disgustingly relevant to this discussion. Pride
of ownership is a real-estate term that means one takes pride in owning a home
instead of renting a home. You might
say that pride of ownership prior to the Civil War in the United Sates included
the pride of owning a slave instead of hiring an employee.
I
cannot begin to imagine the horror of the moment when the burning hot branding
iron burnt a trademark into the skin of a person considered to be someone's
possession. The screams of terror
from the poor black person being torched with a red hot iron would have been
excruciating, but did the master of the plantation care?
Obviously, he felt no mental or emotional anguish from his actions.
It was the nature of his business, the culture of the day.
It was part of the means by which he provided for his family.
As
I stood before that fireplace, torturing a fellow human being in such a way was
hard for me to comprehend, but it was the reality in the American south until a
Civil War brought the pathetic practice to an end.
It is sad to say, that even though the practice of slavery came to and
end, prejudice never ends. Even in
our so-called era of cultural and religious tolerance, bias and prejudice lurks
its ugly head in all corners of our culture.
If we are honest, you have to admit, we do not practice tolerance.
We practice what I call "selective tolerance." Slavery
Banned In Unlike
the American experience, the abolition of slavery in The
fact that the Biblical gospel of Jesus, and the presence of Jesus in the lives
of many individuals, was influential in banning the evil practice of slavery in I
admit that there is no recorded statement from the lips of Jesus that overtly
opposed slavery. That was not his
mission on earth. That being said,
when Jesus comes into someone's life, it is clear, that someone opposes the
buying, selling, and ownership of a human being.
This fact is fundamental to how the Bible views slavery.
It cannot be ignored. It
cannot be disregarded in our attempt to understand the Biblical position on this
matter. Let
us now see, at least in part, what the Bible has to say about slavery.
Slavery
In Noah's Day In
the following pages I will attempt to point out some of the relevant Old
Testament and New Testament passages concerning what the Bible has to say about
the practice of owning slaves. I
will conclude by saying that even though the Old Testament, and really, the
Bible, does not overtly and openly oppose the practice of slavery, there is no
doubt, at least in my thinking, it does oppose the practice.
It is something that critics of Biblical theology seem to always, ether
intentionally or unintentionally, overlook.
We
will begin our survey of the Bible in the Old Testament where slavery is first
mentioned in the very first book of the Bible.
Genesis 9:25 reads: "He
[Noah] said: ' He
will be the lowest of slaves to his brothers.'" The
context of Genesis 9:25 is this. After
the great flood, Noah began to cultivate a vineyard that provided the grapes to
produce wine. In the above instance,
he got drunk from the wine he had made. Ham,
one of Noah's three sons, who became the father of the Canaanites, found his
drunken and naked father inside of his father's tent.
When Noah awoke from his drunken stupor, he was quite upset with Ham.
Why Noah was so angry with Ham is not known.
The text does not give us any reason for Noah's anger towards his son.
It has been speculated, and it is speculation, that while Noah was drunk,
his son Ham had committed some kind of homosexual sin with his drunken, naked
father. Whatever really did happen
in Noah's tent, the result was that Noah cursed his son Ham and his descendents
by proclaiming, even predicting, that Ham and those in his lineage who would
come after him would be the lowest of all slaves.
The
point to be made from this situation is that even as early as Noah's day and
before, whatever era that was, slavery was a common practice.
Slavery goes back a very long way in human history.
We don't need the Bible to tell us that.
There is plenty of extra-Biblical and ancient material that confirms the
practice of slavery among the peoples of the ancient world.
Slavery
In The Old Testament Law Of Moses God
instituted guidelines concerning slavery into Judaism as seen in what has been
called the Torah in Judaism, or the Law of Moses, in Christianity.
You might say that the Law of Moses, or the Torah, was the founding
constitution for what would become the newly created nation of "Then
all the people [the Jews] responded together, 'We will do all that the LORD
has spoken.' So Moses brought the
people’s words back to the LORD." Exodus
24:3 confirms the willingness on the part of the Jews to keep their end of the
covenant. That verse reads: "Moses
came and told the people all the commands of the LORD
and all the ordinances. Then all the people responded with a single voice, 'We
will do everything that the LORD has commanded.'" The
Law of Moses contained six hundred and thirteen laws that would govern the Jews
and the State of Israel when it would later come into existence.
In more recent times, due to a better knowledge and understanding of
ancient, near-eastern culture and history, many Biblical historians now view
these six hundred and thirteen laws as wisdom literature.
This means that these six hundred and thirteen so-called rules might well
have been considered wise sayings that if lived out in daily life would cause
the Jews and their nation of When
understanding the Law of Moses in its near-eastern, ancient setting, we should
also realize that some, but not all, of what you read in the Law of Moses could
be found in other ethnic and cultural environments.
In those cultural settings, slavery was commonplace, especially after one
tribal nation conquered another tribal nation.
Those conquered would more often than not become slaves of their
conqueror. When
the Law of Moses was first enacted, the Jews themselves were recent victims of
slavery in During
Old Testament times there were basically two types of slaves.
They were; chattel (permanent) slaves and debt slaves.
This was the case throughout the ancient near-eastern world, which
included Jewish culture. When one
ethnic people conquered another ethnic people, the conquered usually became
chattel slaves of their conqueror. When
one could not find his way out of indebtedness, he could submit to slavery as a
means to repay his debt.
A
close study of the guidelines concerning slavery in the Law of Moses shows us
that these laws were meant to protect slaves in a world-wide culture where
slaves were often abused and mistreated. This
point is also often overlooked by critics of the Bible. Like
the guidelines concerning slavery, similar guidelines concerning divorce were
instituted in the Law of Moses, the Torah. These
regulations were meant to protect a divorced wife who would have been kicked out
of the home for no valid reason. She
would have been stigmatized as an adulteress in her civil community even though
she probably wasn't an adulteress. Like
slavery, the practice of divorce was not banned in the Law of Moses.
It was, however, regulated to protect an innocent wife.
In
Matthew 19:8 we read that God conceded to the practice of divorce in Old
Testament times because of man's evil hearts.
Jesus said this about divorce in that verse.
"He
told them, 'Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of the hardness of
your hearts, but it was not like that from the beginning." It
is my position that as God conceded to divorce in Old Testament times, as stated
by Jesus, He also conceded to the practice of slavery, and for the same or
similar reason. Man's hearts are
continually evil. Man being
inherently evil is God's stance when it comes to humanity, as seen in Jeremiah
17:9. I remind you of what Jeremiah
wrote. "The
heart is more deceitful than anything else, and
incurable — who can understand it?" As
an aside, you can read the divorce regulations, or words of wisdom in
Deuteronomy 24:1 through 4. What
the apostle Paul said in Acts 17:30 is important to the idea that God overlooked
certain sins in Old Testament times. That
verse reads: "Therefore,
having overlooked the times of ignorance, God now commands all people everywhere
to repent," According
to Paul, now, in these New Testament times, God does not overlook sins and our
ignorance of sins as He once did in Old Testament times. The
Law of Moses had other things to say about the practice of slavery that portray
how God feels about the practice and how slaves should be treated.
Concerning
the debt slaves that I mentioned above, Exodus 21:2 comes into play.
Although it might be debated, Exodus 21:2 appears to be in reference to
debt slaves. This verse states that
a slave must be set free after six years of enslavement.
It reads: "When
you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for six years; then in the seventh he is
to leave as a free man without paying anything." The
reason why I suggest the above verse is in reference to debt slaves is because,
as the next verse I quote states, a Jew could not enslave a Jew for life.
Leviticus 25:44 says this: "Your
male and female slaves are to be from the nations around you; you may purchase
male and female slaves." The
above passage obviously does not condemn or ban the practice of slavery.
I certainly cannot argue that point.
I can only conclude, as I have pointed out, that God at this particular
time in history had His reasons for not overtly opposing slavery.
He had other plans. I believe
that Scripture states that these other plans included Jesus, and how He could
change the heart of an evil man that would in turn dispose of this evil practice
as well as other such evil practices. I
maintain that you can legislate morality all you want, but mere legislation
alone cannot change the heart of man. It
is obvious, that in our western-world today, where slavery is illegal, the
market for sex-slaves is alive and thriving in the underground economy.
Young girls are being kidnapped and sold into slavery to satisfy the lust
of men around the world.
You
can also educate people in matters of morality, but education alone does not
always change the behaviour of the one being educated.
Everyone knows that drinking and driving is not good, but people still
drink and drive. Matters of
morality, and that includes slavery, are matters of the heart, and that is where
Jesus comes into the picture. In
Biblical terms, the Spirit of Jesus comes into the life of the believer, and
from the heart of that individual, his behaviour begins to change.
It is for this reason, that the Law of Moses itself could never change
the heart of man. It could only
regulate man's actions. The
Law of Moses instituted what was called the "Year of Jubilee."
Every fifty years would see the cancelation of all debt and the freeing
of debt slaves back to their own property and clan.
Leviticus 25:10 through 13 reads as follows: "You
are to consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim freedom in the land for all its
inhabitants. It will be your
Jubilee, when each of you is to return to his property and each of you to his
clan. The fiftieth year will be your Jubilee; you are not to sow, reap what
grows by itself, or harvest its untended vines. It is to be holy to you because
it is the Jubilee; you may only eat its produce directly from the field. In this
Year of Jubilee, each of you will return to his property."
The
Year of Jubilee should say something about how the Old Testament, and thus God,
views life-long slavery. Deuteronomy
23:15 reads: "Do
not return a slave to his master when he has escaped from his master to
you." Why
would a slave run away from his master? That
is not all that difficult to figure out. The
slave probably ran away from his master because he was being mistreated, and
thus, the reason for the legislation not to return a run-away slave to his evil
master. This regulation protected
the mistreated slave. Exodus
21:26 reads: "When
a man strikes the eye of his male or female slave and destroys it, he must let
the slave go free in compensation for his eye." Once
again, this regulation, or word of wisdom as some suggest, protects the slave by
allowing him to be set free when physically abused.
Also, once again, this does not overtly oppose slavery or ban the
practice, but it does protect the slave when he or she has been mistreated.
Exodus
21:20 says: "When
a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod, and the slave dies under his
abuse, the owner must be punished." Again,
the above regulation says something about how God viewed slavery, even in Old
Testament times. The law punished
the slave master who killed a slave. This
cannot be overlooked in our study of slavery in the Law of Moses.
Murder is still murder, even if it was a slave who was murdered.
Exodus
3:7 reads: "Then
the LORD said, 'I have observed the misery of my
people in Clearly,
God is not overjoyed to see slaves being mistreated, as Jeremiah 34:16 states.
"But
you have changed your minds and profaned my name.
Each has taken back his male and female slaves who had been let go free
to go wherever they wanted, and you have again forced them to be your
slaves." Re-enslaving
a person after he was set free is disgusting in the sight of God.
It was not permitted in the Law of Moses.
There
are many more passages in the Law of Moses and throughout the Old Testament
related to slavery, but what I have quoted should suffice as an introductory
study of the subject. I
believe I can safely say that the Old Testament accommodated, or conceded, to
the evil heart of man by not banning the practice of slavery.
For this reason, the Law of Moses regulated slavery in the Jewish
culture, and by so doing, protected slaves from being mistreated by their
miserable masters. The Old Testament
also punished the slave master who either killed or mistreated his slaves.
I, therefore, believe I can also say that the Old Testament, even though
it did not ban or overtly oppose slavery; it did oppose the practice. Diakonos
And Doulos The
New Testament was written in what is commonly called Koine Greek.
This differed from Classical Greek in that it was the common,
street-level, Greek of the day. It
was the Greek spoken on the streets where business and commerce took place.
Before
we get too involved in what the New Testament says about slavery, there are two
important first-century Koine Greek words that we must understand and consider
that are translated into our English Bible as either "slave" or
"servant." Some kind of
knowledge and understanding of these two words are beneficial to our discussion
at this point. Both of these Greek
words can either be translated as "slave" or "servant" in
our English New Testament, but for the most part, we read "servant"
instead of "slave" in our modern versions of the New Testament.
In
our twenty-first century, western-world culture the word "slave" has a
very negative connotation, and that is due in part to the slave trade in The
two Greek words I am referring to are "doulos" and
"diakonos." I will
explain their meanings. The
Greek word "doulos" is made up of two Greek words meaning, "to
bind," and "a slave." In
Paul's day this word had two express meanings.
First, a doulos was the lowest of all slaves.
Second, a doulos became to be known as a slave by choice in New Testament
times. This means that sometimes a
person would freely submit his life to another.
This kind of slave is often known as a bond-slave.
The apostle Peter considered himself a doulos, a slave of Jesus by
choice, as seen in 2 Peter 1:1. "Simeon
Peter, a servant [doulos] and an apostle of Jesus Christ:" The
apostle Paul also considered himself to be a doulos, a slave of Jesus by choice.
Romans 1:1 reads: "Paul,
a servant [doulos] of Christ Jesus, called as an
apostle and set apart for the gospel of God —" I
think I can say that Paul would have chosen
to serve Jesus when he met Jesus in a dramatic way on the road to Peter
and Paul were not the only Christians back then that considered themselves to be
a servant, or a slave, of Jesus. It
is commonly understood that all first generation believers considered themselves
a servant of Jesus by choice. The
Greek word "diakonos" appears to be rooted in another Greek word
meaning "to run an errand," as in "the servant ran an errand for
the king." One who was a
diakonos was, thus, one who executed another's command, with no thought of
whether this was an execution by choice or by constraint.
Depending on what English Bible you read, "diakonos" could be
translated into English as "minister," "servant,"
"deacon," or, other such words. The
word "diakonos" became associated with those who carried out the
duties of a deacon in the local church. You
can certainly see our English word "deacon" is a direct
transliteration from the Greek word "diakonos."
The
apostle Paul also considered himself to be a "diakonos," as well as a
"doulos," as seen in Ephesians 3:7. "I
[Paul] was made a servant [diakonos] of this
gospel by the gift of God's grace that was given to me by the working of his
power." So,
Paul considered himself to be both a doulos, a servant of Jesus by choice, and a
diakonos, a servant who executed his Lord's commands. All
of this tells us that the Christian, even by today's standards, should consider
themselves as servants of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Jesus' very title of "Lord" should make that point clear.
The very act of repenting from serving self and submitting your life over
to Jesus as an act of trust, or faith, is an act of servitude.
It is what being a Christian is all about.
Slavery
And Jesus Jesus
was born and raised as a Jew in Galilee, a Roman province north of the Roman
provinces of John
1:11 confirms that Jesus came to minister to His own people, the Jews.
That verse reads: "He
[Jesus] came to his own [the Jews], and his own people did not receive
him." Matthew
15:24 makes this point even clearer when it says this: "He
[Jesus] replied, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep
of the house of The
above two passages make it clear that all that Jesus said and did was
specifically for His generation of Jews. He
was not sent by God to be a critic of the Roman, Gentile world. That was not His
mission in life. That being said,
when an opportunity arose to speak to a Gentile, or comment on the Greco-Roman
culture of His day, He did not hesitate to make His point.
This is important in the present discussion because, even though some
Jews may have had slaves, slavery was a practice that was commonplace in the
Greco-Roman world in Jesus' day. For
this reason Jesus would not have openly addressed the issue of slavery because
it applied more to the Roman culture than the Jewish culture.
That being the case, we do not have everything Jesus said recorded for us
to read. We cannot, therefore, say
dogmatically that He avoided commenting on the issue of slavery altogether.
Jesus
may also not have openly opposed slavery because His mission was not to
Christianize the All
of the above being said, in passing, Jesus did comment on the dictatorial,
authoritative, rule of the Roman system of government, that does, in a secondary
way reflect on His position of one man dominating another, as seen in the
practice of slavery. Luke 22:25
reads: "But
he [Jesus] said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord
it over them, and
those who have authority over them have themselves
called Benefactors.'" I
don't believe I am stretching things when I say the following.
Jesus, by His very nature, opposed all kinds of unfair, abusive,
dictatorial rule of one man over another man.
In the above statement Jesus said that the Gentile rulers were dictators,
and they dictated their will over their subject so they would benefit.
That does not only represent the prevailing authoritarian rule of the
Roman government leaders back then, it would have portrayed how some masters
mistreated their slaves. If Jesus
opposed such dictatorial rule by government officials, it is not a stretch to
think or believe he would have opposed the same dictatorial rule of a slave
owner over his slaves. I
understand the argument against what I have just said.
Yes, Jesus might well have openly opposed brutal slave owners, but he did
not promote the banning of slavery. Again,
I suggest that Jesus' mission was not to be a social activist. Here
is another similar point that could be made.
Jesus made one short comment concerning those believers, and really
anyone, who aspired to be a great person. Matthew
23:11 reads:
"The
greatest among you will be your servant."
This
simple little sentence spoken from the mouth of Jesus would certainly be
fundamental to His thinking on anyone of importance, and that would include
slave masters. The one who is
important, or thinks he is important, must live as if he was a servant.
I would suggest, then, that the slave master, should consider himself a
fellow slave or servant. That would
say a lot about how he would then treat his slaves.
It says a lot about what the Bible says about the practice of slavery.
Jesus
said something similar in Mark 9:35. "Sitting
down, he [Jesus] called the Twelve and said to them, 'If anyone wants to be
first, he must be last and servant of all.'" Jesus
made it very clear to His followers. If
any of them felt a need to be first or the greatest, he or she must first live
as a servant. We
see that Jesus followed His own advice, as seen in Mark 10:45. "For
even the Son of Man [Jesus] did not come to be
served, but to serve,
and to give his life as a ransom for many." The
Bible states that Jesus is the ultimate, universal authority, but His mission on
earth was to serve. His ultimate act
of service was taking humanities place by experiencing the wrath of God on the
cross. As a matter of fact, at this
present time, Jesus sits in a place of authority at God's right hand, and He
does so as a servant who is representing the Christian to God.
The apostle John said it this way in 1 John 2:1 and 2. "My
little children, I am writing you these things so that you may not sin.
But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the
Father — Jesus Christ the righteous one.
He himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours,
but also for those of the whole world." The
apostle John records a couple things that Jesus said concerning His servants.
They say a lot about how Jesus would have viewed servitude, something we
will see later the apostle Paul wrote about as well.
John
15:14 reads: "You
are my friends if you do what I command you." Viewing
servants or slaves as friends seems to be opposites but Jesus considered his
followers to be both servants and friends. He
made that point again in John 15:15. "I
do not call you servants anymore, because a servant doesn't know what his master
is doing. I have called you friends, because I
have made known to you everything I have heard from my Father." Simply
put, Jesus wanted a spirit of friendliness to prevail between Him and His
servants. Not everyone can pull this
servant friendship relationship off in real life, but it was, and is, something
Jesus wanted, and could do.
If
you look up the words "servant" or "slave" in any
concordance, you will see many references to these words in Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John, many of which are from the lips of Jesus.
Jesus spoke of servants, or slaves, as if the practice was commonplace in
His day, and there is no doubt that it was.
One
thing Jesus does not overtly do, and that is to oppose the practice of slavery.
He does, however, speak to the issue of how men dominate other men, and
that should say something about how He would have felt about slave owners and
there domination of slaves. Jesus
was not in favour of heavy-handed, dictatorial, domination.
I
repeat, Jesus was not a social activist. His
mission was not to reform the There
is no real distinction in the New Testament between a servant and a slave.
A servant was a slave and a slave was a servant.
There is, however, two types of slaves that you could fined in the
first-century, Slavery
In The Slavery
was more than commonplace in the first-century, Greco-Roman world.
It was an accepted practice that kept the Roman economy afloat.
It is estimated that at least forty to forty five percent of the Jesus
Himself spoke to the point that some slaves had a good measure of authority in
the "Who
then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his
master has put in charge of his household, to give them food at the proper
time?" It
should also be noted that some slaves became slaves by choice, or a
"doulos" as I mentioned earlier. It
was a way in which one could escape financial indebtedness.
In other words, some people chose to be slaves because they could no
longer live with their debt. Some
might think that was not really a choice, and that I would understand.
It
should also be understood that some slaves remained slaves by choice after given
the opportunity to be set free. They
would make this choice because their standard of living would be better as a
slave than as a free person without a means to support himself and his family.
I
am not suggesting that slaves in the first-century Ephesians
6:5 through 9 When
it comes to New Testament thinking, doctrine, and practice, the apostle Paul is
the one New Testament personality, more than anyone else, and that includes
Jesus, who has defined Christian doctrine and practice for us.
It is for this reason we absolutely must spend as much time as possible
on what Paul wrote and taught about slavery, something he would have been
familiar with while being raised in the Greco-Roman city of It
has been speculated by some Christian theologians and historians that Paul's
father, or possibly grandfather, might have been a Jewish slave and for some
reason was able to purchase his freedom. Whether
either was a slave cannot be known. One
thing we do know is that somehow one of these men became a Roman citizen.
One of them had to have purchased his Roman citizenship.
This has to have been the case because the Bible states that Paul, a Jew,
was born a Roman citizen. See Acts
22:25 through 29 and Acts 23:27. How
and why Paul was born a Roman citizen is unknown.
One thing we know, and that is Paul was born a free person.
Biologically
speaking, Paul was a Jew who was born a Roman citizen.
He was raised in the city of As
it pertains to his Jewish education, Paul was trained in Paul
was not only well acquainted with the Jewish religious traditions, he was well
educated and familiar with Greek philosophy and could argue and debate with the
best of the philosophers of his day. You
can read one example of this in Acts 17. He
clearly understood Roman law and the economic environment of his day, which
would have certainly included slavery as a means to maintain the empire's
economic stability. For a brief
introduction to the life of the apostle Paul, I refer you to my paperback and
e-book entitled "Who Was Paul?" That
book will fill you in on more details of the life of Paul than what I have
written here. Since
Paul was the Lord's servant to define Christian doctrine and practice for all
believers everywhere and in all ages and cultures, we now take a close look at
what he wrote about slavery. What
Paul taught about this subject is fundamental to how Christians should view
slavery because it is the Christian belief that Paul represented God in all that
he taught, and that would include the topic of slavery. Here
is what Paul wrote about a slave in relation to his master in Ephesians 6:5
through 9. I will make comment on
each of these verses. "Slaves,
obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart,
as you would Christ. Don’t work
only while being watched, as people-pleasers, but as slaves to Christ, do God's
will from your heart. Serve with a
good attitude, as to the Lord and not to people, knowing that whatever good each
one does, slave or free, he will receive this back from the Lord. And masters,
treat your slaves the same way, without threatening them, because you know that
both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with
him." Verse
5 from above reads: "Slaves,
obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart,
as you would Christ." The
plural form of the Greek word "doulos" is translated as
"slaves" in this verse. You
might wonder why Paul used "doulos" in this context instead of
"diakonos." Remember, in
Paul's day, a "doulos" came to be known as a slave "by
choice," otherwise known as a "bond-slave."
Why would a slave back then view himself as a slave by choice, and why
would Paul choose to use the Greek word "doulos" instead of
"diakonos?" I don't claim
to be able to read Paul's mind on this matter, and neither should anyone else.
I do, however, have a couple of speculative thoughts on why Paul used the
word "doulos" in this instance and not "diakonos."
Even
though "doulos" and "diakonos" have a difference in meaning,
sometimes the two words are used interchangeably in the New Testament, as if
they were synonyms. That might be
the case here. Another
reason for why Paul might have chosen the word "doulos" in this verse
is because in the first-century, Greco-Roman world many slaves did choose to be
slaves. They did so because it was
to their financial benefit. It was
one way to get out of a life of financial debt that bogged them down into a life
of poverty. I am sure that some of
the slaves that Paul was addressing, but not all, would have fit into this
category of slaves. Other men, those
who were well educated, might have chosen slavery because they could work in a
place of prominence where their skills and education could be utilized.
The
verb "obey" in this verse is a Greek present, active, imperative verb.
Present means that the slaves must obey, right now, in present time.
Active means that they are the ones who are actively obeying their
masters. Imperative means that this
obedience is a command, and, since Paul is acting on behalf of the Lord, it is a
command that he is passing on from Jesus Himself.
So, this is a serious matter for the Christian slaves to hear from Paul.
You see it is a serious matter with Paul's use of the words "fear
and trembling" that should motivate obedience.
The
motivation for this obedience should extend from a pure and sincere heart,
according to Paul. A slave is not to
obey with a grumbling attitude. In
fact, he obeys his master as if he was obeying Jesus Himself.
Such obedience presents us with the often-asked question.
What if a slave master demanded the slave to do something that
specifically opposed the will of God, like, committing adultery for example?
The common answer to this question is what Peter told the Jewish leaders
in Acts 5:29. It reads: "Peter
and the apostles replied, 'We must obey God rather
than people.'" In
this situation it becomes a matter of authority.
The New Testament teaches that Christians are to obey any authority they
find themselves under. See Romans
13:1 through 7. That would include
political authority or any other kind of authority, like a slave owner.
I will not get into a detailed discussion on submission to authority
here, but the New Testament does teach what I've just written.
You can read Romans, chapter 13, to begin a study on submission to
political authority.
Verse
6 reads: "Don’t
work only while being watched, as people-pleasers, but as slaves to Christ, do
God's will from your heart." Paul
told slaves not to work hard only when they are being watched by their masters
or by someone who their master has appointed over them, and why?
They are to fulfill their duties as if they were working for Jesus
Himself, as if, Jesus was watching their every move, which in fact He would have
been doing. Nothing is hid from the
eyes of Jesus. The
words "being watched" are translated from the Greek word "ophthalmodoulia."
This word is made up of the Greek word "ophthalmos." which
means "eye," and the Greek word "doulos" that means slave.
We derive our English word "ophthalmologist" from this Greek
word. Verse
7 reads: "Serve
with a good attitude, as to the Lord and not to people," Paul
repeated himself again in this instance. Slaves
must serve their masters with the best attitude they could muster up from
within. They were to serve their
masters in the same way that they would serve Jesus Himself.
This is a significant statement, or command, that Paul passed on to the
Christian slave. Verse
8 reads: "...
knowing that whatever good each one does, slave or free, he will receive this
back from the Lord." There
is a New Testament principle here that applies to both a slave and a free
person. All we do as Christians,
will be judged by Jesus at what has been called the Judgment Seat of Christ, as
seen in 1 Corinthians 3:10 and following. It
is at the judgment seat of Christ where each of our works of service as
Christians will be judged by Jesus. It
is there that each work of service, if done from the wrong motivation, will be
burned in the fire of judgment. Those
works of service that were performed throughout our lives from pure motives will
be rewarded. In
concluding this portion of Scripture, we note that Paul does not overtly oppose
the practice of slavery. Some might
even say that he is upholding the practice of slavery.
Whatever position you hold in this instance, what Paul does say in this
section of his letter to the Ephesian Christians is that a Christian slave, out
of the goodness of his or her heart, must obey his or her master as if he or she
was obeying Jesus Himself. Paul
does not end the discussion of slavery at this point.
In the following verse he teaches how slave masters are to treat their
slaves. After
writing all of the above about how slaves should obey their masters, Paul only
wrote one verse on how masters should treat their slaves and that is found in
verse 9. It reads: "And
masters, treat your slaves the same way, without threatening them, because you
know that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism
with him." Paul
told slave owners, and that would include Christian slave owners, to treat their
slaves "in the same way." What
way is that? "In the same
way" would be in reference to what Paul just told the slaves and their
relationship with their masters. The
masters, then, should not threaten their slaves.
They should treat them just as Jesus would treat them.
If you think about that, the slave master should exhibit agape, that is,
sacrificial love towards their slaves because that is how Jesus loves us.
The slave owner should treat his slaves with respect, and all of which
that means, because their Master, who is Jesus, is watching over them.
As Jesus watches over the slaves, He is watching over the slave owner.
Note
that Paul is playing on the word "master" in this verse.
He called the slave owner a "master" and then he called Jesus
their "Master," with a capital "M."
Paul was actually warning the slave master here when he said that there
is no favoritism with God. In other
words, "treat your slaves properly or else you are in trouble with your
Master." In
the sight of God, there is no difference between a slave and a slave master.
They are both human beings, and if they are Christian, as they would be
here, both slave and slave master belong to Jesus, and what He says goes.
This
passage in Paul's letter to the Ephesian believers should make it clear.
Although Paul does not oppose the practice of slavery in this letter, he
does oppose the mistreatment of slaves. What
he taught about the relationship between a slave and his or her master pretty
much would have transformed the whole slave industry in his day if adopted into
Roman culture. In fact, if you think
it through, slaves would not really be the possession of their master because if
they are Christian, they are a possession of Jesus. What
Paul said about slavery in this passage forms the basis of how the New
Testament, and God Himself, feels and thinks about the issue of slavery.
Colossians
4:1 reads as follows: "Masters,
deal with your slaves justly and fairly, since you know that you too have a
Master in heaven." Paul
told the Colossian Christian slave owners something similar to what he told the
Ephesian Christian slave owners. This
time he added a couple of different words to his admonition.
He told these particular masters to treat their slaves "justly and
fairly." The addition of these
two words is noteworthy because one attribute of God is His sense of justice.
We correctly say that God is love (1 John 4:8).
We can also correctly say that God is just.
By this I do not simply mean that God acts justly.
No, by His very nature He is just, and, because He is just, He acts
justly. In
the above sense of the word, slave owners should treat their slaves as God
Himself would fairly and justly treat them.
In short, Paul was telling the slave masters to exhibit the very
character of a just God in their dealings with their slaves.
Colossians
3:22 and 23 read: "Slaves,
obey your human masters in everything. Don’t
work only while being watched, as people-pleasers, but work wholeheartedly,
fearing the Lord. Whatever you do, do it from the heart, as something done for
the Lord and not for people, knowing that you will receive the reward of an
inheritance from the Lord. You serve the Lord Christ." Again,
what Paul told the Ephesian Christian slaves he told the Colossian Christian
slaves. They were to do their work
as if they were working for their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
1
Timothy 6:1 and 2 read: "All
who are under the yoke as slaves should regard their own masters as worthy of
all respect, so that God’s name and his teaching will not be blasphemed.
Let those who have believing masters not be disrespectful to them because
they are brothers, but serve them even better, since those who benefit from
their service are believers and dearly loved.
Teach and encourage these things." In
this passage Paul repeated what he has said in other places.
Slaves must respect their masters, and even more so if they were
Christians. Paul did, however,
insert an additional thought that he left out elsewhere.
In this passage he distinguished between Christian slave owners and
non-Christian slave owners. A slave
was to represent Jesus in all he or she did in service of his earthly master.
The slave was supposed to be a good witness to the non-Christian slave
owner, and why? The honorable works
that a slave was encouraged to do by Paul might well lead the non-believing
slave owner to Jesus. This is what
the love of God is all about. That
is to say, you sacrifice of yourself in the hope that the one who is the
beneficiary of your sacrifice will come to Jesus. To
the slave who has a Christian master, he must respect his master because his
master is a brother in the Lord. So,
basic to the relationship between the slave and his master is the fact that they
are both Christians, and therefore, must live accordingly.
This
admonition is directed to both the slave and the slave master.
Both are to exhibit the love of God within the context of their
relationship. One might then ask why
does the slave owner not set his slave free?
There
is an answer to the above question. Setting a slave free might not be the best
thing for the slave and his family. If
a Christian slave owner treated his slave with love and respect, the slave and
his family would most likely be the better if he stayed with his master.
Freed slaves often experienced much hardship and poverty in the
first-century, Greco-Roman world because they would have to start out in life
all over again, and in many cases, with little to nothing.
Once free, the slave and his family would have to find their way in the
world, and that was not necessarily and easy task back then for newly freed
slaves.
1
Corinthians 7:20 and 21 say: "Let
each of you remain in the situation in which he was called.
Were you called while a slave? Don’t
let it concern you. But if you can
become free, by all means take the opportunity." In
the above verses Paul said that if you were a slave when you gave your life to
Jesus, don't worry about attempting to obtain your freedom.
Why would Paul have said such a thing?
Throughout
Paul's writings he taught that one's relationship with Jesus, and the ministry
that Jesus requires of him, is the important thing in life.
That should outweigh everything else in the life of a true believer.
Beyond this, Paul maintained that one's eternal destiny also outweighs
any present reality, no matter how tough this present reality is.
Paul
himself put up with many unfavorable afflictions in life, which included
imprisonment, beatings, stonings, hunger, and much more.
He could put up with such unpleasant things because he understood that
his present existence in this world was temporary.
A better world is yet to come. Look
at what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 4:17. His
words confirm that this was the way he approached life.
"For
our momentary light affliction is producing for us an absolutely incomparable
eternal weight of glory." What
Paul called "momentary light afflictions" for us would be next to life
ending afflictions. Most of us could
never survive all that Paul went through for the sake of Jesus.
Many of us would have given up the faith.
How Paul lived his life was how he expected others, including slaves,
should live their lives. Momentary
afflictions, whether light or heavy, mean little when it comes to one's eternal
destiny and the eternal glory that will come to the Christian slave.
1
Peter 2:18 and 19 read: "Household
slaves, submit to your masters with all reverence not only to the good and
gentle ones but also to the cruel. For
it brings favor if, because of a consciousness of God, someone endures grief
from suffering unjustly." The
apostle Peter was in agreement with Paul. Slaves,
like anyone else in life, are to endure hardships and trials in this life.
Enduring these hardships with the strength and peace provided by Jesus,
is a powerful witness to the reality of Jesus' existence.
This mentality is backwards to the thinking of today's western-world
mindset. It was backwards to the
thinking in Paul and Peter's day. The
Bible clearly states that unjust suffering will be rewarded, maybe not in this
life, but it will certainly be rewarded in the next life.
So, with all of this in mind, a slave should put the salvation of his
unsaved slave owner in the forefront of the way in which he lives his life.
This mindset is how every Christian should live.
It's what the New Testament Greek text calls "agape."
That is to say, a believer gives of himself for the sake of another,
especially for the sake of that other's salvation.
The
New Testament teaches that God is love. See
1 John 4:8. The word
"love," as it refers to God throughout the New Testament is translated
from the Greek word "agape." This
Greek word means "love that is demonstrated through some kind of practical
demonstration of sacrifice." God's
very essence - who He is at His core - is in fact sacrificial by nature. This
sacrificial love, as much as is humanly possible, should be exhibited in the
life of the believer, and that would include how Christian slave owners should
treat their slaves.
Paul's
Letter To Philemon I
have written that the New Testament does not overtly oppose slavery.
It does not say "thou shall not have slaves."
I believe that is obvious. On the other hand, neither does the New
Testament overtly condone the practice of slavery, especially as it was
practiced in the first-century, Greco-Roman world.
What the New Testament does do is similar, but not exactly, to what the
Old Testament does. It regulates the
practice of slavery, and, it regulates it in accordance with the very nature and
essence of God. That is to say, God
is love, just, and sacrificial by nature. Those
character qualities that are inherent in God form the foundation on which the
New Testament teaches about slavery. It
is this foundation that Christians should form their thinking on the matter.
We will now turn our attention back to Paul's understanding of slavery as
one who was raised and lived in the first-century, Greco-Roman world.
Unlike
today's western-world economy, slavery was an important component of the
economic landscape of the first-century, Greco-Roman, world in which the New
Testament was written. Some
historians say that at least forty to forty five percent of the population of
the first-century, Slavery
was fundamental to the Maybe
Bob Dylan was right after-all when he recorded his 1979 hit song entitled,
"You've Gotta Serve Somebody." In
this sense of the word, everyone is a slave to something or someone.
We all serve something or somebody. The
one we serve most is ourselves. It's basic to our human nature. Moving
on, the New Testament teaches that God makes no distinction between slaves and
free people in respect to salvation. In
1 Corinthians 12:13 Paul made that clear. "For
we were all baptized by one Spirit into one
body — whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or
free — and we were all given one Spirit to
drink." Galatians
3:28 also makes that clear. "There
is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; since you are all one in
Christ Jesus." The
New Testament also teaches that slave owners must treat their slaves with
respect because God is the Master of both them and their slaves, and, God does
not favour one person over another. Ephesians
6:9 reads: "And
masters, treat your slaves the same way, without threatening them, because you
know that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism
with him." With
the above in mind, and all that I have written so far, I believe Paul's letter
to Philemon, a Christian slave owner, is fundamental to the issue of how the
Bible views slavery. I suggest you
read this short letter that Paul wrote to Philemon.
It will not take long to read. If
this letter is all that you know of what the Bible says about slavery, you will
have the basic understanding of slavery as seen in the Bible.
A
man named Onesimus was one of Philemon's slaves who apparently had run away for
one reason or another. Why he ran
away, we do not know. In Philemon 8
through 16 Paul gave Philemon the following instructions that he hoped Philemon
would comply concerning Philemon's run-away slave.
The instructions read as follows: "For
this reason, although I have great boldness in Christ to command you to do what
is right, I appeal to you, instead, on the basis of love.
I, Paul, as an elderly man and now also as a prisoner of Christ Jesus,
appeal to you for my son, Onesimus. I
became his father while I was in chains. Once
he was useless to you, but now he is useful both to you and to me.
I am sending him back to you — I am sending
my very own heart. I wanted to keep
him with me, so that in my imprisonment for the gospel he might serve me in your
place. But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your
good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.
For perhaps this is why he was separated from you for a brief time, so
that you might get him back permanently, no longer as a slave, but more than a
slave — as a dearly loved brother.
He is especially so to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh
and in the Lord." Paul
said a lot in the above passage. Being
an apostle, on behalf of Jesus, Paul gave Philemon instructions on what to do
with Onesimus, Philemon's run-away slave. Note
that Paul approached Philemon on this issue as a beloved brother in the Lord and
not from the standpoint of an authoritative apostle.
This was Paul's normal way of instructing and admonishing those to whom
he was given the responsibility to care for and lead.
Note
the phrase "command you to do the right thing."
This is an important phrase for us to think our way through.
First of all, this was not a suggestion that Paul was giving Philemon.
It was a command, and, a command from God, spoken through Paul, the
servant of God. So, what Paul said
here is how the God of the Bible feels and thinks about slavery.
Once again, this is something that critics of the Bible often miss.
We cannot ignore these instructions of Paul because, in my opinion, they
represent the bottom line to how the Bible views slavery.
The
second thing to note here is that the command from God was to do "the right
thing." The words "right
thing" clearly tell us that if Philemon did not follow through on this
command, he would have been doing the wrong thing.
Philemon, in fact, would have been in the wrong when it came to the issue
of slavery, especially as it pertained to Onesimus.
So
what was the right thing that Philemon needed to do?
Philemon was to receive Onesimus back, "not as a slave but as a
brother." Does this mean that
Onesimus would no longer be a slave? Does
this mean that he would now be a free person?
I believe I could safely say that Paul could well have been telling
Philemon to free Onesimus from slavery, and that might actually be what Philemon
did. He would, thus, be doing the
right thing. I
do understand that some might believe that Paul's instructions did not
necessarily mean that Onesimus would no longer be a slave, and that I can
understand. Those in this camp might
suggest that Onesimus was still a slave, but a slave, who would be treated as a
loved brother in the Lord. That
might well have been the case. We
just do not know all of the details surrounding this issue.
One thing would be sure though, and that is this.
Even if Onesimus was still a slave, he would have had great freedom,
freedom as brothers in the Lord have in their relationships with each other.
When
you understand what the Bible teaches about Christian brotherhood, those of the
family of God, Philemon could no longer treat Onesimus as one of his
possessions. That is clear.
Onesimus might well have become more of an employee than a slave.
As a matter of fact, Paul's letter to Philemon suggests that Onesimus had
become an effective servant of the Lord with a God-appointed ministry that Paul
expected Philemon to respect, and by so doing, would allow Onesimus to follow
through on his God-appointed ministry. Philemon
was not to inhibit Onesimus from fulfilling God's will for his life.
Whatever
you think might have happened to Onesimus after he returned to Philemon, even if
Philemon freed Onesimus, certain provisions would have to be made to help
Onesimus survive his new status in the Greco-Roman culture in which he lived.
Some
slaves chose not to be set free in Paul's day because they would suddenly be
poverty stricken and with no source of income to support their families.
This would, thus mean, that if Philemon freed Onesimus, Philemon could
not just kick Onesimus out onto the street to fend for himself.
Philemon would have to treat Onesimus as a loved brother, and thus, do
whatever was necessary for Onesimus' well being.
This would be God's will. This
would demonstrate to the surrounding Greco-Roman culture how the Christian God
viewed the practice of slavery. In
fact, this is what I understand is foundational to what the Bible teaches when
it comes to the practice of slavery. My
Biblical Based Conclusion I
have just set forth how I understand the apostle Paul approached the issue of
slavery, in a culture where slavery was not only commonplace, but was viewed as
an economic necessity. Maybe you
still wonder why Paul did not vigorously and overtly oppose the practice of
slavery. Why didn't he pronounce a
sovereign sweeping statement that was meant to be followed by all Christians in
all generations? Why didn't he
simply say, "You must not own slaves?"
That probably would have prevented us from asking all of our questions
concerning what the Bible says about slavery.
It would have made life much easier in this respect.
I
remind you that Paul's mission on this planet was to be God's chosen
spokesperson. He was to represent
His God to the Gentiles, their governing authorities, to the Jews, and to the
Jewish leaders. That is stated in
Acts 9:15 and 16. Like Jesus, Paul
was not commissioned to be a social activist, protesting the evils of the
empire. He was not called to
Christianize the I
have been a social activist. I have
protested in front of abortion clinics, but my protest never closed the clinics,
and, it led no one to Jesus. It
certainly did not ban the practice of abortion.
Banning abortion does not end the abortion of human lives.
It sends the practice underground, where slavery exists today in our
so-called, civilized, slavery-banned, western world.
In
times past I have been a political activist, both in the United Sates and in Once
a person becomes a Christian, then, all of what Paul taught should begin to be
implemented into that person's life. If,
then, a slave owner became a Christian, he was expected to do what was best for
his slave. He was expected, as Paul
wrote to Philemon, to do the right thing. Whatever
the right thing was for a specific circumstance would differ from another
circumstance. For one slave it might
mean freedom from domination. For
another, it might mean becoming an employee instead of a slave.
In either case, if both slave and master are Christians, they were, and
are, first and foremost brothers in Christ and therefore must build their
relationship accordingly. I
conclude that what Paul taught concerning the practice of slavery is how the
Bible views slavery. In fact, Paul,
as Christians believe, was representing God in all that he taught, and that
included what he taught about slavery.
Turning
to some things that Jesus said about freedom, we note His inaugural speech to "The
Spirit of the Lord is on me, because
he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and
recovery of sight to the blind, to set free the oppressed,
to proclaim
the year of the Lord’s favor." However
you interpret the phrases "release to the captives" and "to set
free the oppressed," in Biblical terms, Jesus is the source of all kinds of
freedom. Such freedom would include
inner spiritual freedom that would produce an outward freedom that should have
relevant social and cultural implications in the life of an individual.
Returning
to Paul, he also taught about individual freedom.
Galatians 5:13 reads: "For
you were called to be free, brothers and sisters; only don't use this freedom as
an opportunity for the flesh, but serve one
another through love." The
inner freedom the believer finds in Jesus is meant to set the believer free to
serve those to whom Jesus has placed before him at any given time.
Our western-world culture knows little to nothing about this kind of
freedom. Being set free to serve
someone other than one's self makes no sense to us today.
Our culture defines freedom in terms of the individual being free to do
what he wishes or desires. Individual
expression is primary to our cultural experience.
The end result of such thinking is the hedonistic society in which we
live. Freedom, in a Biblical sense,
never implies freedom to live for one's self.
It always implies being free to serve, love, and care for others, and
that would include a slave. Again,
we turn to Jesus for something else He said about freedom.
John 8:36 reads: "So
if the Son sets you free, you really will be free." You
might question just what Jesus meant by the above statement.
Was He speaking solely about spiritual freedom?
Could we interpret His words to include social or cultural freedom,
including setting the slaves free? These
questions are worthy of debate. I do
admit to that. I lean to the
thinking that Jesus, first and foremost, had spiritual freedom in mind.
That is to say, the believer has been set free in many ways and from many
things. He has been set free from
the wrath of God. He has been set
free from finding acceptance in God's sight through human effort.
He has been set free from serving self in order to serve God and anyone
who God brings across his path. When
one is set free spiritually, his outward existence will demonstrate this
Biblical reality. It might well mean
freeing a slave, or at least, doing whatever is best for the fellow human being
who you have enslaved. It would
certainly not mean you would view any person as your possession.
When
it comes to how Paul viewed himself, he considered himself to be a slave of no
one, despite the fact that the love of God motivated him to serve everyone.
Nevertheless, he thought of himself as a slave to Jesus.
His servitude to Jesus motivated him to serve all those who crossed his
path at any given moment of time. Paul
often called himself a servant, or a slave of the Lord.
Romans 1:1 says this. "Paul,
a servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle
and set apart for the gospel of God —" Jesus
considered Himself to be a servant to His Father.
He did not come to earth to be served but to serve, as He said in Mark
10:45. "For
even the Son of Man [Jesus] did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give
his life as a ransom for many." John
15:15 tells us something that probably sounds very strange to our modern-day
ears. Jesus added a bit of a twist
to what a servant of His was all about. "I
do not call you servants anymore, because a servant
doesn't know what his master is doing. I have called you friends, because I have
made known to you everything I have heard from my Father." What
Jesus said here is interesting. He
told His disciples, His servants, that from that point on He would no longer
call them servants, but friends. This
is interesting because those to whom He said these things considered themselves
to be servants of Jesus, as we saw with Paul.
This very statement may well suggest that Jesus believes in setting
servants free. If, however, there is
more to this verse than what seems to meet the eye, and Jesus still thinks of
Christians as servants, as I believe He does, this servitude is based on some
kind of friendliness. Friendliness,
would thus, define and undergird the relationship Jesus has with His servants.
In
addition to the last paragraph, the Greek word "philos" is translated
in John 15:15 in English as "friends."
Philos was one of six first-century Koine Greek words that were
understood to be some kind of expression of love.
Philos represented reciprocal love, meaning, a free exchange of love
between people. Philos was commonly
understood as "brotherly love." Once
again, the servant Master relationship Jesus has with His servants is based on a
free flow exchange of brotherly love. This
represents the mind of God, and the Biblical thinking concerning the foundation
of the relationship between a slave and his master.
I
believe I can safely conclude that just because the Bible does not overtly and
openly come out and say "thou shall not have a slave," does not mean
the Bible indorses slavery. On the
contrary, I believe the Bible opposes the practice of slavery.
It is not God's will for one human to own another human.
It has never been His will and it will never be His will.
In fact, when it comes to someone owning another, it is God who owns the
believer. Jesus purchased the
believer with His death on the cross, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 6:20. "...
for you were bought at a price. So glorify God with your body." If
Jesus has bought your fellow brother or sister in Christ, would you not think
that if you owned that brother or sister in the Lord, you would be steeling him
or her away from Jesus? There is
some logic to that, don't you think? The
Bible teaches that God is the Creator of all things, and that includes human
beings. By the same token as stated
in the last paragraph, if you owned a slave, would you not be steeling that
person from God? Do you not
think there is some logic to this as well? Would
you not think that steeling from God would be something you should not do? Does
the Bible oppose slavery? There is
no doubt in my mind. The Bible does
indeed oppose the practice of slavery.
The
Bottom Line People
always ask; "So what's the bottom line to all you have written?"
In point form, here is the bottom line concerning what the Bible says
about slavery. The Old Testament says
the following about slavery. Slave owners must be
punished when they are abusive to their slaves. Jews were not permitted
to enslave another Jew. God opposes slaves
being mistreated. The New Testament says
the following about slavery. Christian slaves must
obey their masters out of respect for Jesus. Christian slaves must
obey their masters in the hope of leading their masters to Jesus. Slave owners must treat
their slaves with love and justice, as God Himself would treat them. Christian slave owners
must do the right thing when it comes to their slaves. The relationship
between Christian slaves and Christian slave owners
should be based on a free flow exchange of sacrificial love. Putting it all
together, the Bible as a whole says that those who own slaves must do "the
right thing." They can no
longer think of their slaves as their personal possession.
In this sense, the Bible opposes slavery.
|