Whilst reading an excellent recent article by Thomas Kidd on the Gospel Coalition website about the famous African American poet of the 18th century, Phillis Wheatley (https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/phillis-wheatley-evangelical-first-published-african-american-female-poet/ ) I was reminded of how often people have badly misread the Bible in regard to the issue of slavery. First of all, slavery is of course reported and described as an extant, even pervasive fact of ANE and Greco-Roman life. The first and most important point to make about this is that slavery is not ENDORSED as a good or natural institution in those passages. Indeed, what we find in the Bible is the attempt to regulate an existing condition and evil on the basis of Biblical principles. And I would argue, the trajectory of the argument pushes towards emancipation and eventual elimination of the institution as well. Obviously the Exodus stories resound throughout the later Scriptures and there is the constant reminder against thinking slavery is a good thing— ‘remember you were all once slaves in Egypt’ and Moses was sent to liberate God’s people, not baptize the institution of slavery and call it good.
All too often, we hear argument that ‘since the Bible is wrong about slavery, and wrong about women and their roles, it is also wrong about sexual mores as well’. I’ve dealt elsewhere with the latter two sorts of arguments, but this post is about the former argument. Is there in fact an endorsement of slavery even in the NT?
The short answer is no, but unless one sees the trajectory of the arguments in Paul’s letters, one may draw the wrong conclusions. Colossians 3-4, Ephesians 5-6, and Philemon need to be read in that order in order to see where Paul’s argument is going. Colossians 3-4 addresses an existing situation— domestic slavery in a Christian household, and here Paul is writing to those who he did not convert (probably converted by one of his co-workers such as Tychicus— no evidence Paul had been to Colossae when this was written). The advice in Col. 3-4 is first order discourse— the opening salvo, and even here notice the difference from pagan household advice. Here women, children, and slaves are addressed as moral agents, people who can hear, comprehend and respond to imperatives. Slaves are not treated as mere property here. Paul is seeking to ameliorate the harsh effects of slavery in the Christian household by injecting the yeast of the Gospel into an existing situation. Paul had to start with people where they were, not where he wanted them to be in due course. In Ephesians we have second order moral discourse, in a circular document sent to a variety of churches likely including Colossians. Here Paul goes further and is much more bold in asserting that slaves should be served by their masters because they are equal (isotes) in the sight of God. Careful comparison shows the development of the argument from Colossians to Ephesians, and one sees this as well in the advice about submission for Paul says to all believers in Ephes. 5.21ff ‘submit to one another out of reverence for Christ’. Not just females, slaves, and minors to the head of the household, but mutual submission of all Christians to each other, serving one another. Christ in Phil. 2.5-11 is presented as the paradigm of such voluntary submission and service of others. Finally, in Philemon we have third order moral discourse. Paul is addressing a close colleague and convert. Here, he can readily reveal his heart. He wants Onesimus manumitted and on basic principles— if he is a brother, then he should no longer be your slave, but rather a free person, more than a slave, a brother in Christ.
It is not an accident that we have evidence in subsequent early church history of Christians working to emancipate slaves from their bondage. They had rightly realized that slavery was one more institution created by sin as a result of human fallenness, human attempts to forcefully subjugate others. This was never God’s original plan for humankind. And so, from Paul all the way down to Phillis Wheatley, and beyond, Christians have realized the Bible if properly read and interpreted provides no justification for slavery, any more than it does for the subjugation of women to men by decree in the home or church.
In short, it’s time to bury that old canard of an argument that goes “since the Bible is wrong about slavery, then it must also be wrong about……..”
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In