It is encouraging to read restoration movement literature from the 19th century denouncing slavery. This was such a divisive period in our nation’s history, and I am happy to know that those involved in the early effort to restore the principles of the new testament church were on the right side of history and humanity. I am also painfully aware that many churches pointed to the new testament to justify slavery. After all, the theory went, Paul sent a slave back to his master:
Philemon 12-14 – I am sending him–who is my very heart–back to you. I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. 14 But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do will be spontaneous and not forced. (NKJV)
As it turns out, it is far more likely that Onesiumus was a bondservant, and that Paul was sending him, a debtor to his physical brother Philemon, back to his master. The KJV uses the word “servant” rather than “slave,” and this seems more consistent with the context that Onesimus was Philemon’s biological brother:
Philemon 15-16 – For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord? (KJV)
In any case, we would look ill upon any person contractually owning another human being’s freedom. But Paul instructed Timothy that Christian bondservants should continue to submit to their believing masters, because they are brothers:
1 Timothy 6:2 – Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them.
What is striking about Paul is that he did not write to Philemon commanding him, as a matter of Christian law, to free his bondservant Onesimus. Instead, he requested this of him as a personal favor and as a tribute to his love for his brother in the flesh and in Christ. He did not write for bondservants to demand their freedom from Christian masters, who ought to have known better than to put another human being into bondage, contractual or not. Instead, he instructed them to submit to their brothers out of love. This speaks volumes about the role of Christian brotherhood in bonding together a diverse people.
Did Paul soften Jesus’ doctrine to “love your neighbor as yourself?” No. Was he cheapening the message by currying political favor in a society that thought nothing of putting other human beings into bondage? Absolutely not. In fact, he was illustrating in the extreme Jesus’ command by not twisting it to read “insure that your masters love you and free you.” Jesus’ command was to be internalized in the individual: “love your masters.”
Are we, then, like lawyers, to use the apostle’s letters as legal documents, establishing for all in our “brotherhood” what are the lawful and unlawful methods of edifying each other? Or are we to use them as exhortations to think and act in accordance with the principle of love for God, his Son, and our brethren? Paul’s lack of “pulling rank” and issuing a command is a telling sign of how we are to be longsuffering and patient with our brethren who may be in error on points of doctrine or practice.
Churches in the South often divided over the issue of slavery, forming communities of like-minded believers based on where groups came down on that issue. But never does Paul demand or suggest that. You can’t persuade a brother to give up his slaves in the spirit of Christian love if you dissociate with him. Slavery was and is contrary to Christ’s law of love for all mankind. To enslave a fellow human being is to act contrary to Jesus’ summation of the law in the command to “love your neighbor as yourself.” Our “golden rule,” which is based on this command, is clearly violated in the act of enslaving a person, whether that slavery is the result of financial default or not.
If Paul could be patient with a brother who held a bondservant, something I cannot imagine doing, I can be patient with a brother who, in good conscience, doesn’t see eye to eye with me on matters of church practice. Like Onesimus, we have been freed from bondage, but for us, it is the bondage of the written code:
Galatians 5:1 – It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
The written code has been abolished, as surely as the institution of slavery:
Romans 2:29 – No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.
Romans 7:6 – But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
It is replaced by serving God in a new way. This new way is not summed up by formatting each of our assemblies in the exact pattern of the early church. That may be wise, but it is neither the sum and substance of the gospel nor of Christian fellowship and association. There is no more a fixed, legal pattern for our assemblies than there is a legislative code to establish that pattern. That, of course, doesn’t mean we are antinomian, or without law or instruction on the Christian assembly. But it does mean we can’t establish a fixed pattern for our assembly by which we can measure the faithfulness of ourselves or other believers.
Those living under the Law of Moses were required to conform with a detailed legislative code, but the law of Christ is not like that. The Law was a tutor to bring us to Christ, and He didn’t bring along another tutor. Our law is written in our hearts, addressed to our reason, to our humanity, and to our love for God and our fellow man. The new testament scriptures are not meant to be read with the intent of determining what God has legislated. Instead, we are to educate our consciences with them, forbearing one another in love in matters where we disagree, and working together for the common goal of spreading the good news of Jesus Christ. That is true freedom from the bondage of the written code and absolute compliance with our only true pattern, Jesus Christ himself.
Freedom from bondage
It is encouraging to read restoration movement literature from the 19th century denouncing slavery. This was such a divisive period in our nation’s history, and I am happy to know that those involved in the early effort to restore the principles of the new testament church were on the right side of history and humanity. I am also painfully aware that many churches pointed to the new testament to justify slavery. After all, the theory went, Paul sent a slave back to his master:
Philemon 12-14 – I am sending him–who is my very heart–back to you. I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel. 14 But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do will be spontaneous and not forced. (NKJV)
As it turns out, it is far more likely that Onesiumus was a bondservant, and that Paul was sending him, a debtor to his physical brother Philemon, back to his master. The KJV uses the word “servant” rather than “slave,” and this seems more consistent with the context that Onesimus was Philemon’s biological brother:
Philemon 15-16 – For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord? (KJV)
In any case, we would look ill upon any person contractually owning another human being’s freedom. But Paul instructed Timothy that Christian bondservants should continue to submit to their believing masters, because they are brothers:
1 Timothy 6:2 – Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them.
What is striking about Paul is that he did not write to Philemon commanding him, as a matter of Christian law, to free his bondservant Onesimus. Instead, he requested this of him as a personal favor and as a tribute to his love for his brother in the flesh and in Christ. He did not write for bondservants to demand their freedom from Christian masters, who ought to have known better than to put another human being into bondage, contractual or not. Instead, he instructed them to submit to their brothers out of love. This speaks volumes about the role of Christian brotherhood in bonding together a diverse people.
Did Paul soften Jesus’ doctrine to “love your neighbor as yourself?” No. Was he cheapening the message by currying political favor in a society that thought nothing of putting other human beings into bondage? Absolutely not. In fact, he was illustrating in the extreme Jesus’ command by not twisting it to read “insure that your masters love you and free you.” Jesus’ command was to be internalized in the individual: “love your masters.”
Are we, then, like lawyers, to use the apostle’s letters as legal documents, establishing for all in our “brotherhood” what are the lawful and unlawful methods of edifying each other? Or are we to use them as exhortations to think and act in accordance with the principle of love for God, his Son, and our brethren? Paul’s lack of “pulling rank” and issuing a command is a telling sign of how we are to be longsuffering and patient with our brethren who may be in error on points of doctrine or practice.
Churches in the South often divided over the issue of slavery, forming communities of like-minded believers based on where groups came down on that issue. But never does Paul demand or suggest that. You can’t persuade a brother to give up his slaves in the spirit of Christian love if you dissociate with him. Slavery was and is contrary to Christ’s law of love for all mankind. To enslave a fellow human being is to act contrary to Jesus’ summation of the law in the command to “love your neighbor as yourself.” Our “golden rule,” which is based on this command, is clearly violated in the act of enslaving a person, whether that slavery is the result of financial default or not.
If Paul could be patient with a brother who held a bondservant, something I cannot imagine doing, I can be patient with a brother who, in good conscience, doesn’t see eye to eye with me on matters of church practice. Like Onesimus, we have been freed from bondage, but for us, it is the bondage of the written code:
Galatians 5:1 – It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
The written code has been abolished, as surely as the institution of slavery:
Romans 2:29 – No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.
Romans 7:6 – But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
It is replaced by serving God in a new way. This new way is not summed up by formatting each of our assemblies in the exact pattern of the early church. That may be wise, but it is neither the sum and substance of the gospel nor of Christian fellowship and association. There is no more a fixed, legal pattern for our assemblies than there is a legislative code to establish that pattern. That, of course, doesn’t mean we are antinomian, or without law or instruction on the Christian assembly. But it does mean we can’t establish a fixed pattern for our assembly by which we can measure the faithfulness of ourselves or other believers.
Those living under the Law of Moses were required to conform with a detailed legislative code, but the law of Christ is not like that. The Law was a tutor to bring us to Christ, and He didn’t bring along another tutor. Our law is written in our hearts, addressed to our reason, to our humanity, and to our love for God and our fellow man. The new testament scriptures are not meant to be read with the intent of determining what God has legislated. Instead, we are to educate our consciences with them, forbearing one another in love in matters where we disagree, and working together for the common goal of spreading the good news of Jesus Christ. That is true freedom from the bondage of the written code and absolute compliance with our only true pattern, Jesus Christ himself.
About Editor
Newshound, writer, digital marketer, passionate about Jesus, unity, liberty, family, foster care & adoption.What you can read next
Sitting on the fence
Restoration: A movement or a monument?
The flaw of silence