Does the Bible Condone Slavery?

Alright, now let's stop for a moment here and let's go back and answer a question that arose at the outset.

What is going on with all this language about slavery? I heard a non -believer say one time that the

Bible endorses slavery because of passages like Colossians 3 .22. Slaves, obey your masters in all things.

And of course, when we talk about slavery, what's floating around in the back of our minds is the slavery of America's past, right?

Here's what we need to understand. Paul is not endorsing slavery. If you want to know

Paul's heart with regard to slavery, read the letter to Philemon. Philemon was a slave owner who had a slave named

Onesimus. Onesimus ran away from Philemon and went to be with Paul. Onesimus got saved, and then

Paul sent him back with a letter appealing to Philemon, who was also a Christian, to welcome

Onesimus. And Paul said this, welcome him no longer as a slave, but more than that, as a brother in Christ.

He said in verse 17, receive Onesimus as you would receive me. This isn't someone who endorsed slavery.

Someone who endorsed slavery would not speak this way. Paul didn't endorse slavery.

But if he didn't endorse slavery, why didn't he say more to end slavery in his letters? It's a good question.

Here's what I think. I think Paul was doing something in Colossians that was much more eternal and way less political.

All right. See, Paul, when he writes these injunctions, what he essentially does is he flattens out the distinction between slave and master.

He flattens it out. Sure, there may be an earthly distinction, but in heaven there is no distinction.

Paul just finished saying at the beginning of chapter three, there is no Jew, there is no Greek, there is no slave, there is no free man.

Christ is all and in all. And because of this lack of heavenly distinction, a change of behavior between slave and master is now required.

In Christ, there is a new dynamic between these two, a new reciprocal relationship, one that is marked by divine love.

By forgiveness when offense is taken. One that acknowledges and submits to the lordship of Jesus Christ.

You know what that means? That means masters don't get to do whatever they want anymore. That means masters cannot be corrupt because they have a heavenly master that they now serve.

As a matter of fact, I think Paul gives much advantage to the slave and takes away much advantage from the master when he writes this way in Colossians.

We also have to think biblically about how moral failings like slavery, like racism, have been features of society spanning generations.

How has this happened? Where did these problems come from? The problems didn't come from insufficient public policy.

All the problems with the world comes from our sin. We broke the world. That's what's going on here.

And so there's a principle of redemption that we need to recognize here. And I'm trying to articulate this.

Somebody help me. God very often chooses not to change immediate contexts, but to redeem individuals within those contexts.

All right. Let me try that out again. God very often chooses not to change immediate contexts, but instead he chooses to redeem individuals in those contexts.

Why do I say that? Because the solution to sin is the renovation of the heart by the power of the Holy Spirit and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

That in the long run is a way more effective and long -term strategy for change when it comes to societal ills.

Once the heart truly changes and recognize God's attitudes towards his own creation, then it starts to sink in that there is no place for slavery in the kingdom of God.

And so what Paul has done here essentially, in my opinion, is he's planted the seeds of the end of slavery by saying what he said.

You still with me? All right. Here's the last thing I'll say about this, although it's probably the least compelling thing to say. Probably.

Slaves in 1st century Colossae were not the same thing as slaves in Antebellum South. They were not.

In some key ways, there were similarities. In a number of key ways, these two types of folks were very, very different.

There's not a whole lot of evidence where we can draw conclusions about what was going on in 1st century

Colossae with regard to slaves. But with the evidence that we do have, it appears that slaves in the 1st century were sometimes treated as family.

It appears that some slaves had non -servile roles within households. In other words,

Paul's not writing to Antebellum slaves in the American South and he's saying just keep enduring those particular crimes that are happening against you.

He's talking to a different group of people altogether in a different cultural context. See, I think some of us missed this on the first go around.

But Paul's comments to slaves, if you just look at your text right here and you go all the way back up to verse 18. Or maybe you already saw this.

They're actually connected to Paul's comments to husbands and wives and children. Why is that?

Because slaves were part of the typical household in the 1st century. A lot of slaves had privileges.

A lot of them got married. A lot of them had children. A lot of their children grew up and had children. They all lived alongside each other in one single household.

So when Paul is giving household instructions, my little subtext in my

Bible says family relations, to Christians to fulfill their roles as husbands and wives and children.

Well, he needs to address the slaves because if he doesn't, he's going to miss the opportunity to talk about a vital component of a household back in the 1st century.

That's what's going on. Which means that the injunction to slaves and masters trades on them both being

Christians. That probably doesn't explain everybody in the church and coliseum at the time.

Okay. But when Paul writes, he writes with the expectation that both slave and master are Christians serving the

Lord Jesus Christ. Philemon and Onesimus are perfect examples. They fit right into these instructions that Paul gives in chapter three.

As a matter of fact, some scholars think that Paul was writing these things in chapter three because of Philemon and Onesimus to sort of pave the way for their reconciliation.

So those are some things to think about when Paul talks about slaves here. He may not have called for the end of slavery, even if we wanted him to, you know, that might've been a little bit more expedient, but I think he actually did something greater that had more eternal significance.