What does the Bible have to say about freedom from slavery?  Do we have to privilege the story of the Exodus over the teachings of Paul in order to arrive at an acceptable answer?  Or do we have to ditch the Bible as our holy book, because we believe that it fails to condemn slavery in its various forms?

In chapter 7, Esau MacCaulley tackles the most important biblical texts on this question.

Reading the Bible like Jesus did

When Jesus was asked about divorce, he pointed his questions back beyond the Mosaic law (Deut 24:1-4), which permitted it under some circumstances, to God’s creational intention:

Mt 19:3 Then some Pharisees came to him in order to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?” 19:4 He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female, 19:5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 19:7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” 19:8 Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way.” (Emphasis added)

Jesus’ approach suggests that Christian ethics should be guided more by those texts which set out what God intended us to be than by those which make concessions because of what we have become (due to sin).

Both divorce and slavery can be seen as non-optimal measures that seek to regulate and limit the damage we do to one another in our fallen nature.

The law is good, and retains its formative place in Christian ethics.  But the law of Moses leads us to the law of Christ, whose service is perfect freedom (see Gal :19-24).

The book of Revelation (which is in so many ways the counterpart of Genesis) sets forth God’s vision for the reconciliation of all things.  And this entails ‘a community of the healed and transformed, not the enslaved’ (Rev 21:3f).

So, the story of the Bible creates ‘an imaginative world in which slavery becomes more and more untenable.’

Regarding God’s character

To view the teaching of the Old Testament from a slightly different angle, consider its presentation of the character of God.

He is a God who hears the sufferings of his people and rescues them (Ex 3:7-10; Deut 7:8; Lev 11:45).  God’s liberating attitude was to be extended to the strangers in Israel’s midst (Deut 24:17).

Of course, the slave passages still exist.  But they must not be used, as the slave-holders used them, to undo the story of the Exodus and its testimony to the character of God.

Some Old Testament texts

MacCaulley’s argument is not that, according to the Bible, we may approve ‘good’ slavery and only condemn ‘bad’ slavery.  It is, rather, that the whole trajectory of Scripture leads inexorably to the dismantling of all forms of slavery.

Consider, first, the stipulation that no Hebrew could be enlaved for more than six years (Deut 15:12-15).  This virtually dissolves slavery as an institution at a single stroke.

We might well wonder why this law of Jubilees didn’t apply to foreign slaves.  But texts such as Isa 2:2-4; 25:6 do look forward to a day when debt and war (the two main drivers of slavery in the ancient Near East) will be no more.  Moreover, these texts look to the spread of Israel’s law to the Gentiles (Isa 2:3).  In such ways, God’s justice would become ‘a light to the nations’ (Isa 51:4).

Further: the law provided for slaves’ safety if they were able to escape (Deut 23:15f).

Still further: various OT texts focus on the human treatment of slaves.  For example, Ex 20:20f allows for the life of slave who has been fatally wounded to be avenged.  And Ex 21:26f says that a slave who is injured by his owner should be set free.  According to these texts, the slave is not a mere chattel, but a person who, when wronged, can receive redress.

MacCaulley concludes that the OT provisions for slaves far outstrips anything found in other cultures of the time.  Moreover, they set a trajectory towards complete liberation.

The teaching of Paul

Neither Paul, nor anyone else (with the exception of Gregory of Nyssa) in the first few centuries of the Christian era seemed to envision an end to the institution of slavery.  It would be unrealistic to suppose that the fledgling church could have effected such a change within the Roman empire.

Nevertheless, even within Paul’s writings we find an impetus that leads towards the abolition of slavery.

In his letter to Philemon, Paul repeatedly refers to himself and others as ‘prisoners’, thereby reducing himself and them to a social rank similar to that of Onesimus.  He refers to Philemon as ‘brother’, thus emphasising the character of all Christians, whether slaves or free, as having family ties.  And whoever would enslave a brother or a sister?  Paul wants Philemon to accept Onesimus, not as a slave, but as a brother.

But Paul expresses confidence that Philemon will do ‘more than I ask’.  This can only mean that he wants him not merely to treat Onesimus as if he were a brother, but to actually grant him his freedom.  In the words of Raymond Brown, Paul wants

‘a Christian slave owner to defy the conventions: To forgive and receive back into the household a runaway slave; to refuse financial reparation when it is offered, mindful of what one owes to Christ as proclaimed by Paul; to go farther in generosity by freeing the servant; and most important of all from a theological viewpoint to recognize in Onesimus a beloved brother and thus acknowledge his Christian transformation.’

The very nature of the Christian life demands that believers live as free men and women.  For how can they fully function as Christian husbands, fathers, wives and children while they remain enslaved?

In 1 Cor 7:21-24 Paul appears to be entirely complacent about slaves remaining in that condition.  But his point is that they do not accrue guilt through not being able to serve the Lord as fully as free persons can.  He does, however, counsel them to obtain their freedom if they can.

What about 1 Tim 6:1-3, where Paul tells slaves to submit to their (nonChristian) masters?  But we are not to suppose that Paul was being cynical when he wrote that faith reconfigures relationships between people, including masters and slaves.

In this passage, Paul is concerned that God’s name and Christian teaching should not be brought into disrepute.  This is reminiscent of those in the Old Testament who serve as examples of those who remained faithful to God while enslaved.  Paul does not expect slaves to do anything their masters demand, given the example of Joseph, who refused to have sex with Potiphar’s wife, and that of Daniel, who refused to bow down to an idol.

So then,

‘when Paul speaks of slaves honoring their masters, he does not mean unquestioned obedience. Drawing on the prophetic tradition, he has in mind behaving in such a way that their masters are drawn to God. This included, according to the Old Testament testimony, periodic refusal to obey. This is not slavery as evangelism. Instead, it is saying that even in slavery one has some ability to live in a way that testifies to their beliefs.’

When, in the same passage, Paul asks Christian slaves to treat their Christian masters with respect, he is speaking to slaves as moral agents and not merely as tools.  There is potential here for the gospel to weaken the power of slavery and thus lead, eventually, to its abolition.

So Paul begins the job of dismantling the institution of slavery.  It is a job which the church should have completed much sooner than it did.

As Pennington, a former slave, concluded:

‘My sentence is that slavery is condemned by the general tenor and scope of the New Testament. Its doctrines, its precepts, and all its warnings against the system. I am not bound to show that the New Testament authorizes me in such a chapter and verse to reject a slaveholder. It is sufficient for me to show what is acknowledged by my opponents, that it is murdering the poor, corrupting society, alienating the brethren, and sowing the seed of discord in the bosom of the whole church.… Let us always bear in mind of what slavery is and what the gospel is.’