1 Corinthians 7:21

7:21-23 Slavery illustrates the general principle stated in 7:17, 20, 24. Slavery was widespread in the Greco-Roman world, and many Christian converts were slaves serving rich families. Like circumcision, one’s own slavery is, according to Paul, a relatively unimportant issue for the Christian. Even as a slave, the Christian is spiritually free from the power of sin, death, and the law (see Rom 6:14; 7:4-6; 8:2). And as a freeman, the believer is still a slave of Christ (see Eph 6:5-6; 1 Pet 2:16). • As one who has been purchased at a high price (see 1 Cor 6:20), the free Christian ought not to be enslaved by the world.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Co 7:21. Μή σοι μελέτω, care not for it) Do not anxiously seek to be set free; so, do not seek [a wife], 1Co 7:27.—μᾶλλον χρῆσαι, use it rather) use the power of obtaining liberty, or rather use [continue in] slavery; for he, who might become free, has a kind master, whom it is better to serve, than to follow any other course of life, 1Ti 6:2; comp. the beginning of the next verse: therefore in 1Co 7:23, he does not say, be not, but do not become the servants of men.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_7:21. Μή σοι μελέτω] let it give thee no concern, let it be all the same to thee. Hom. Il. ii. 338, x. 92; Plato, Phaed. p. 95 B; Tim. p. 24 B; Wis_12:13; Mar_4:38, al[1172] What it is that ought to give him no concern, is plain from the immediate context, namely, his being called as a slave; not, as Hofmann would read into the text, his seeming to be doomed to lifelong slavery.

ἀλλʼ εἰ καὶ κ.τ.λ[1173]] but, even if thou art in circumstances to become free, use it rather, namely, the having been called as a slave; make use rather (instead of becoming free) of thy vocatio servi by remaining true to thy position as a slave. Comp 1Co_7:20. So, in substance, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact. Camerarius, Estius, Wolf, Bengel, and many of the older interpreters; among more modern expositors, de Wette, Osiander, Maier, Ewald,[1175] Baur (in the theol. Jahrb. 1852, p. 26 ff.), also Vaihinger in Herzogs Encykl. XIV. p. 474 f.; Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 417 f. The ἀλλά is nothing else than the German sondern, corresponding to the preceding μή σοι μελ., and ΕἸ ΚΑΊ is etsi (Herm. a[1176] Viger. p. 832; Stallbaum, a[1177] Plat. Apol. p. 32 A; Baeumlein, Partik. p. 151), so that it conveys the sense: even although, if even; and in the conditional clause the emphasis is made by καί to fall upon ΔΎΝΑΣΑΙ. The Syriac, however (elige tibi potius quam ut servias), and most modern commentators, supply Τῇ ἘΛΕΥΘΕΡΊᾼ after ΧΡῆΣΑΙ, with Luther, Erasmus, Castalio, Beza, Calvin, Grotius, Cornelius a Lapide, and many others (a view mentioned, too, by Chrysostom). Pauls advice, they hold, is rather to avail oneself of the opportunity of becoming free. But this is grammatically incorrect, because it goes in the face of the καί,[1178] and contrary also to the connection, for Paul would thus be contravening his own thrice-repeated injunction: let each man remain, etc. The ground specially founded on (in a very unhermeneutical way) by Rückert, that the old interpretation is against the spirit of the apostle, is untenable; for the advice to use the opportunities of obtaining freedoman advice comparatively unimportant and paltry in view of the Parousia believed to be at handby no means corresponds with the apostles lofty idea that all are one in Christ (Gal_3:28; 1Co_12:13; Col_3:11); that in Christ the slave is free and the freeman a slave (1Co_7:22); as, indeed, 1Co_7:22 can furnish a confirmation of 1Co_7:21 only on the ground of the old exposition, descending from Chrysostom, al[1179], of μᾶλλον χρῆσαι. It may be added, that that idea of true Christian equality carries in itself the germ of the abolition of slavery; the latter is the ripe fruit of the former. The moral consciousness of Christendom has not in this respect advanced beyond the standpoint of Paul (Baur); it is but a further development of the same principle which he enunciates, the future influence of which, however, upon the removal of slavery the apostle himself was not led to consider more closely from his expectation of the nearness of that great change which was to bring in for all believers the glorious liberty of the children of God. He left slavery, therefore, unassailed, as he did civil relations in general, not even asking, in his letter to Philemon, that Onesimus should be set free, but introducing the idea of Christian love, unity, and equality (1Co_12:13; Gal_3:28; Eph_6:8; Phm_1:16; Col_4:1),an idea, the consequence of which is necessarily the cessation of slavery, although just as necessarily it was not natural for the apostle, with his eye turned to the approaching Parousia, to single out this consequence and apply it for an age of the world which, in his view, was on the point of passing away. It may be further noted that he does not forbid an exchange of slavery for freedom, which was in itself allowable; but he dissuades from it as a trifling way of dealing with the position in question, under the circumstances of the time, when viewed from the height of the Christian standpoint.

[1172] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[1173] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1175] Who, however, expounds χρῆσθαι as meaning to let oneself be used, i.e. to be dependent, without being able to establish any precedent for such a rendering Regarding χρῆσθαι without a dative of the object, see Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. p. 452 C, 489 B.

[1176] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[1177] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[1178] What devices have been practised of late with this καί! Billroth thinks that it indicates an accessory thought: this, too, is not to be denied, that if thou canst be free, etc. Rückert thinks that it denotes a climax and properly (?) belongs to ἐλεύθ.: but if thou mayest even be free, etc. Olshausen holds that spiritual freedom is implied in καλεῖσθαι, and that, starting from this idea, Paul goes on: but if in addition to thy spiritual freedom thou canst obtain also bodily liberty, avail thyself of it rather. Even Neander substantially agrees with this. But upon Billroths view καί would require to come before εἰ; upon Rückerts and Olshausens, before ἐλεύθ.; and the turn given to the clause by the latter is but one proof out of many that men may make anything out of everything, if theywill. Hofmann considers that καί lays emphasis on the reality (comp. on ver. 11) as contrasted with the mere wish, which wish, however, is only brought in by an erroneous explanation of μή σοι μελέτω. He even maintains that, according to our understanding of the verse, Paul must have written καὶ εἰ. He might have written either, and would, had it been καὶ εἰ, have meant even in the case that; but he meant εἰ καί (if thou art even in a position to, etc.), and therefore wrote it and nothing else. The latter is as little absurd as the former.

[1179] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 7:21 . From the chief religious, the Ap. passes to the chief social distinction of the times: cf. Gal 3:28 , Col 3:11 . This contrast is developed only on one side no freeman wished to become a slave, as Gentiles wished to be Jews; but the slaves, numerous in this Church (1Co 1:26 ff.), sighed for liberty; their conversion stimulated this longing. The advice to the slave is read in two opposite ways: ( a ) “In slavery wast thou called? never mind ( μή σοι μελέτω )! But still if thou canst also become free, rather make use of it (than not)” so Ev [1086] excellently renders, with Cv [1087] , Bz [1088] , Gr [1089] , Hf [1090] , Bt [1091] , Gd [1092] , Lt [1093] , supplying τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ for complement to μᾶλλον χρῆσαι ; while ( b ) Est., Bg [1094] , D.W [1095] , Mr [1096] , Hn [1097] , Weiss, Weizsäcker, Al [1098] , El [1099] , Sm [1100] supply τῇ δουλείᾳ , and suppose P. to recommend the slave, with liberty offered, to “make use rather” of his servile condition. εἰ καὶ may either mean ( a ) “if verily” (Luk 11:18 ; so ἐὰν καὶ in 1Co 11:28 , Gal 6:1 ), or ( b ) “although” (Phi 2:17 , Luk 11:8 , etc.). The ancient commentators differed on this text, with a leaning to ( b ). The advocates of ( b ) exaggerate the sense of 1Co 7:20 ; 1Co 7:24 , which condemns change not per se but, as in the case of circumcision, because it compromises Christian faith and standing. “Freedom” is the object proximately suggested to “rather use” by “free” just above; and the sense of χράομαι in 1Co 7:31 , 1Co 9:12 ; 1Co 9:15 to “avail oneself of an opportunity of good” (Lt [1101] ) speaks in favour of ( a ). The οὐ δεδούλωται of 1Co 7:15 and the μὴ γίνεσθε δοῦλοι ἀνθρώπων of 1Co 7:23 indicate Paul’s feeling for freedom; and the δύνασθαι ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι was to the Christian slave a precious item in his providential μέρος (1Co 7:17 ).

[1086] T. S. Evans in Speaker’s Commentary .

[1087] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii .

[1088] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).

[1089] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.

[1090] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht , ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).

[1091] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).

[1092] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).

[1093] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).

[1094] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

[1095] .W. De Wette’s Handbuch z. N. T.

[1096] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).

[1097] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).

[1098] Alford’s Greek Testament .

[1099] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .

[1100] P. Schmiedel, in Handcommentar zum N.T. (1893).

[1101] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).

Upon this view, ἀλλὰ … χρῆσαι forms a parenthesis, resembling in its connexion the οὐ δεδούλ . clause of 1Co 7:15 , by which P. intimates that in urging contentment with a slave’s lot he does not preclude his embracing liberty, should it be offered. Having said this by the way, he supports his μή σοι μελέτω by the comforting reflexion of 1Co 7:22 a , which is completed in 1Co 7:22 b by the corresponding truth for the freeman.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_7:21

Art thou called (being) a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use (it) rather.

Here again the general sense is plain. A mans being a slave, so far as his being a Christian is concerned, is a matter of no account. It need give him no concern. The interpretation of the latter part of the verse is somewhat doubtful. According to most of the Fathers the meaning is, Care not for being a slave; but even if you can be free, prefer to remain as you are. This interpretation is adopted by several of the modern German commentators. It is urged in its favor that the original demands it. Paul does not Say but if (ἀλλ ̓ εἰ), but, but if even (ἀλλ ̓ εἰ καί). Care not for your slavery; but if even you can be free, use it rather; or, although (εἰ καί) thou canst be free, etc. The English version overlooks the καί. Besides, it is said the common interpretation is in conflict with the context. The very thing the apostle has in view is to urge his readers to remain in the condition in which they were called. Art thou called being circumcised, remain circumcised; art thou called being free, remain free; art thou called being a slave, remain a slave. There is not much force in this argument; because, as before remarked, Pauls object is not to exhort men not to improve their condition, but simply not to allow their social relations to disturb them; or imagine that their becoming Christians rendered it necessary to change those relations. He could, with perfect consistency with the context, say to the slave, Let not your being a slave give you any concern; but if you can become free, choose freedom rather than slavery. A third argument urged in favor of the interpretation above mentioned, is that it is more consistent with the spirit of the apostle, with his exalted views of the equality of all men in Christ, and with his expectation that all earthly distinctions would soon be swept away. The advice to slaves to avail themselves of the opportunity to become free, it is said, would be trivial in the estimation of one who believed that those slaves might, at any moment, be exalted to be kings and priests to God. It must be admitted that this interpretation is plausible. It is not, however, demanded either by the language used, or by the context. The conjunction (καί), overlooked in our version, may be rendered also. Wast thou called being a slave? care not for it; but if also (i.e. in addition to your being called) thou canst become free, use it rather. Luther, Calvin, Beza, and the great body of commentators from their day to this, understand the apostle to say that liberty was to be chosen if the opportunity to become free were offered. That the context does not conflict with this view of the passage, which our translators evidently adopted, has already been shown.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

As though this calling were too unworthy a calling for Christ.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

care not for it--Let it not be a trouble to thee that thou art a servant or slave.

use it rather--Continue rather in thy state as a servant (Co1 7:20; Gal 3:28; Ti1 6:2). The Greek, "But if even thou mayest be made free, use it," and the context (Co1 7:20, Co1 7:22) favors this view [CHRYSOSTOM, BENGEL, and ALFORD]. This advice (if this translation be right) is not absolute, as the spirit of the Gospel is against slavery. What is advised here is, contentment under one's existing condition (Co1 7:24), though an undesirable one, since in our union with Christ all outward disparities of condition are compensated (Co1 7:22). Be not unduly impatient to cast off "even" thy condition as a servant by unlawful means (Pe1 2:13-18); as, for example, Onesimus did by fleeing (Plm 1:10-18). The precept (Co1 7:23), "Become not (so the Greek) the servants of men," implies plainly that slavery is abnormal (compare Lev 25:42). "Men stealers," or slave dealers, are classed in Ti1 1:10, with "murderers" and "perjurers." NEANDER, GROTIUS, &c., explain, "If called, being a slave, to Christianity, be content--but yet, if also thou canst be free (as a still additional good, which if thou canst not attain, be satisfied without it; but which, if offered to thee, is not to be despised), make use of the opportunity of becoming free, rather than by neglecting it to remain a slave." I prefer this latter view, as more according to the tenor of the Gospel, and fully justified by the Greek.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 21. Art thou called being a servant?] δουλος εκληθης, Art thou converted to Christ while thou art a slave-the property of another person, and bought with his money? care not for it-this will not injure thy Christian condition, but if thou canst obtain thy liberty-use it rather-prefer this state for the sake of freedom, and the temporal advantages connected with it.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. Art thou called being a servant? We see here that Paul’s object is to satisfy their consciences; for he exhorts servants to be of good cheer, and not be cast down, as if servitude were a hinderance in the way of their serving God. Care not for it then, that is to say, be not concerned how you may throw off the yoke, as if it were a condition unbecoming a Christian, but be contented in mind. And hence we infer, not merely that it is owing to the providence of God that there are different ranks and stations in the world, but also, that a regard to them is enjoined by his word.

But if thou mayest even be made free The particle even (in my opinion) has simply this force, — “If, in place of servitude, you could attain even to liberty, it would be more advantageous for you.” It is uncertain, however, whether he continues his discourse to servants, or turns to address those that are free. In the latter case, γενέσθαι would here mean simply to be Either meaning suits sufficiently well, and they amount to the same thing. He means to intimate, that liberty is not merely good, but also more advantageous than servitude. If he is speaking to servants, his meaning will be this — While I exhort you to be free from anxiety, I do not hinder you from even availing yourselves of liberty, if an opportunity presents itself to you. If he is addressing himself to those that are free, it will be a kind of concession, as though he had said — I exhort servants to be of good courage, though a state of freedom is preferable, and more to be desired, if one has it in his choice.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(21) Art thou called being a servant?—Better, Were you called while a slave? Do not let that make you anxious. The fact of your being in slavery does not affect the reality of completeness of your conversion; and so you need have no anxiety to try and escape from servitude. In this and the following three verses the subject of SLAVERY is treated of as the second illustration of the general principle laid down in 1Co_7:17—viz., that a man’s conversion to Christianity should not lead him to change his national or social condition.

But if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.—These words may seem to imply that if a slave could obtain his liberty he was to avail himself of the opportunity to do so. Such an interpretation, however, is entirely at variance with the whole drift of the argument, which is, that he is not to seek such a change. What the Apostle does say is, that (so far from letting the servitude be a cause of distress to you) if you can even be free, prefer to use it, i.e., your condition as a converted slave. It, as well as any other position in life, can be used to God’s glory. Such an interpretation is most in accordance with the construction of the sentence in the original Greek; and it is in perfect harmony, not only with the rest of this passage, but with all St. Paul’s teaching and his universal practice on this subject.

It may be well here briefly to notice the attitude which the Apostle of the Gentiles maintains towards the great question of SLAVERY. While there were many points in which ancient slavery under the Greek and Roman Governments was similar to what has existed in modern days, there were also some striking points of difference. The slaves at such a place as Corinth would have been under Roman law, but many of its harsher provisions would doubtless have been practically modified by the traditional leniency of Greek servitude and by general usage. Although a master could sell his slave, punish him, and even put him to death, if he did so unjustly he would himself be liable to certain penalties. The power which a master could exercise over his slave was not so evidently objectionable in an age when parents had almost similar power over their children. Amongst the class called slaves were to be found, not only the commonest class who performed menial offices, but also literary men, doctors, midwives, and artificers, who were constantly employed in work suited to their ability and acquirements. Still, the fact remains that the master could sell his slave as he could sell any other species of property; and such a state of things was calculated greatly to degrade both those who trafficked and those who were trafficked in, and was contrary to those Christian principles which taught the brotherhood of men, and exalted every living soul into the high dignity of having direct communion with its Father.

How, then, are we to account for St. Paul, with his vivid realisation of the brotherhood of men in Christ, and his righteous intolerance of intolerance, never having condemned this servile system, and having here insisted on the duty of a converted slave to remain in servitude; or for his having on one occasion sent back a Christian slave to his Christian master without asking for his freedom, although he counted him his master’s “brother”? (See Ep. to Philemon.)

One point which would certainly have weighed with the Apostle in considering this question was his own belief in the near approach of the end of this dispensation. If all existing relations would be overthrown in a few years, even such a relation as was involved in slavery would not be of so great importance as if it had been regarded as a permanent institution.

But there were other grave considerations, of a more positive and imperative nature. If one single word from Christian teaching could have been quoted at Rome as tending to excite the slaves to revolt, it would have set the Roman Power in direct and active hostility to the new faith. Had St. Paul’s teaching led (as it probably would, had he urged the cessation of servitude) to a rising of the slaves—that rising and the Christian Church, which would have been identified with it, would have been crushed together. Rome would not have tolerated a repetition of those servile wars which had, twice in the previous century, deluged Sicily with blood.

Nor would the danger of preaching the abolition of servitude have been confined to that arising from external violence on the part of the Roman Government; it would have been pregnant with danger to the purity of the Church itself. Many might have been led, from wrong motives, to join a communion which would have aided them in securing their social and political freedom.

In these considerations we may find, I think, ample reasons for the position of non-interference which the Apostle maintains in regard to slavery. If men then say that Christianity approved of slavery, we would point them to the fact that it is Christianity that has abolished it. Under a particular and exceptional condition of circumstances, which cannot again arise, St. Paul, for wise reasons, did not interfere with it. To have done so would have been worse than useless. But he taught fearlessly those imperishable principles which led in after ages to its extinction. The object of Christianity—and this St. Paul over and over again insisted on—was not to overturn and destroy existing political and social institutions, but to leaven them with new principles. He did not propose to abolish slavery, but to Christianise it; and when slavery is Christianised it must cease to exist. Christianised slavery is liberty.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. use it rather] This may either be interpreted (1) “use freedom,” or (2) “use slavery.” Dean Stanley remarks of this passage that its interpretation “is one of the most evenly balanced questions in the New Testament.” But the context, the position of the word καὶ in the former part of the sentence (its literal translation would seem to be but even if thou canst be made free), and the fact that the word translated use has often the sense undergo, endure (for examples see Dean Alford’s note), make it probable that the second is the correct interpretation, and that the slave is here instructed to refuse freedom if offered. And the strongest objection to this interpretation, namely, that Christianity has always allowed men to occupy a position of more extended usefulness if offered to them, is obviated by the fact that St Paul does not absolutely forbid his converts to accept liberty; he merely instructs them to prefer to remain in the condition in which they were called, unless some very strong indication of God’s will bade them leave it, such as was manifested in the case of Onesimus. See Ep. to Philemon. The doctrine of Christian liberty was intended to make men free in, not from, the responsibilities of their position. But as St Peter reminds us (1Pe_2:16; 2Pe_2:19) the doctrine of Christian liberty could be abused. It was abused when it induced among the newly-converted a restlessness and dissatisfaction with their lot, which would have rendered Christianity a source, not of peace, but of confusion (cf. 1Co_7:15, and ch. 1Co_14:33).

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Art thou called being a servant?.... That is, called by grace whilst in the condition of a servant,

care not for it; do not be troubled at it, and uneasy with it; be not anxiously solicitous to be otherwise; bear the yoke patiently, go through thy servitude cheerfully, and serve thy master faithfully; do not look upon it as any objection to thy calling, any contradiction to thy Christian liberty, or as unworthy of, and a reproach upon thy profession of Christ:

but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. The Syriac renders the last clause, , "choose for thyself to serve"; perfectly agreeable to the sense given of the words, by several great critics and excellent interpreters, who take the apostle's meaning to be, that should a Christian servant have an opportunity of making his escape from his master, or could he by any art, trick, and fraudulent method, obtain his liberty, it would be much more advisable to continue a servant, than to become free by any such means: yea, some seem to carry the sense so far, that even if servants could be made free in a lawful way, yet servitude was most eligible, both for their own and their master's good: for their own to keep them humble and exercise their patience; for their master's not only temporal, but spiritual good; since by their good behaviour they might be a means of recommending the Gospel to them, and of gaining them to Christ; but one should rather think the more obvious sense is, that when a Christian servant has his freedom offered him by his master, or he can come at it in a lawful and honourable way, this being preferable to servitude, he ought rather to make use of it; since he would be in a better situation, and more at leisure to serve Christ, and the interest of religion: however, certain it is, that the apostle's design is, to make men easy in every station of life, and to teach them how to behave therein; he would not have the freeman abuse his liberty, or be elated with it, nor the servant be uneasy under his servitude, nor be depressed by it, for the reasons following.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

21 Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.

Ver. 21. Use it rather] Liberty is that we lost by sin, and affect by nature. Servus est nomen officii. A servant is not αυτοματος, one that moveth absolutely of himself, he is the master’s instrument, and ολως εκεινου, wholly his, saith Aristotle. Oh that we could be God’s servants in that sort!

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Being a servant - (δοῦλος doulos). A slave. Slaves abounded in Greece and in every part of the pagan world. Athens, e. g., had, in her best days, 20,000 freemen, and 400,000 slaves. See the condition of the pagan world on this subject illustrated at length, and in a very learned manner, by B. B. Edwards, in the Bib. Repository for October, 1835, pp. 411-436. It was a very important subject to inquire what ought to be done in such instances. Many slaves who had been converted might argue that the institution of slavery was contrary to the rights of man; that it destroyed their equality with other people; that it was cruel, and oppressive, and unjust in the highest degree; and that therefore they ought not to submit to it, but that they should burst their bonds, and assert their rights as freemen. In order to prevent restlessness, uneasiness, and insubordination; in order to preserve the peace of society, and to prevent religion from being regarded as disorganizing and disorderly, Paul here states the principle on which the slave was to act. And by referring to this case, which was the strongest which could occur, he designed doubtless to inculcate the duty of order, and contentment in general in all the other relations in which people might be when they were converted.

care not for it - Let it not be a subject of deep anxiety and distress; do not deem it to be disgraceful; let it not affect your spirits; but be content in the lot of life where God has placed you. If you can in a proper way obtain your freedom, do it; if not let it not be a subject of painful reflection. In the sphere of life where God by his providence has placed you, strive to evince the Christian spirit, and show that you are able to bear the sorrows and endure the toils of your humble lot with submission to the will of God, and so as to advance in that relation the interest of the true religion. in that calling do your duty, and evince always the spirit of a Christian. This duty is often enjoined on those who were servants, or slaves; Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; 1Ti 6:1; Tit 2:9; 1Pe 2:18. This duty of the slave, however, does not make the oppression of the master right or just, any more than the duty of one who is persecuted or reviled to be patient and meek makes the conduct of the persecutor or reviler just or right; nor does it prove that the master has a right to hold the slave as property, which can never be right in the sight of God; but it requires simply that the slave should evince, even in the midst of degradation and injury, the spirit of a Christian, just as it is required of a man who is injured in any way, to bear it as becomes a follower of the Lord Jesus. Nor does this passage prove that a slave ought not to desire freedom if it can be obtained, for this is supposed in the subsequent clause. Every human being has a right to desire to be free and to seek liberty. But it should be done in accordance with the rules of the gospel; so as not to dishonor the religion of Christ, and so as not to injure the true happiness of others, or overturn the foundations of society.

But if thou mayest be free - If thou canst (δύνασαι dunasai), if it is in your power to become free. That is, if your master or the laws set you free; or if you can purchase your freedom; or if the laws can be changed in a regular manner. If freedom can be obtained in “any” manner that is not sinful. In many cases a Christian master might set his slaves free; in others, perhaps, the laws might do it; in some, perhaps, the freedom of the slave might be purchased by a Christian friend. In all these instances it would be proper to embrace the opportunity of becoming free. The apostle does not speak of insurrection, and the whole scope of the passage is against an attempt on their part to obtain freedom by force and violence. He manifestly teaches them to remain in their condition, to bear it patiently and submissively, and in that relation to bear their hard lot with a Christian spirit, unless their freedom could be obtained without “violence and bloodshed.” And the same duty is still binding. Evil as slavery is, and always evil, and only evil, yet the Christian religion requires patience, gentleness, forbearance; not violence, war, insurrection, and bloodshed. Christianity would teach masters to be kind, tender, and gentle; to liberate their slaves, and to change the laws so that it may be done; to be “just” toward those whom they have held in bondage. It would not teach the slave to rise on his master, and imbrue his hands in his blood; to break up the relations of society by violence; or to dishonor his religion by the indulgence of the feelings of revenge and by murder.

Use it rather - Avail yourselves of the privilege if you can, and be a freeman. There are disadvantages attending the condition era slave, and if you can escape from them in a proper manner, it is your privilege and your duty to do it.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Magis utere, Greek: mallon chresai. St. John Chrysostom says, Greek: touteti mallon douleue.

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: If while thou art a servant to another in any honest employment, thou art converted to the Christian religion, let it not trouble thee, mind it not. A man may be the servant of Christ, and yet a servant to men in any honest employment.

But if thou mayest be made free, by the favour of thy friends, with the consent of thy master,

use it rather; that is, (say some), rather choose to be a servant still, (which indeed in some cases may be the duty of a good Christian), that is, if thou seest, that in that station thou canst better serve God and the interest of thy master’s or other souls. But it is more probable the sense is, make use of thy liberty rather; for certain it is, that the free-man is ordinarily at more advantage for the service of God than he that is a servant.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. Servant—As opposed to freeman in 1Co_7:22; the word, doubtless, here implies a slave.

Care not for it—Care not in the sense of repining. You have a divine freedom; let that inspire you with a free contentment with your condition. That fully obeys the law of abiding stated in 1Co_7:20.

But—A limitation now comes to the extent of that law of abiding. If—In the Greek ει και, if also; that is, if, in addition to, or over and above this Christian uncaringness, thou art able to become a freeman, for such is the Greek reading.

Use it rather—The question is to what the it here refers. Some refer it to δουλεια, slavery, implied in the word servant or slave. Others refer it to ελευθερια, freedom, as is implied in the words made free. Stanley considers the grammatical question between these two as remarkably evenly balanced, assuming that there is no third supposition. We think, on the contrary, that it refers to neither. Beyond reasonable doubt, we think, it refers to the chance of being free implied in δυνασθαι, art able. (Whilst revising these notes for the press we find, with satisfaction, that Dr. Fairbairn suggests the same reference. Our own notes stand precisely as they were written months before seeing his work on the “Pastoral Epistles.”) Alford maintains that the meaning is, use slavery, and supports it elaborately by a series of arguments which we think to be so many mistakes.

1. He argues that also implies an additional thought in the same direction with the antecedent thought. This is true, and our interpretation, as above, provides for it. The antecedent thought is the moral freedom of Christian quietude, and the also implies an additional thought in the same direction, namely, the actual chance of emancipation.

2. But the position of this also, (και,) he says, ought, by the interpretation he opposes, to be not before, but after art able. That is true, we reply, if freedom is supplied as the reference of it; but if, as we suppose, the chance implied in art able is the reference, the also is placed just right.

3. The but, he says, expresses too strong a contrast. Assuredly not. The contrast is between remaining a contented slave and the becoming a freeman; a contrast justifying a very strong but.

4. The absence of a supplied objective after use (it is supplied by the translator, as the italics show) flings us back, not on the secondary subject of the sentence, freedom, but the primary, slavery. But our interpretation makes it refer to neither slavery nor freedom, but to the being able to be free; and that is the subject of the entire sentence after the but; if thou hast a chance to be free use it in preference.

5. Our interpretation, Alford says, is inconsistent with the context; for the context tells the Christian to remain as he is, and the interpretation tells him to change his position. But Alford entirely misconstrues the context. Paul does not, as Dr. Hodge well says, forbid a man to “better his condition.” He does not forbid a journeyman mason becoming a boss mason: or an employe laying up money and becoming a capitalist and an employer; or a rail splitter’s behaving himself well and becoming president. What he is forbidding is, the expectation that Christianity is to break up the social order and fling every believer out of his position in the general system. The direction, therefore, to the slave, to remain a free-hearted slave, or to become free in accordance with social order, is truly telling him to remain in the system as he is.

6. But our interpretation, he says, makes the apostle “turn out of his way to give a precept of merely worldly wisdom, that a slave should become free if he could.” But is the direction to rise, if possible, from slavery, “a precept of mere worldly wisdom?” For a man to remain a voluntary slave when he might be free is a base self-degradation, an endorsement of the enslavement of others, and thereby a heinous wickedness. It is none the less this because, under the Mosaic law, a slave might prefer slavery, and so have his ear bored as a token of perpetual bondage; for that, like polygamy and free divorce, was on account of the hardness of the hearts of that age. A perverted state of society may, no doubt, exist under pagan despotism, where all are virtual slaves, in which emancipation may bring no higher wellbeing, moral or economical, especially for some individuals. But as Christianity asserted the law of marriage, so it could not but assert the moral obligation of every man to be free, unless the social state held him fast. The Christian was morally bound to be a freeman if possible. And in the day when a government becomes Christian—when right and progress are understood principles, slave laws and fugitive-slave laws are crimes and have no validity—then it is the duty of the slave, according to the law of revolution, when the opportunity arrives to assert his freedom by war and blood. Short of that it is his right, if possible, to escape; and the “underground railroad,” that aids his passage, is no unrighteous institution.

7. Finally, Alford asserts that the Greek for use is better suited to the word for slavery than for freedom, and he quotes so old an author as Herodotus to justify his criticism on the New Testament. All this has nothing to do with our position; which is, that neither freedom nor slavery is the object of use, but the chance of emancipation. And it is conclusive to our purpose for us to say that every instance in the New Testament of the Greek word for use has for its object a means to an end. And here it means to use the chance of emancipation as a means to the end of becoming a freeman.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Being a servant. This is the second instance of the rule. One who was converted whilst he was a slave is not to strive over anxiously for freedom. The word "emancipation" sometimes seems (as in the letter to Philemon) to be "trembling on Paul"s lips," but he never utters it, because to do so would have been to kindle social revolt, and lead to the total overthrow of Christianity at the very commencement of its career. Our Lord had taught the apostles to adapt means to ends; and the method of Christianity was to inculcate great principles, the acceptance of which involved, with all the certainty of a law, the ultimate regeneration of the world. Christianity came into the world as the dawn, not as the noon a shining light, which brightened more and more unto the perfect day. Care not for it. Do not be troubled by the fact, because in Christ "there is neither bond nor free", (Gal_3:28) and because earthly freedom is as nothing in comparison with the freedom which Christ gives (Joh_8:36). But if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. The words may mean,

(1) "use freedom avail yourself of the opportunity of emancipation; or

(2) "use slavery be content to remain a slave. In favour of the first interpretation is the fact that there is nothing extravagant or fantastic in Christian morality; and that, considering what ancient slavery was how terrible its miseries, how shameful and perilously full of temptations were its conditions it sounds unnatural to advise a Christian slave to remain a slave when he might gain his freedom. Yet the other interpretation, remain a slave by preference, seems to be required:

1. By the strict interpretation of the Greek particles.

2. By the entire context, which turns on the rule that each man should stay in the earthly condition in which he first received God"s call.

3. By the fact that even the Stoic moralists like Epictetus, who was himself a slave gave similar advice (Epict., "Dissert.," 3:26; "Enchir.," 10:32.)

4. By the indifference which St. Paul felt and expressed towards mere earthly conditions, (Gal_3:28) as things of no real significance. (Col_3:22)

1. By his appeal to the nearness of the day of Christ (vers. 29-31).

2. By the preponderance of high authorities Chrysostom, Theodoret, Luther, Bengel, De Wette, Meyer, Alford, etc. in favour of this view

3. By its parallelism to the advice given to Christian slaves in 1Ti_6:2, where they are urged to serve Christian masters all the more zealously because they were brethren.

4. Lastly, all the apparent harshness of the advice is removed when we remember that St. Paul was probably thinking only of the Christian slaves of Christian masters, between whom the relation might be as happy as that of Philemon to the forgiven Onesimus.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Care not for it - Do not anxiously seek liberty. But if thou canst be free, use it rather - Embrace the opportunity.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Wast thou called being a bondservant? care not for it: nay, even if ["nay, even if" should read "but if"] thou canst become free, use it [i. e., freedom] rather .

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. Art thou called being a servant? Half the population of the Roman Empire at this time were slaves. Thousands of the early Christians were in this condition. If a servant was converted, let him not be troubled over his servile state; but if he had the means of becoming free, let him rather choose freedom.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

21. μή σοι μελέτω. Trouble not thyself about it.

μᾶλλον χρῆσαι. This may either be interpreted (1) ‘use freedom,’ or (2) ‘use slavery.’ Dean Stanley remarks of this passage that its interpretation ‘is one of the most evenly balanced questions in the New Testament.’ But the context, the position of the word καὶ in the former part of the sentence (its literal translation would seem to be but even if thou canst be made free), and the fact that the word translated use has often the sense undergo, endure (for examples see Dean Alford’s note), make it probable that the second is the correct interpretation, and that the slave is here instructed as a rule to refuse freedom if offered. ‘If when you were called you were a slave, do not let it trouble you, and even if you have the chance of becoming free, do not jump at it.’ And the strongest objection to this interpretation, namely, that Christianity has always allowed men to occupy a position of more extended usefulness if offered to them, is obviated by the fact that St Paul does not absolutely forbid his converts to accept liberty; he merely instructs them to prefer to remain in the condition in which they were called, unless some very strong indication of God’s will bade them leave it, such as was manifested in the case of Onesimus. See Ep. to Philemon. The doctrine of Christian liberty was intended to make men free in, not from, the responsibilities of their position. But as St Peter reminds us (1Pe 2:16; 2Pe 2:19) the doctrine of Christian liberty could be abused. It was abused when it induced among the newly-converted a restlessness and dissatisfaction with their lot, which would have rendered Christianity a source, not of peace, but of confusion (cf. 1Co 7:15, and ch. 1Co 14:33). See the whole question discussed in the Introduction to Bishop Lightfoot’s Commentary on the Epistle to Philemon.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21-24.] Second example: Slavery. Wert thou called (converted) [being] a slave, let it not be a trouble to thee: but if thou art even able to become free, use it (i.e. remain in slavery) rather. This rendering, which is that of Chrys., Theodoret, Theophyl., Œcum, Phot., Camerar., Estius, Wolf, Bengel, Meyer, De Wette, al., is required by the usage of the particles, εἰ καί,—by which, see Hartung, Partikellehre, i. 139, the καί, ‘also,’ or ‘even,’ does not belong to the εἰ, as in καὶ εἰ, but is spread over the whole contents of the concessive clause: so Soph. Œd. Tyr. 302, πόλιν μέν, εἰ καὶ μὴ βλέπεις, φρονεῖς δʼ ὅμως, οἵᾳ νόσῳ ξύνεστιν. Plato, Rep. p. 337, εἰ δʼ οὖν καὶ μή ἐστιν ὅμοιον, φαίνεται δὲ τῷ ἐρωτηθέντι τοιούτων. Aristoph. Lysistr. 254, χώρει, Δράκης, ἡγοῦ βάδην, εἰ καὶ τὸν ὦμον ἀλγεῖς. Thucyd. ii. 64, μήτε ἐμὲ διʼ ὀργῆς ἔχετε … εἰ καὶ ἐπελθόντες οἱ ἐναντίοι ἔδρασαν, ἅπερ εἰκὸς ἦν μὴ ἐθελησάντων ὑμῶν ὑπακούειν. See more examples in Hartung. It is also required by the context: for the burden of the whole passage is, ‘Let each man remain in the state in which he was called.’ It is given in the Syr.: which has ܓܒܝ ܠܟ ܕܬܦܠܝܘܝܝ “choose for thyself that thou mayest serve,” or simply, “prefer servitude:” not as Meyer from the erroneous Latin of Tremelius, “elige tibi potius quam ut servias” (I am indebted for this correction of some of my earlier editions to the kindness of the Rev. Henry Craik, of Bristol). The other interpretation,—mentioned by Chrys., and given by Erasm., Luther (Stanley is mistaken in quoting him as favourable to the other interpretation: his words are, “Bist du ein Knecht berusen, sorge der nicht: doch, kannst du frei werben, so brauche deß viel lieber”), Beza, Calvin, Grot., and almost all the moderns,—understands τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ after χρῆσαι: ‘but if thou art able to become free, take advantage of it rather.’ The objections to this are, (1) the position of καί, which in this case must have been after δύνασαι,—εἰ δύνασαι καὶ ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι, or have been absent altogether. (2) The clause would hardly have begun with ἀλλὰ εἰ but with εἰ, δέ—so the alternative suppositions in vv. 9, 11, 15, 28, 36. The ἀλλά brings out a strong opposition to the μελέτω, and implies a climax which would ill suit a merely parenthetic clause, but must convey the point of the sentence. (3) The absence of a demonstrative pronoun after χρῆσαι, by which we are thrown back, not on the secondary subject of the sentence, ἐλευθερίᾳ, but on the primary, δουλείᾳ. (4) Its utter inconsistency with the general context. The Apostle would thus be giving two examples of the precept ἕκαστος ἐν ᾧ ἐκλήθη ἐν τούτῳ μενέτω, one of which would convey a recommendation of the contrary course. See this followed out in Chrysostom. (5) Its entire contradiction to ver. 22: see below. (6) It would be quite inconsistent with the teaching of the Apostle,—that in Christ (Gal 3:28) freeman and slave are all one,—and with his remarks on the urgency and shortness of the time in this chapter (ver. 29 ff.),—to turn out of his way to give a precept merely of worldly wisdom, that a slave should become free if he could. (7) The import of χράομαι in such a connexion, which suits better the remaining in, enduring, labouring under, giving one’s self up to, an already-existing state, than the adopting or taking advantage of a new one; cf. such expressions as τοιούτῳ μόρῳ ἐχρήσατο ὁ παῖς, Herod. i. 117: συμφορᾷ, συντυχίᾳ, εὐτυχίᾳ, χρῆσθαι, often in Herod.: ἀμαθίᾳ χρῆσθαι, and the like. The instance quoted by Bloomfield for ‘become free,’ ἑκὼν γὰρ οὐδεὶς δουλίῳ χρῆται ζύγῳ, Æsch. Agam. 953, tells just the other way. There χρῆται is used not of entering, but of submitting to, the yoke of slavery, as here.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. δοῦλος ἐκλήθης. ‘Wast thou a slave when thou wast called? Do not mind that.’ A slave can be a good Christian (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Tit 2:9). Thackeray quotes the iambic line in Philo, Quod omn. prob. Liber 7, δοῦλος πέφυκας; οὐ μέτεστί σοι λόγου. Here again, the clause might be either interrogative or hypothetical.

ἀλλʼ εἰ καὶ … μᾶλλον χρῆσαι. ‘But still, if thou canst also become free, rather make use of it than not.’ The καί affects δύνασαι, not εἰ: ‘if thou art also able to become free as well as to remain a slave’; if the one course is as possible as the other; then what? It is remarkable that the Apostle’s advice is interpreted in opposite ways. He says, ‘Rather make use of it.’ Make use of what? Surely, τῷ δύνασθαι ἐλεύθερος γενέσθαι, the possibility of becoming free. This was the last thing mentioned; and ‘make use of’ suits a new condition better than the old condition of slavery. Still more decidedly does the aorist. (χρῆσαι, not χρῶ) imply a new condition. The advice, thus interpreted; is thoroughly in keeping with the Apostle’s tenderness of heart and robustness of judgment. ‘Do not be miserable because you are a slave; yet, if you can just as easily be set free, take advantage of it rather than not.’ He regarded marriage as a hindrance to the perfection of the Christian life (vv. 32-35). Was not slavery, with its hideous temptations, a far greater hindrance?*

Nevertheless, various commentators, ancient and modern, insist on going back to δοῦλος for the dat. to be supplied with χρῆσαι and understand τῇ δουλείᾳ. Utere servitute quasi re bona et utili: servitus enim valet ad humililatem servandam et ad patientiam exercendam (Herv.) It is urged that in this way the Apostle remains consistent with his rule, ‘Abide in the calling in which thou wast called.’ But ἀλλʼ εἰ καὶ … χρῆσαι is a parenthetic mitigation given in passing; like ἐὰν δὲ καὶ … καταλλαγήτω in v. 11, it mentions a possible exception. The meaning will then be, ‘Slavery is not intolerable for a Christian, but an opportunity for emancipation need not be refused.’ The Christian slave is not to rebel against a heathen master, any more than a Christian wife against a heathen husband; but if the heathen is ready to grant freedom, the Christian slave, like the Christian wife, may take it without scruple. For this view, which is that of Luther, Erasmus, Calvin, and Beza, see Evans, Lightfoot, and Goudge; for the other, which is that of Bengel, Meyer, De Wette, and Edwards, see Alford, Ellicott and Schmiedel; but Schmiedel admits that χρῆσαι, if τῇ δουλείᾳ is to be understood, hat allerdings etwas Seltsames.

22.. ὁ γὰρ ἐν κυρίῳ κληθεὶς δοῦλος. ‘For he who, while in slavery, was called to be in the Lord is the Lord’s freedman.’† Or we may take ὁ with δοῦλος, ‘For the slave who was called in the Lord’; but the next clause is against this. A slave ‘called in the Lord’ is in relation to Christ a freedman: ἀπελεύθερος, like libertus, is a relative term, used c. gen. of the emancipator. Although in his secular condition he remains a slave, in his spiritual condition he has been set free: he is κλητὸς ἅγιος (1:1), and is free from the bondage of sin (Rom 6:6). There is no hint here that his master, if he were a Christian, would be sure to set him free; and even Phm 1:21 does not imply that. See Harnack, Mission and Expansion, 1. pp. 167 f.; Deissmann, Light, PP. 323, 326-333, 382, 392.

‘In like manner, he that was called being free is Christ’s slave’; or, ‘the free man by being called is Christ’s slave,’ he can no longer do as he likes to his own hurt; he is bound to obey his new spiritual Master and Lord. Such a bondservant of Christ was the Apostle himself, and he gloried in the fact (Rom 1:1; Php 1:1; Tit 1:1). Nowhere else in the Bible is ἀπελεύθερος found.

K L, Copt. Aeth. Arm. add καί after ὁμοίως: D E F G add δὲ καί: א A B P 17, Vulg. omit. καί or δὲ καὶ is usual after ὁμοίως, and hence the insertion; but here neither is required.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Use it rather. Whether the apostle means, use the bondage or use the freedom - whether, take advantage of the offer of freedom, or, remain in slavery - is, as Dean Stanley remarks, one of the most evenly balanced questions in the interpretation of the New Testament. The force of kai even, and the positive injunction of the apostle in vers. 20 and 24, seem to favor the meaning, remain in slavery. 95 The injunction is to be read in the light of ver. 22, and of Gal 3:28; Col 3:11; 1Co 12:13, that freeman and slave are one in Christ; and also of the feeling pervading the Church of the speedy termination of the present economy by the second coming of the Lord. See vers. 26, 29. We must be careful to avoid basing our conclusion on the modern sentiment respecting freedom and slavery.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vv. 21. “Thou wast called being a slave, care not for it; but if therewith thou mayest be made free, use it rather.”

Here in this domain is the extreme case which can be conceived. Few situations could appear so incompatible with Christian holiness, dignity, and freedom as that of a slave. But a multitude of evidences proves that Christianity had quite specially found access to persons of this class. But, abnormal as this position may appear, it will not remain beyond the victorious influence of the gospel. The spiritual elevation which faith communicates, places the believer above even this contrast: slave, free.

There is something heroic in the word of the apostle: care not for it. “Do not let this position weigh either on thy conscience or on thy heart!” Hofmann applies these words, not to the state of slavery, but to the counsel which the apostle has just given, in this sense: “Do not torment thyself with the counsel I give thee; it should not prevent thee from accepting thy liberty, if an opportunity of recovering it presents itself.” This explanation is not natural. For it is evident that it was his enslaved condition which would above all fill a Christian in this position with concern. The anxiety which Paul’s order could cause him was only an effect of that which the position itself caused.

The second part of this verse has been understood in two diametrically opposite senses. The ancient Greek exegetes, and, among the moderns, de Wette, Meyer, Osiander, Kling, Reuss, Renan, Heinrici, Holsten, Edwards, Jean Monod (in a pamphlet published in connection with the American War on the subject of slavery), among translators, Rilliet, Oltramare, Segond, Weizsäcker, think that the apostle means: “But, though thou mayest become free, use rather (slavery).” Calvin, Neander, Hofmann, Bonnet, Beet give this meaning, on the contrary, to the apostle’s words: “But nevertheless, if thou canst become free, profit by it (by accepting the advantage which is offered thee).”

The reasons ordinarily alleged in favour of the first interpretation are: 1. The conjunction εἰ καί, which signifies even if, although: “But although thou mightest become free, remain a slave.” 2. 1Co 7:22, which more naturally justifies the idea of remaining a slave. 3. The whole context, which rather calls for encouragement to remain what one is than to change his state. Renan compares Paul’s counsel thus understood with the words of the sages of the time: “The Stoics used to say like St. Paul to the slave: Remain what thou art; think not of freeing thyself.” According to this interpretation, the Christian slave would be invited to refuse, should the case occur, the liberation which was offered him, and “to regard his state, to use Reuss’ expression, as a means of education to salvation and as a special sphere of activity assigned to him.” But these reasons are far from seeming to me decisive. The form εἰ καί has not always the sense of even if or though. The two elements of which it is composed may remain distinct, so that the εἰ continues an if, and the καί an also. This is established by Passow by many examples (2.1540). We see this in our Epistle (1Co 4:7), and even in our chapter, in 1Co 7:11; 1Co 7:28, where the meaning of though would be absolutely illogical, and where the εἰ καί evidently signifies: If therewith, if however. A new fact (καί) presents itself, which gives a new aspect to the case. It is precisely so in our passage: “But if therewith (besides the internal liberty which thou possessest, or thy tranquillity of soul, thy οὐ μέλεσθαι), thou canst also become outwardly free...” (καί applying to δύνασαι γένεσθαι). It might even be asked whether, in the other sense, Paul would not have required to say: καὶ εἰ, and even if. On the connection with 1Co 7:22, see below. Finally, as to the context, it agrees perfectly with the second explanation, if this counsel be regarded as a restriction brought into the general rule. This is what is naturally indicated by the ἀλλά, but, for in the other sense it would require to be taken as an ἀλλά of gradation: but moreover; which is rather forced. We here find a restriction parallel to that of 1Co 7:15-16, which was also introduced by an adversative particle (εἰ δέ, but if). As, in these verses, the Christian spouse was authorized to deviate from the general rule and to separate from the heathen spouse who refused to remain with her; so in our verse the Christian slave, after having been exhorted to bear without a murmur the state of slavery, is authorized to take advantage of any opportunity which occurs of exchanging it for freedom: “But if, therewith, thou mayest be made free...”

The reasons which appear to me to decide in favour of this meaning are the following: 1. The natural regimen of χρῆσαι, make use of, after the words which immediately precede, If thou mayest be made free, is certainly: “make use of the possibility.” It is much less natural to go to the preceding sentence to borrow the idea of slavery. 2. The μᾶλλον, rather, which some oppose to this meaning, is on the contrary much more naturally explained if the apostle has in view the acceptance of liberty. He was well aware that the slave’s situation might be such that he could legitimately prefer to remain in it. Hence it is that to his counsel to accept he delicately adds the word rather, which takes away from his words everything of an imperative character: “I would have thee in this case to incline rather to liberty.” From the rule so forcibly inculcated: to remain in his position, there might in fact arise this misunderstanding, that a slave should not think himself free to profit by an offer of emancipation; this is what the apostle wishes to avoid. 3. Could Paul reasonably give to the Christian slave the advice to remain a slave if he could lawfully regain his freedom? Is not liberty a boon? Is it not the state which accords with the dignity of man? one of the features, the fundamental feature perhaps, of God’s image in man? No doubt the Christian slave possesses inward liberty; for the Lord has set him free, not only from condemnation and sin, but also from the yoke of external circumstances, which he can henceforth accept as a gift of God. Nevertheless it remains true, that enjoying liberty, he will be able as a rule to give himself more efficiently to the service of God. What would be said of a prisoner who should refuse liberation, alleging that in his prison he enjoys moral liberty? Or of a sufferer, who, being able to recover health, should refuse to do so for the reason that on his couch he possesses spiritual life? The apostle had too much wisdom from above, and also too much natural good sense, to give himself up to such exaggeration, which belongs to an unhealthy asceticism. Heinrici points out, rightly no doubt, the much more gentle and humane form which slavery had taken at that period. This is true: the master had no longer the right of life and death over his slave; but nevertheless he had the disposal of his person. And if the Christian could find strength in communion with Christ to overcome the temptations attached to such dependence, what an exaggeration would it be to bind him to reject an opportunity providentially offered of becoming free, and escaping from the cause of such conflicts! 4. Moreover, the apostle has himself clearly enough expressed his judgment on this question in the Epistle to Philemon; and all the torture to which Meyer subjects his words (see in his Commentary) does not avail to show that the apostle did not really and positively claim from Philemon the emancipation of Onesimus, who had become his brother by the common faith: “Knowing that thou wilt do even beyond what I say” (Phm 1:21). This passage may certainly be called the first petition in favour of the abolition of slavery. It is not by violent means, like servile wars, it is by the spirit which breathes in such words that Christianity has made and still makes the chains of the slave to fall. And as St. Paul could not contradict himself on this point, we may be assured that his thought was no other than this: “But if therewith (while consenting to live in the state of slavery, enjoying moral liberty) thou mayest become free, take advantage of it.”

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.