The uncomfortable fact should come first:
Paul never commands the Roman Empire to abolish slavery.
He writes to Christians living inside a slave society. He tells enslaved people how to live faithfully. A short letter to Philemon concerns an enslaved man named Onesimus, yet Paul never simply writes the sentence modern readers most want:
“Free him immediately because owning another human being is intrinsically immoral.”
Christians should not hide this.
But neither should we pretend Paul simply baptized Roman slave ideology unchanged.
His letters contain social and theological claims that destabilize the master–slave hierarchy from within.
Roman Slavery Was Real Slavery
A common apologetic mistake says:
“Roman slavery was more like employment than American slavery.”
That is false.
Roman slavery differed significantly from the race-based hereditary chattel slavery of the modern Atlantic world. Enslaved people could enter slavery through:
- war;
- birth;
- exposure or sale;
- piracy;
- punishment;
- debt-related circumstances in some periods.
Some enslaved people became educated household managers, teachers, scribes, physicians, or administrators. Some obtained freedom.
But none of that turns slavery into ordinary employment.
Enslaved persons were legally controlled by masters. They could face:
- sale;
- beating;
- forced labor;
- family separation;
- sexual exploitation;
- corporal punishment;
- extreme status vulnerability.
Roman slavery must not be sanitized simply because it did not map perfectly onto the American plantation system.
Paul’s Clearest Case: Philemon
Philemon is an undisputed Pauline letter.
Paul writes concerning Onesimus, a man legally connected to Philemon as a slave.
The exact backstory is uncertain.
Onesimus may have:
- fled from Philemon;
- sought Paul as a mediator;
- been sent to assist Paul;
- become separated from Philemon under circumstances we cannot reconstruct.
We should not call him a “runaway slave” as though the text explicitly says so. It does not.
Paul’s Language About Onesimus
Paul says Onesimus has become his “child” during imprisonment.
Then comes the crucial appeal:
Philemon should receive him:
“no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother.”
This sentence is enormous.
Paul does not merely tell Philemon to become a nicer slaveholder.
He reframes Onesimus through baptismal kinship.
Onesimus is a brother in Christ.
Does Paul Demand Manumission?
Not explicitly.
This has to be admitted.
Paul says he could command Philemon but chooses to appeal in love. He asks Philemon to receive Onesimus as he would receive Paul himself. He expresses confidence that Philemon will do “even more” than Paul says.
Some interpreters think this is a tactful request for manumission.
It is plausible.
But it is not certain.
The letter never records Philemon’s response, and Paul never uses an unambiguous verb meaning “set Onesimus free.”
The responsible conclusion is:
Paul presses Philemon toward a relationship difficult to reconcile comfortably with ordinary slave hierarchy, but the surviving text stops short of a clear abolition command.
“No Longer as a Slave”
Could Paul mean only spiritual brotherhood while Onesimus remains legally enslaved?
Possibly.
Early Christianity often transformed relationships without immediately dismantling their legal structures.
But Paul’s request that Philemon receive Onesimus as he would receive Paul makes the spiritual claim socially dangerous.
If Paul himself deserves honor, fellowship, and familial reception, and Onesimus is to be received in the same way, the master’s absolute status superiority is being challenged.
The gospel has created a brother where Roman law sees property.
Galatians 3:28
Paul declares:
“There is neither slave nor free … for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
This does not automatically abolish Roman legal categories.
Enslaved Christians remained enslaved after baptism.
Yet Paul denies that slave/free status determines covenant standing or access to Christ.
That theological equality eventually creates moral pressure against treating a baptized brother or sister as a disposable thing.
But history shows that Christians could live with the contradiction for centuries.
We must not convert theological potential into an abolition movement that Paul did not actually organize.
First Corinthians 7:21
Paul tells enslaved believers not to let their condition dominate their identity.
Then comes a notoriously difficult line commonly translated along the lines of:
“But if you can gain your freedom, make use of the opportunity.”
The Greek has been debated.
Some older interpreters understood Paul to mean:
even if freedom becomes possible, remain in slavery.
Many modern interpreters think he instead means:
if you can become free, take the opportunity.
The latter fits the natural force of the context for many scholars.
But Paul’s larger point is theological: the slave called in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person, and the free Christian is Christ’s slave.
Human status is relativized under Christ.
“You Were Bought With a Price”
Paul then says:
“You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men.”
The language is metaphorical and theological.
Christ owns the believer.
It would be too much to turn the verse into a universal legal abolition statute.
But it creates a profound tension with human ownership.
A Christian ultimately belongs to Christ.
Household Codes
Ephesians and Colossians contain instructions to slaves and masters.
Ephesians tells slaves to obey earthly masters and tells masters to stop threatening, remembering that both slave and master have the same heavenly Master.
Colossians similarly commands slaves to serve sincerely and masters to treat slaves justly and fairly.
These texts clearly regulate slavery rather than abolish it.
That is morally uncomfortable.
Authorship Matters
Modern scholars frequently dispute Pauline authorship of Ephesians and Colossians, though Colossians retains significant defenders.
Therefore we should distinguish:
- the undisputed Paul: Philemon, Galatians, 1 Corinthians;
- the broader canonical Pauline tradition: Ephesians and Colossians.
Canonical authority is not erased by authorship debates.
But historical reconstruction should remain precise.
Why Did Paul Not Call for Abolition?
Several explanations are proposed.
He expected an imminent eschaton
Paul believed the present form of the world was passing away.
This may have reduced interest in a long-term political program.
Christians had almost no political power
The small house churches of the 50s did not possess the institutional capacity to legislate the Roman economy.
His mission focused on new creation within communities
Paul’s strategy was ecclesial transformation rather than imperial revolution.
He still accepted some ancient social structures
This uncomfortable possibility should not be excluded.
Paul was an inspired apostle, but he still spoke inside a first-century social world.
Interpreters disagree about how theological inspiration relates to historically conditioned social assumptions.
Did Christianity Cause Abolition?
Christian arguments eventually contributed powerfully to abolition.
Abolitionists appealed to:
- human creation in God’s image;
- the Exodus;
- love of neighbor;
- the unity of humanity;
- Galatians 3:28;
- Philemon;
- the brotherhood of Christians.
But Christians also defended slavery for centuries and used biblical texts to do it.
The history is morally mixed.
Christianity should not claim exclusive credit for abolition while ignoring Christian participation in slave systems.
Roman Slavery and American Slavery
The comparison requires two sentences at once.
They were not identical systems.
American chattel slavery became intensely racialized and hereditary in ways that do not simply describe all Roman slavery.
But:
Roman slavery was still ownership and domination of human beings.
It could involve extreme violence, forced labor, family disruption, and sexual access to the enslaved.
The difference must never become an excuse.
Orthodox Theology
Orthodoxy sees every person as created in God’s image and called to theosis.
No human being is spiritually inferior because of social rank.
The Eucharist creates one body.
A master and enslaved Christian approaching the same chalice stand before the same Lord.
Historically, Orthodox societies also tolerated forms of slavery and servitude. The Church’s moral history cannot be idealized.
The theological trajectory, however, moves toward the incompatibility of human commodification with the dignity of the person in Christ.
Did Paul Support Slavery?
The answer depends on what “support” means.
If it means:
Did Paul explicitly condemn the institution and demand immediate universal emancipation?
No.
If it means:
Did Paul teach that Roman mastery expressed God’s ideal order and that enslaved people were naturally inferior property?
Also no.
Paul operates inside slavery while undermining some of its deepest status claims.
Final Verdict
Paul did not preach a modern abolitionist program, and Christians should not pretend he did.
The undisputed letters show him:
- addressing enslaved Christians within the institution;
- not issuing a universal emancipation command;
- possibly encouraging freedom in 1 Corinthians 7;
- declaring slave and free one in Christ;
- insisting Christians ultimately belong to Christ;
- asking Philemon to receive Onesimus “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother.”
That is not enough to call Paul a nineteenth-century abolitionist.
It is also not a theological endorsement of human beings as naturally subordinate property.
The most historically honest conclusion is:
Paul accommodates a slave society he does not politically abolish, while planting ecclesial and theological convictions—brotherhood, equal baptismal standing, belonging to Christ, and one body—that stand in deep tension with treating another human being as a thing.
Key Sources
Primary sources
- Philemon.
- 1 Corinthians 7:17–24; 12:13.
- Galatians 3:28.
- Colossians 3:22–4:1.
- Ephesians 6:5–9.
Modern scholarship
- John M. G. Barclay, “Paul, Philemon and the Dilemma of Christian Slave-Ownership,” New Testament Studies.
- Jennifer A. Glancy, Slavery in Early Christianity.
- Kyle Harper, Slavery in the Late Roman World.
- Dale B. Martin, Slavery as Salvation.
- J. Albert Harrill, Slaves in the New Testament.