John MacArthur believes he has ‘uncovered’ something of a cover up. This cover up is by the English Bible translators. Now you may be wrongly tempted to think that in his later years of ministry he has gone off the deep end to join someone like Dan Brown. He hasn’t. He believes “the cover-up was not intentional–at least not initially. Yet its results have been dramatically serious.”
What is the cover-up? It is the translation of the Greek word doulos. The word is most often translated ‘servant’. MacArthur contends that we should be translating it as ‘slave’.
Why? MacArhtur writes:
“While it is true that the duties of slave and servant may overlap to some degree, there is a key distinction between the two: servants are hired’ slaves are owned.”
Now I think you probably see MacArthur working. He is once again shaking the trees in the Lordship debate. You may recall the his previous forrays into this issue. The Gospel According to Jesus and The Gospel According to the Apostles were the counter-punch to many of the Dallas dispensationalists of the non-lordship camp. Evangelicalism is better today because those battle lines were drawn and the differences clear.
Here in this book MacArthur is not going at anyone specifically. Instead he is trying to pursuade us that our thinking is fuzzy. It is fuzzy around the concept of doulos. This is particularly problematic because it corresponds to our understanding of the heart of the relationship between Jesus (the Lord, or Master) and us (the slaves).
So what is his strategy to pursuade us in this book?
In typical MacArthur pulpit fashion you have a bevy of word studies and more historical analysis than you know what to do with. Additionally, he has called in many of the great leaders throughout church history to help him make the case. As a result, you have a lexical argument, rooted in biblical books, within a historical context that is echoed throughout church history. In the book you are left wondering why. Why have English translations consistently translated this word as servants instead of slaves?
MacArthur provides two potential answers:
1) Given the stigmas attached to slavery in Western society, translators have understandably wanted to avoid any association between biblical teaching and the slave trade of the British Empire and the American Colonial era.
2) From a historical perspective, in late-medieval times it was common to translate doulos with the Latin word servus. Some of the earliest English translations, influenced by the Latin version of the Bible, translated doulos as servant because it was the more natural rendering of servus.
The book is a presentation of his case as to why doulos should be both translated and understood to be slave. He works upward from the Christian to his relationship to Christ and then he teases out the practical implications.
Overall, the book is well done and very edifying. I got more than I bargained for. MacArthur is ‘messin’ with our constructs and understanding. He is hammering hard the Lordship of Christ and communicating the powerful implications of the gospel. He is definitely fired up. And if history is any judge, it will doubtless generate a lot of discussion. It will be interesting to listen to the conversation and watch the impact.
You may pick up your copy of Slave at Amazon.
In addition, the publisher, Thomas Nelson, was kind enough to sponsor a giveaway here at Ordinary Pastor. Look for details on that tomorrow.
