TheLeeadingLady

Charlie, or rather 'Cuckoo Charlie' (I prefer to use your full username as I feel it to be quite full of meaning and appropriate)

Yes, you are quite right, the verse I quoted does mention 'slaves and free'. It says that there are no longer 'slaves and free' and offers a reason for that. The reason why the apostle Paul says there is no more real distinction of this kind is because both the 'slave' and the 'free' -if they are believers- are 'one in Christ'. They are one...it doesn't say they are two.

Either you believe this or you don't.

You have already indicated in your post that you think Paul's words here are erroneous and that you don't believe them. "Galatians has to be wrong", you wrote.

Cuckoo Charlie, sadly, this makes you an 'unbeliever'.

It is written, "But not all [Israelites] accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "LORD, who has believed our message? Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the Word of Christ".

[Romans 10:16-17]

I would urge you strongly, therefore, Cuckoo, to not become the fulfilment of a negative prophecy out of the book of Isaiah, or out of the Scriptures, just like Judas Iscariot was and unwittingly fulfilled the prophecies about himself.

You have, unfortunately, chosen to deliberately disbelieve a portion of clearly revealed Scripture penned by a specially appointed apostle all in favor of what you have, in rustic simplicity, termed "plain commonsense"

Normally I would not waste my time with you because as someone who has rejected the inerrancy of the Word of God I find I have no common ground with you. Anything I might say would only appear as 'foolishness' to you, and anything you say would only appear as rank foolishness to me. That's how it works [1Cor 2:14-15].

But I'm gambling that you're probably a 'church kid', like me. This wins you a slight reprieve. You are therefore young and impressionable. At your age it is easy to be influenced by all kinds of 'winds of teaching'. And there are plenty of them blowing around -even on this thread.

The words you've written appear to be ideas that you have simply imbibed on this site, even down to the what some would call the 'lame' examples that you draw (you spoke of legs).They are almost the mirror-opposite of the wildly off-course, out-of-kilter ideas I have come across here.

You need to exercise caution, Cuckoo, when you're reading some of the submissions here (including mine). Just because some brothers were way back in the churchlife before you or I were ever born doesn't make them all necessarily wise.

Jesus said, "Take heed what ye hear. With what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you" [Mark 4:24]. That just means 'nonsense in, nonsense out'.

Now, to your point

It's true that Paul gave instructions to some of the churches that slaves who had believed and been converted should continue to obey their masters, and that masters shouldn't treat them with too heavy a hand. And I can also see why you would question (or why 'others' would lead you to question) Paul's assertion to the Galatians insisting that there's no distinction between 'slave' and 'free'.

It does seem a little odd, doesn't it?

Of course, the only explanation I can offer is that which I discern in the Word of God. I will not invent, and spin, some theory out of what I may have cobbled together from the vain philosophies of the world while I make a pretense of being learned and erudite at whatever cost, even of the truth. Nah, I won't go there.

So, going back to the Word of God, what do we see Paul telling the Corinthians in regard to slaves and freedom?

'Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him. Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you -although if you can gain your freedom, do so. FOR he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's 'free' man'; similarly, he who was a 'free' man when he was called is Christ's 'slave'. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men...'

[1Cor 7:20-23]

In short, if you're a believer, and you are free, actually, you are not free. You are a slave that belongs to Christ. He bought you, Paul reminds us, for the price of his own blood, as any slave would have been bought at an auction back in those days.

Alternatively, if you're a believer, and if you are, unfortunately, a slave, in reality, you are, in fact -and crucially in the Lord's consideration- the Lord's 'free' person. And Paul adds that such a person should not consider themselves 'a slave of any man'. That's what the apostle actually says. And I don't dispute it.

But Cuckoo, you want it all to make perfect sense before you can accept it, don't you? Because this doesn't seem to make any sense, does it?

The reason it doesn't make sense to you and appears to be 'foolishness' is because you chose to discard your faith, and elect the 'plain commonsense' that's been presented to you by your new pal and his newfangled theories.

Salvage and 'unshipwreck' your faith, Cuckoo, please. You can't keep calling the Word of God "wrong" every time you run across something you don't understand.

Let's go back to the Word..

Now, it's easy to imagine ourselves as Christ's slaves, even though we're actually free, isn't it? (it sounds all spiritual and self-sacrificial) But it's quite another matter when you're a slave, and in chains, to be told that you are free. It's almost like being mocked, I would imagine.

But here's what I believe Paul meant..

He wrote to the Romans:

'..thanks be to God that, though you used to be 'slaves to sin'...you have [now] been set 'free' from sin and have become 'slaves to righteousness' '

'.. you used to offer your members 'in slavery' to uncleanness, and iniquity unto iniquity, [but] now offer [your members] 'in slavery' to righteousness leading to holiness.'

'.. when you were 'slaves to sin', you were free from the control of righteousness...But now that you have been 'set free from sin' and have BECOME SLAVES TO GOD, the benefit you reap leads to HOLINESS...'

[Romans 6:17-22]

As you can see, Cuckoo, the whole matter before God regarding 'slavery' and 'freedom', 'slaves' and 'free' is not really a question of whether or not you're physically in iron chains and fetters.

Though it is of a little concern, it does not seem to be God's chief and primary concern.

This kind of explains why the Lord Jesus did not deliver the Jewish nation from the iron hold of the Roman Empire when he, as the long-awaited Christ, the son of the warrior-king, David, written of in prophecy, was widely expected to. This was the general expectation. But even by his own disciples his true mission and purpose was misunderstood.

The epistle to the Romans makes it plain that in regard to 'slavery' it is the 'slavery to sin' that is the most pernicious. It is the form of slavery that we, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, are in most need of being delivered from.

And Christ's death on the cross achieved this!

As long as we are believers in him, and his work, we are free!

But we are not free to live unto ourselves [Romans 14:8]. We've been bought, like slaves, for a price. We belong to the Lord, and we "live unto him" and we also "die unto him".

We are, Paul tells the Romans, SLAVES TO RIGHTEOUSNESS, and therefore, SLAVES TO GOD -whether Jew or Gentile, there are no special exceptions.

Some will, of course, be greatly riled and nettled that I've clumped their precious 'Jews' together with those 'dirty Roman Gentiles' (after all, the epistle is addressed to Rome). I mean, how d-d-dare I?

Actually, Paul -and other writers- have gone to extraordinary lengths, throughout the epistles to show that between the Jews and the Gentiles, the Jews are, above all peoples, the most in bondage (the book of Acts, though it doesn't overtly teach this -because of its narrative structure and because it is not its purpose- vividly illustrates it).

Paul, however, does openly teach this to the Galatians by providing them with an allegory that explains the 'two covenants'. He explains that the covenant (the Mosaic Law) given to the children of Israel on Mount Sinai corresponds to Hagar, and her children. Hagar was the bondwoman (the slave), and figuratively, Paul says, all her children are in bondage with her. The children that are in bondage are identified by him as the Jewish nation, represented by the earthly city of Jerusalem. [Galatians 4:21-31]

He concludes this little picture by quoting and stating momentously that the children of Hagar, the bondwoman, (indicating the 'Jews' who are in bondage under the Law) should have no part in the inheritance promised through Isaac, and should be cast out.

This is really meaningful.

Cuckoo Charlie, if you really understood what Paul means, you would not lend your ears so readily to those who would -knowingly or unknowingly- warp and influence your mind, and thus clap you in chains, and rob you of your heritage as a believer.

Take heed how ye hear..

Thank you

There's no time right now to address your concern over the 'neither male nor female' thing. But if God allows...