Give Me Your Slave!

Dan McClellan This is one of the imprisonments of Paul.

Dan Beecher He's a career criminal is what he is.

Dan McClellan Yeah. I think there were 34 felonies that he was convicted of.

Dan Beecher No, that's somebody else. I think you're thinking of someone else.

Dan McClellan Hey, everybody, I'm Dan McClellan.

Dan Beecher And I'm Dan Beecher.

Dan McClellan And you're listening to the Data Over Dogma podcast, where we increase public access to the academic study of the Bible and religion, and combat the spread of misinformation about the same. How are things today, Dan?

Dan Beecher It's a good day. It's a good day for some expounding on biblicality.

Dan McClellan I don't know. Biblicality, yes.

Dan Beecher Yes.

Dan McClellan And going to get into some expositional weeds here on- ... on something.

Dan Beecher We're going to get into some weird stuff, man. So our first thing, we're going to do a chapter and verse, and we're going to cover the entire Book of Philemon, which does not take long- No ... it turns out.

Dan McClellan No.

Dan Beecher It's one of those blessed short ones- Mm-hmm ... that are scattered hither and thither throughout the holy text.

Dan McClellan Or hither and yon, if you're nasty.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Yeah. Only 335 words in Greek, the whole book.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan Which sounds like a lot, and that resolves to 25 verses.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan So yeah, not going to take long to get through.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan But some interesting stuff in there.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Some things to ponder.

Dan Beecher I can't wait to have you explore it with me because I am... There's a couple moments that just made me go .

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher So there's that, and then in the latter half of the show, we're going to be talking about something that is near and dear to your heart because it was part of one of your master's theses.

Dan McClellan Mm-hmm.

Dan Beecher We're going to be talking about the Septuagint.

Dan McClellan The Septuagint. Which is the seventh- Which is not how it's ever pronounced.

Dan Beecher Yep. It's the seventh in the series, I understand.

Dan McClellan 70th, but- It's between...

Dan Beecher Oh, 70th?

Dan McClellan All right.

Dan Beecher I was- Yeah. Oh, yeah, septuagenarian.

Dan McClellan All right, fine.

Dan Beecher It's the 70th. The translation of the 70, as it is known.

Dan McClellan And we'll talk about the tradition that is the reason that it's called the Septuagint.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan Yes. And why you're probably using it wrong. But also- I- ... it doesn't matter ...

Dan Beecher guarantee I'm using it wrong. I literally just used it wrong.

Dan McClellan Well, not you you. I'm talking to the audience- Oh, yeah ... if there is still an audience.

Dan Beecher Oh, they're out there. You guys are out there, right?

Dan McClellan Hello?

Dan Beecher Are you there? So let's just dive in with chapter and verse. And for chapter and verse, here it is. We said it, it's Philemon. I like that on the Bible website that I'm looking at with the NRSVUE, it's listed as- Mm-hmm ... Philemon 1. Philemon 1. I don't know that there's more than one.

Dan McClellan New York zero.

Dan Beecher So. Anyway, yeah, it's just the one book and the one chapter in the one book.

Dan McClellan That's a problem.

Dan Beecher And here's- No.

Dan McClellan ...

Dan Beecher here's the thing. It starts out, and it's a Pauline epistle. Is that correct?

Dan McClellan It is Pauline. It is indisputed. That is to say that there are no scholars who believe this is pseudonymous, that believe someone other than Paul wrote it.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan Pretty much everyone, I'm sure there's somebody out there, but everyone who has ever published on it agrees this is Pauline.

Dan Beecher I- Wait.

Dan McClellan No.

Dan Beecher I might- Nope.

Dan McClellan I can think of somebody- Oh, okay ... who has challenged its authenticity. But that is actually a rather new publication, so we'll see how that goes.

Dan Beecher How the rest of academia comes crashing down on them.

Dan McClellan We shall see.

Dan Beecher I'm going to say, and we'll get to it later on, but I am suspicious that this isn't actually Paul, but we'll get to why later on.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher What I don't believe, I'm not saying that I think that this was someone else later pretending to be Paul and trying to pass it off. We'll get to it.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher Anyway.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher Starting off, verse one basically just says, and we're already to a place where you're going to have to clarify something for me because I know it doesn't mean what it seems like it means.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher It says, "Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ," or of Christ Jesus- Mm-hmm ... "and Timothy our brother- Yes ... to our belo- " I don't think this means that Christ is holding Paul prisoner, but that's- ... sure what it sounds like when it's worded- Mm-hmm ...

Dan McClellan like that. No, the idea is that he is imprisoned because of- Ah ...

Dan Beecher of Christ Jesus. Who has imprisoned him?

Dan McClellan This is something that we don't know. This is what Paul usually says when he has been imprisoned somewhere because of, and this is how the Book of Revelation starts as well, that John was exiled for his testimony of Jesus.

Dan Beecher Mm.

Dan McClellan And so Paul is apparently in prison, and we're not sure. It could be Philippi, could be Caesarea, could be Rome. In the Book of Acts, Paul is imprisoned in those three places.

Dan Beecher Oh, wow.

Dan McClellan Now that come to think of it, in 2019 when I was in Israel, Palestine, Caesarea, we visited Caesarea, which is where there's a hippodrome, there's Herod's palace, there's a bunch of cool stuff. I had a lovely parfait in the little cafe overlooking the actual Little port thing that had been built there. And then I went back in 2020... I don't remember the year now that I come to think. 2023, I think it was. They had uncovered a prison there.

Dan Beecher Oh.

Dan McClellan So they were like, "This is probably where Paul was imprisoned." And it was actually underground.

Dan Beecher Oh, wow.

Dan McClellan So it was a place that I had walked around on previously, and they had excavated it, and there was this whole prison underneath the ground there. So, that was pretty cool. So I had seen- Well, you can't- ... the place where he was -...

Dan Beecher dig a hole in Israel, Palestine, without bumping into something.

Dan McClellan It's pretty common that, in fact, anytime you want to do any construction anywhere, whether it's roads or housing or anything like that, the Israel Antiquity Authorities has got to come in and do their little... They have a certain amount of time where they go in and do their exploratory excavation, see if there's anything there. And then, they may be like, "Uh-oh, we found a temple." And then you're like, "Argh." Then you can't build there.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan But that's literally what happened six or seven years ago. They found a temple Yeah.

Dan Beecher ...

Dan McClellan where the road was going to go. And so they just had to build the highway over top of it.

Dan Beecher It's- I remember you mentioning that, and I looked it up, and you can see them continuing the dig underneath the freeway- Underneath the freeway, yep ... that goes over them.

Dan McClellan It's very cool. So we don't know where he's imprisoned, but- Okay ... this is one of the imprisonments of Paul. And it may be one that we don't know about.

Dan Beecher That guy's just in an... He's a career criminal, is what he is.

Dan McClellan Yeah. I think there were 30, 34 felonies that he was convicted of.

Dan Beecher No, that's somebody else. I think you're thinking of someone else.

Dan McClellan Hmm.

Dan Beecher Anyway, Paul is writing to our beloved coworker, as the NRSVUE would have it.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher Does everybody call it coworker, or do other people say Coworker- Colleague ... feels to our beloved- Synergo- Yeah ...

Dan McClellan is the word in Greek, which literally means work with.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan There you go. Work with-er, or work-er. Or work with-er.

Dan Beecher Yep. I like work with-er even better. So I'm going to start saying that in my daily life.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher Anyway, to our beloved coworker, work with-er, Philemon, to our sister Apphia, to our fellow soldier, Archippus, and to the church in your house.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher I guess, so what do we know about Philemon? Do we know anything about this recipient of a letter?

Dan McClellan Not really. Philemon is a name that occurs in Greek. In fact, I think there's an old legend with somebody named Philemon, or a Greek myth or something like that. Really, all we know is what we see in this text. And the idea that there's a church in your house, this is pretty common in this time period when Paul is going around setting up churches. It's not like, "Okay, we got the permits. We're going to break ground next month, and then we'll have everything up and running." They would make converts, and then they would be like, " Anybody got a living room that could host this for a while?" And usually, a lot of women were patrons of the church. They would use their homes for church meetings. And so it seems that these folks, I don't know if Philemon and Apphia and the others are related or what, but it seems like they are the patrons, they are the hosts for one of the congregations that is meeting in the home.

Dan Beecher Are you aware of the modern-day sect that doesn't actually have a name, but they're sometimes called the Two by Twos? Have you heard of them?

Dan McClellan Don't think I have.

Dan Beecher It's a somewhat secretive Christian sect, but they aim to sort of do things the old way, and one of the things that they do is their apostles or their leaders- They're sent out two by two without purse or a script kind of thing? They do. They literally don't have any money. They stay at members' houses and hold services in the houses, and yeah, that's kind of their whole thing.

Dan McClellan That sounds like something I have witnessed myself personally- Oh, really?

Dan Beecher ...

Dan McClellan but probably not that specific sect because- Okay ... I think that kind of thing has been done many times.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Since the Great Awakenings in the US, there are people who are like, "We got to get back to Biblical Christianity."

Dan Beecher You really don't, guys.

Dan McClellan Minus the communism and- Right.

Dan Beecher Yeah, exactly. But yeah, they'll- Not the parts we don't like, but the parts that are weirdo, that's interesting.

Dan McClellan But they'll isolate one passage like that and be like, "We're going to build a church on that passage."

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan All right.

Dan Beecher Well, let's see what Paul has to say to Philemon.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher He first says some nice stuff about, "Whenever I mention you in my prayers, I thank God because I hear of your love for all the saints and your faith toward the Lord Jesus. I pray that the partnership of your faith may become effective as you comprehend all the good that we share in Christ." Blah, blah, blah. That's nice. Then he says, he kind of... Okay, I'm going to just say it.

Dan McClellan He's like, "Time for the pivot."

Dan Beecher And Paul goes full, there are multiple moments of Paul being very passive-aggressive. There's all these moments of- Yeah ... "Now listen, I could totally pull rank on you and order you to do stuff, but I'd rather just ask out of love." That is not how you ask out of love.

Dan McClellan That is- Yeah ...

Dan Beecher just straight out the bat- Yeah ... when you say- Verse eight just says, "Though I am more than bold enough in Christ to command you to do the right thing, yet I would rather appeal to you on the basis of love. And I, Paul, do this as an old man and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ."

Dan McClellan It kind of has you wouldn't hit a guy with glasses kind of thing to it. He's like, "I'm just an old man, and I'm a prisoner of Christ. And if I wanted to, I could say jump and you'd have to say how high. But- Yeah.

Dan Beecher But I would never pull rank with you. I would never do that.

Dan McClellan Yes.

Dan Beecher I'm just telling you I could, and now I'm asking you kindly to please do what I'm commanding you to do.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher And what he's asking, he says, "I am appealing to you for my child Onesimus, whose father I have become during my imprisonment." Which when I first read my child, I was like, "Wait a minute. Paul had children?" I have heard many times Dan say Paul does not like the idea of even sex, so.

Dan McClellan Yeah. So the- Not a literal child.

Dan Beecher Yes.

Dan McClellan Yes, and the idea that he converted him, and so he is his spiritual father.

Dan Beecher So you- Right. You've got- He's in his down line.

Dan McClellan He's in... You got to imagine him in a beet field. "Oh, and just like you have planted this seed in the earth, now I will plant my seed in you."

Dan Beecher Oh, my goodness.

Dan McClellan That's from The Office, but don't- Yes.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher All I'm saying is, it has a very multi-level marketing feel to it. I'm just saying.

Dan McClellan Anyway, so Onesimus is- Onesimus ...

Dan Beecher in Paul's downline. He says, and this is the part that's interesting. Clearly, unless I'm misreading this, Philemon knew Onesimus before. He says, "Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful to you and to me." And he goes on to say, "I wanted to keep him with me so that he might minister to me in your place during my imprisonment in the gospel, but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your good deed might be voluntary and not something forced."

Dan McClellan Yeah. Something coerced- Yeah ... but not forced.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Exactly.

Dan Beecher And the good deed that he's talking about seems to be letting Paul keep Onesimus because he used to be Philemon's slave. Is that correct? Am I reading that right?

Dan McClellan Yes. So- So a couple things to start, though. The name Onesimus means useful.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan So it's kind of a stock name for an enslaved person.

Dan Beecher Oh, okay. Was it an actual name that was applied to people?

Dan McClellan Mm-hmm.

Dan Beecher Okay. So you have a slave, and you call them Useful.

Dan McClellan Yes.

Dan Beecher "Hey, Useful, get over here and pour me a drink."

Dan McClellan Yeah. Useful can reach on high shelves.

Dan Beecher Uh-huh.

Dan McClellan You get a whole battery of names. But the play on words there is formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful.

Dan Beecher Yeah. I don't know why he was useless before, but okay.

Dan McClellan Well, he's just got to say this is... Although the word in Greek is not Onesimus, it's , which really means profitable. But the idea is that Onesimus is probably a runaway slave.

Dan Beecher Mm.

Dan McClellan And so he is unprofitable to Philemon in the sense that he ran away, and he was of no use to him in his escaped state. But now that he's with Paul, Paul is like, "Hey, guess what? You've been given a chance to make your runaway slave who was formerly useless to you useful once again. Useful to you and to me."

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher He says, "Perhaps this is the reason he was separated from you for a while so that you might have him back for the long term, no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother, especially to me. But how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord?" That's very interesting. He's sending this guy back and saying, "Don't make him a slave again now that he has converted to being our Christian brother." Is that right?

Dan McClellan That is debated, and I think the majority of scholars would say Paul is not telling him to manumit Onesimus. Paul is saying... Well, to begin, the idea that he's his brother and you should accept him like a brother fits with other pseudo-Pauline texts like Ephesians, where it talks about the duties of a slave to their master- Yeah ... and the duties of a master to their slave. The idea is that if you're Christians, you are brothers in the sense that you are both now children of God. You see this across the New Testament. It's in Paul, it's in John. We find it in other writers that to become converted, you become children of God and/or of Jesus, and that makes you brothers. And so in Ephesians, the idea seems to be the slave-master relationship, which is temporal, is maintained. It doesn't obliterate that.

Dan Beecher Oh.

Dan McClellan But you're both brothers in the gospel, and so the treatment should be one that is indicative of that parity- Okay ... in your relationship to each other. So Paul's not saying release him. Paul's saying, "Receive him as your spiritual brother because that's what he is. Treat him better than you would treat any one of your other slaves." But a lot of scholars have pointed out it would be pretty problematic of Paul to say, "Hey, release your slave." Philemon had legal rights over Onesimus as his slave. That would be probably crossing the line to say, "Hey, give up your legal rights over him." And also, if Philemon has got a bunch of other enslaved folks in his household, which he almost certainly does, and one of them comes back and says, "I'm a Christian now, so you have to release me," and Philemon goes, "All right, fine.

Dan Beecher You're released."

Dan McClellan What do you think all the other enslaved folks are going to suddenly do?

Dan Beecher Right. Suddenly you got a lot of Christians in that household.

Dan McClellan Yeah. And so it's tricky. But the majority of scholars would say-- In fact, there's a commentary I really like on this in the New Testament Library series that points out that there's absolutely no indication that Paul was asking him to release him. What we have here is Paul did not lead a revolt against the slave system in his dealings with Philemon and Onesimus. In fact, he makes no plea for the manumission of Onesimus. Not a single word expresses the wish or the command that Onesimus be legally emancipated, nor is Philemon condemned for the fact that he owned a slave. So Paul's trying to thread a very tiny little needle here. He's like, "I like this guy. He needs to be treated better. He ran away from you for a reason. I'm honoring the social contract. I'm honoring the relationship. I'm having him obey the laws of the land by returning him to you." But, in his kind of rhetorical speaking down to him where kind of like, "I could just snap my fingers, but I'm going to give you the chance to choose to do this," he's kind of saying, "At least just send him back to me. Let me take care of him. Let him minister to me in prison."

Dan Beecher Yeah. So going back to that verse 13, he does say, "I wanted to keep him with me, but I want your consent," et cetera. It is interesting to me if it's not about releasing him from slavery, it's so razor thin close to that.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher He literally says, "No longer as a slave, but more than a slave." In verse 17, he says, "So if you consider me your partner, welcome him as you would welcome me. If he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to me." I was assuming based on all of that language that it was definitely like, "Release him. He's no longer your slave. He's just our brother."

Dan McClellan I think the idea is more that Paul wants to uphold the law, wants Onesimus to do the right thing, but he also does not want to see Onesimus hurt because of this.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Or even executed.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan He's a runaway slave. It would be well within Philemon's rights to treat him quite harshly.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan And so what I think he's trying to emphasize is that Paul's like, "Treat him as you would treat me." Trying to extend the protective wing of his authority over Onesimus so that the slave-master relationship is technically retained, but Paul is putting an awful lot of weight on Philemon to not beat the crap out of him, have him executed, give him dish duty for a month or whatever.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan I don't know what kind of non-corporeal punishments they would've used back then. I can imagine the conversation that Paul and Onesimus had where he was like, "Look, I don't see any way around this. We got to send you back."

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan "I'm going to write a letter. I am going to lean on Philemon to make sure that he doesn't give you too hard a time when you get back. I'm going to ask him to send you back to me so you're only home for the weekend and hopefully everything's cool and then you can come back, and we can get back to work ministering to each other in prison." I think that's probably a little closer to what's going on than- That makes sense to me.

Dan Beecher That sounds about right.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher With one caveat, and that is- Okay ... I'm still holding to my theory that this is pseudepigraphical. Oh, I almost had the big word.

Dan McClellan I don't know your- You got pretty close.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan Pseudepigraphal?

Dan Beecher Pseudepigraphical. Oh, okay.

Dan McClellan Fine. You could say pseudepigraphal. That's close enough.

Dan Beecher Anywho, here's my personal theory.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher And it's based on verses 18 and 19. And my theory is based entirely on the idea, not that it was written by someone claiming to be Paul for any kind of other reason, but just I think this was written by Onesimus. Because it feels a little too much. In verse 19- A little too on the nose here ... he says, "I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand. I will repay you." "I say nothing about your owing me even your own self." It just feels a little much. I think he wrote this for Paul and just leaned a little too hard.

Dan McClellan And we talked with Candida a bit ago about enslaved folks being used to write- Yeah ... letters and things like that. So it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility. And Paul seems to be trying to, whoever's writing this, is trying to make it seem like Paul is the one who's- It just seems like it's trying real, real hard.

Dan Beecher Yeah. "No, this is me, Paul. I promise. There's nobody else writing this. Just Paul. Earlier in the chapter, I, Paul, do this as an old man," blah, blah, blah.

Dan McClellan Anyway.

Dan Beecher No. So yes, this is a really hard lean. Paul says, "If he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to me. I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand. I will repay it. I say nothing about..." I love this line. "Look, I'm not even mentioning the fact that you owe me even your own self. Look, I'm not even bringing it up."

Dan McClellan What- Yeah ...

Dan Beecher again, the backhanded- Yeah.

Dan McClellan "I'm going to bring this up to let you know that I don't even have to bring this up."

Dan Beecher Right. "I would never, but let's both remember it anyway." So then, yeah, he says, "Yes, brother, let me have this benefit from you in the Lord. Refresh my heart in Christ. Confident of your obedience, I am writing to you knowing that you will do even more than I ask."

Dan McClellan Yeah. It's laying it on pretty thick here. It's pretty thick. It's like, "And I don't even have to worry. I know you're actually going to go above and beyond, so yeah."

Dan Beecher "You're probably going to send me more than him. You're probably going to send me a couple more slaves.

Dan McClellan I don't know.

Dan Beecher Who knows what you're going to do?" And then the last line is this weird thing where he says, "And one thing more, prepare a guest room for me, for I'm hoping, through your prayers, to be restored to you." Now, my guess is that's saying, "Buy my way out of prison, and I'm going to come and live with you." What are your thoughts on that?

Dan McClellan I don't think he's asking him that. But I think this is kind of a criticism sandwich.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan You say nice stuff, you get your criticism in there, your constructive criticism, and then you follow it off with nice stuff.

Dan Beecher Sure.

Dan McClellan It's kind of like, "I got to borrow money. Oh, by the way, if you want to come spend the night at any point, you need a couch to crash on, that's cool." It sounds to me like he's just trying to put another stroke of butter on him and just try to make him feel good. Like, "You're the one I've been thinking about this whole time."

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan "Even when I'm with Onesimus."

Dan Beecher "I'm coming to visit any day now. I'll come for a bit. Don't mind the fact that I'm in prison. That's fine. I'm in and out of that, you know."

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher And then he literally says, "And by the way, a bunch of my fellow prisoners say hi."

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher So there you go.

Dan McClellan That's- Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, my coworkers.

Dan Beecher And is that Mark Mark and Luke Luke?

Dan McClellan I think there are folks who think it is Mark. If you go to in Acts, it refers to John, whose other name was Mark, as somebody who was occasionally found gallivanting around with Paul. And Luke is supposed to be Paul's missionary companion- Okay ... in the Book of Acts. So, I think the idea is that, yeah, these are to be identified with those folks. Now, the reality is that the authorship of Mark and Luke is a secondary addition.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan So, these were not the actual folks who actually wrote those texts, or at least are very, very unlikely to be. But I think traditionally, yeah, they are identified with the Gospel authors.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher Interesting.

Dan McClellan So my- And in the canonical order of Pauline epistles, this is the very last one. They were kind of organized according to size, length. Started with Romans, and you go from there. So longest to shortest. So Philemon is last in the Paul- Okay ... just as a little aside.

Dan Beecher So, one of my questions to you, having read this multiple times, and basically I've just read the entire book on our show.

Dan McClellan Yes.

Dan Beecher I skipped a little bit here and there, but not much.

Dan McClellan Yeah, one or two verses.

Dan Beecher Why is this in the Bible? I don't feel like anything is gained. Like you say, he's not changing the rules of slavery.

Dan McClellan He's not- Yeah, and that's an important point ...

Dan Beecher expounding on anything useful. It just seems very strange.

Dan McClellan I think this was probably something that was preserved that was a letter from Paul, and when Paul started to get hot, and these letters started being considered as scripture, this was just part of the collection. Because yeah, there aren't really many Christian principles. There's no deep storytelling going on here.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan It's just this letter where he's- There's, yeah.

Dan Beecher There's nothing- ...

Dan McClellan kind of leaning on a buddy.

Dan Beecher There's nothing to be gained spiritually that I can see from this.

Dan McClellan Or- Yeah ...

Dan Beecher there's no parable here of the slave returned to his master.

Dan McClellan But- Yeah.

Dan Beecher It's very interesting.

Dan McClellan But every time that Someone brings up the fact that there's no part of the New Testament or the Hebrew Bible, no part of the Bible, period, that questions, much less condemns or prohibits the practice of buying, selling, or owning other human beings, enslavement. People will bring up Philemon. What about Philemon?

Dan Beecher And- Oh ...

Dan McClellan even if Paul is, it seems to me to be in between the lines. I think Paul is probably saying, "Come on, man. Just do the right thing. Don't be that guy."

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan But even that is not questioning the practice of slavery.

Dan Beecher No.

Dan McClellan It's just saying, "I like this guy. Let him go." And even within the trans-Atlantic slave trade and in the South, in the US, in the early 19th century, you had people where their masters would be like, "I like this guy. Good guy. We're going to let him go. In my will, as soon as I'm dead, you can be released."

Dan Beecher That doesn't- Right ...

Dan McClellan question or condemn the practice of slavery.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan But that is certainly one of the ways it has been deployed historically, and more on the closer end of history than on the further end of history. But it has certainly been deployed as a means of endorsing an anti-slavery and abolitionist perspective.

Dan Beecher Right. Which, even if it's wrong, obviously, I would like it if it were anti-slavery. That would be nice.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher But I think you're right. Having had you sort of explain it to me, looking back at it, I think it's clear he is just saying, "Don't kill him. Send him back to me. I want him."

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher He's not saying, "He's not a slave anymore," he's saying, "I want him to be my slave, not your slave. Give him to me. Have him work for me."

Dan McClellan Yeah, because if he releases him, it's not like he's under his authority anymore.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan He's like, "Release him so that he can come back to me," not, "Release him and then send him back to me." It's like, if you release him, he's not yours anymore to command, so.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan But yeah. And elsewhere, there are constant references to slavery, including Christian enslavers and Christian enslaved.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan That never says, "Oh, you're a Christian, you don't have to be enslaved anymore. Oh, you're a Christian, you have to release all your slaves." There's nothing that remotely hints at any such thing anymore. So this seems like a unique situation that I think we probably shouldn't generalize to Paul's overall view on slavery. However, having said that, the places where "Paul" talks about the Greco-Roman household codes and all that kind of stuff, those are limited to the Deutero-Pauline, or at least the disputed Paulines. So those things were probably not written by Paul.

Dan Beecher Right. Well, all right. That was interesting. I actually- Yeah ... that's a fascinating little snippet there.

Dan McClellan Oh, one other thing. I want to recommend a book.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan It is called "Slavery in Early Christianity" by Glancy. There's a second edition, fairly recent, phenomenal book on slavery in Christianity, what we can reconstruct from the material data, from the archaeological data and other historical texts and things like that. So if you'd like more on that, highly recommend that.

Dan Beecher Cool.

Dan McClellan Excellent.

Dan Beecher All right, well, let's move on to our next segment.

Dan McClellan What is that?

Dan Beecher And the that this time is- This the that. This the that is the Septuagint.

Dan McClellan Septuaginta, yes.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan All right.

Dan Beecher So, you have said that word many, many times on this podcast.

Dan McClellan Yes.

Dan Beecher And we've sort of vaguely explained what it is before, but I think it bears diving into- Mm-hmm ... because what is that?

Dan McClellan What is that? That is the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, and that sounds pretty banal. Okay, it was translated into Greek. But it's actually quite fascinating because until we discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint was the oldest version of the Hebrew Bible that we had, where the complete Hebrew Bible was non-existent in any Hebrew manuscript prior to around 900, 1000 CE. We had fragments and stuff like that.

Dan Beecher Wow.

Dan McClellan But if we go back to the great unsealed manuscripts of early Christianity, the fourth century, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, they preserve a version of the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. And it was probably executed between probably the middle of the third century BCE down to around the turn of the era.

Dan Beecher And- So wait, sorry, just so that I'm processing this. The Septuagint is what? Because for whatever reason, my brain has just thought that's what Christians used as their version of the Hebrew Bible.

Dan McClellan Uh-huh.

Dan Beecher But were the Jewish people of the early Common Era also using the Septuagint or what?

Dan McClellan Yes. That's why Christians used it, because originally they were Jewish, and they were just using the same thing that the earliest- Oh ... followers of Jesus used. So the reason it was translated- is because the largest population center of Jewish folks outside of Jerusalem was in Alexandria, Egypt Oh ... which spoke Greek. And so there were an awful lot of folks living in Alexandria who were Jewish, who could not access the Hebrew Bible in Hebrew adequately.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan And there's even a theory, it's called the interlinear theory. I don't think it has fallen on hard times, let's say. The idea is that the Septuagint was never meant to be a formal translation so that people who did not speak Hebrew could read the Hebrew Bible. Their idea was that it is to facilitate better understanding. It's like an interlinear translation that's just intended to be a guide as they read the Hebrew.

Dan Beecher Huh.

Dan McClellan That's one theory. But Septuagint means 70, and this is based on a very, very famous tradition of how we got the Septuagint. The reality is that each book, and sometimes parts of books, were translated by different folks. We can go through and look at translation philosophy and style and all this kind of stuff, and they differ significantly from book to book. But there's this tradition known as the Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates that is quoted in Josephus. He paraphrases large chunks of it. It is talked about in Philo of Alexandria. He's got a text called "The Life of Moses," where he quotes chunks of it as well. It's preserved in a text called, "Preparation for the Gospel," by Eusebius, who was a buddy of Constantine. But what he does is he quotes a bunch of other authors, and one of the folks he quotes is Aristobulus of Alexandria, who was writing around the middle of the second century BCE, and Aristobulus quotes a bunch of, the Letter of Aristeas. But this is a tradition that tells a story mainly of a ruler in Egypt known as Ptolemy II Philadelphus- Okay ... who ruled between 281 and 246 BCE. And according to this letter, Ptolemy hires or appoints somebody to take over the curation of the Library of Alexandria, Demetrius of Phalerum. And in the beginning, it says, "After he had been appointed over the king's library, Demetrius of Phalerum was furnished with much money in order to collect, if possible, all the books in the world and make purchases and transcriptions. He brought to completion as much as he could, the king's plan. Thus, while we were present," and so, Aristeas is writing to his bro, Philocrates, and he's like, "Hey, remember when we were there? We were present. He was asked how many thousands of books have been obtained. He said, 'More than 200,000, O King. I will hasten in a short time to fulfill the remainder of 500,000. But it has also been reported to me that the laws of the Jews are worthy of transcription and of inclusion in your library.'" And then the king says, "What is there, therefore, to prevent you from doing this?" And he says, "For everything that you need has been provided to you." But Demetrius said, "Translation is still required, for in Judea they use their own characters, just as the Egyptians use their own arrangement of letters, inasmuch as they also have their own language." And so he says, "We need to translate this. We don't have the means to do that here." So the king writes to the high priest in Jerusalem and says, "Hey, you want to send some translators?" And so he sends six translators each from each of the 12 tribes of Israel from Jerusalem down to Alexandria, and this is a fanciful procession. They're received like visiting dignitaries. 6 times 12, 72. Round 72 off to 70.

Dan Beecher I don't like it. I want it to be the Septuagint.

Dan McClellan So that's where the name 70 comes from, and according to the tradition, they were all locked in a tower. I think it's the Pharos. I think it's the big lighthouse thing in Alexandria.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan But they're all kept on their own, and they all translate the Torah, so just the first five books of Moses, and this is going to be a point later on. But they're all alone translating the entire Torah, the entire Pentateuch, all five books of Moses. Takes them 70 days. They translate during the day, then at night, they get together with the king, and they have these feasts, and they pontificate on the law and philosophy and stuff like that. And it's kind of an apologetic, "Look how hip the Jewish folks are." "We understand your philosophers. We also can show you how the Jewish law fits into Greek philosophy very well." So there's an awful lot of that going on at these feasts that take place at night. 70 days are up. They all bring their work. Got 72 translations, took 70 days to translate, and they all match word for word. To quote the great poet, "Word for word identical." But this time, actually word for word identical, at least according to the tradition.

Dan Beecher Okay. And this has taken- It sounds unlikely. Well- Or rather, it sounds like one guy just started dictating, and everybody else just wrote what they heard Well, if you historicize it, but this is the stuff of legends.

Dan McClellan Right. And they take this as a sign of divine approbation, and then they have this grand party and pronounce blessings on everything, and then pronounce curses on anybody who should take anything away from, add to or take anything away from this text in a very Deuteronomistic style and a very Apocalypse of John style.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan Which is basically a way to say, "This has God's sign-off."

Dan Beecher Stamp of approval.

Dan McClellan Yes. This was all miraculous, and so this is a good thing, and don't nobody change it. And one of the things this does is this is a way to make Greek-speaking Jewish folks feel like their translation, their non-Hebrew scriptures, are actually A-okay.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan That they've been given the divine stamp of approval. And so, in some sense, the Letter of Aristeas is functioning as an apologetic.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan Not only for the quality of the translation, but also for the use of the translation, the existence of the translation. This is still scripture. This is still the inspired word of God, no matter what you anti-Greekites are saying- Right ...

Dan Beecher about the anti-Dentites and the rest, but It's basically a reproof against the Robert Frost quote that, "Poetry is what's lost in translation." They're saying, "Scripture is not what's lost in translation- Yeah ... when it's this translation."

Dan McClellan Yeah. If God has their hand in it, then screw you, Robert Frost. Reminds me of the old Simpsons episode where Homer meets his mom, but he thinks she's buried in the tomb on the top of the hill.

Dan Beecher Uh-huh.

Dan McClellan And the guy's like, "You ever gone up there?" And he goes up there and pulls away the vines and the ivy and everything, and it says Walt Whitman. And he's like, "Walt Whitman? Leaves of Grass, my ass," and starts kicking the headstone. Oh, it's hilarious.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan So, Robert Frost, I shake my fist at thee.

Dan Beecher That's right.

Dan McClellan So, that's the legend that was probably written not too long after the setting. It's not historical. Scholars don't think this is at all historical, but that's what gave the Septuagint its name, at least the Torah, at least the first five books.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan So, there are a lot of folks who will be like, push their glasses up on their face and say, "Septuagint only refers to the first five books of Moses." And technically, that's true. The name comes from the Legend of Aristeas, which is just about the books of Moses.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan It is not about Isaiah. It's not about Kings. It's certainly not about Haggai.

Dan Beecher Yeah. But those all- The Haggai thing is right out.

Dan McClellan Yeah.

Dan Beecher That is rejected from the jump.

Dan McClellan Yeah. Don't make me laugh. And so, this is the name that was given to the first five books of Moses, but before too long, it gets expanded as a reference to everything.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan So, either usage is fine. If you want to be very pedantic about it, and far from me to yuck anyone's pedantic yum, but it would only refer to the- Being a pedant yourself, you would never- Yes ...

Dan Beecher infringe on the pedantry of others.

Dan McClellan And so yeah, sometimes you'll see people say that, the "Septuagint," and technically true, but- Yeah ... let's all live by the golden rule, don't be a dick.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan And so, the Septuagint is, I use it and a lot of other folks use it to refer to the entirety of the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which was probably executed shortly after the first five books of Moses, and most scholars think the first five books of Moses were definitely translated first, before everything else.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan But everything else followed shortly thereafter. And this was the Bible. This was the scriptures for the earliest followers of Jesus, for the authors of the New Testament, for the earliest Christians.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan And there's a wonderful book written by my thesis supervisor from the University of Oxford, T. Michael Law, called "When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible," which I think is a wonderful discussion of the dynamic of the Hebrew Bible to the Septuagint to early Christianity, to what's going on, and how it ultimately changed. So, if anybody's interested in learning more about the role of the Septuagint in early Christianity, that's a wonderful book. And then there's also, if you want an introduction to the Septuagint- Yeah ... there's a wonderful book by Jennifer Dines, D-I-N-E-S, just called "The Septuagint," and I think it's got to be probably from 2003 or 2004.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan And it's a great introduction. It is pretty detailed, but if you're looking to get into the weeds a little bit on the background of the Septuagint, that's a great discussion.

Dan Beecher I'm still wrapping my head around the sort of timeline here.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher So, you said that this appeared somewhere in which century? The second century BCE?

Dan McClellan So no, third century BC is when most scholars date the earliest translation, so that would've been the books of Moses.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan So 250, 225.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan In there somewhere. And then other parts are being added over the next- 200, 250-ish years or something like that.

Dan Beecher Sure.

Dan McClellan Okay.

Dan Beecher Yeah.

Dan McClellan It's not completed until around the turn of the era, maybe a little before.

Dan Beecher Okay.

Dan McClellan And there are also other texts, like the Apocrypha is part of the Septuagint.

Dan Beecher Right.

Dan McClellan All right.

Dan Beecher That's fair.

Dan McClellan Yeah. And there are other texts as well.

Dan Beecher So my question is, surely, because it was translated, there were Hebrew versions of it that existed at the same time for quite some time.

Dan McClellan Yes.

Dan Beecher And then we lost those? When did those disappear?

Dan McClellan Well, what happens is, and we've talked a little bit about this before, Jewish folks are copying and transmitting their manuscripts.