The Identity of a Servant

Servant, slave or none of the above?

One significant challenge in studying this theme is the vocabulary and overlapping conceptual realms of slavery and servanthood. Both the Old and New Testaments use a range of words to capture these ideas, and often do so in ways that defy precise distinctions. As well as the fluidity of vocabulary used, there were significant differences in how slavery and servanthood were practised and perceived in different ancient cultures. In addition to these challenges, there is also the fact that the various lxx translators use a variety of Greek terms to render Hebrew terms that refer to slavery and servanthood, even using two different Greek words to render one Hebrew word within the span of a few verses with no discernable nuance in meaning between the two.

This challenge is multiplied when one translates from Hebrew and/or Greek into a modern language such as English. The meaning of an individual word is determined by its use in context, and words have semantic ranges. For example, the Hebrew word ‘ebed occurs over 800 times in the Old Testament, but this same word can refer to someone who is a lowly and menial slave (Lev. 26:13) or a high-ranking official in the service of a king (Gen. 41:37–38). Even an English translation such as the English Standard Version (esvuk), which strives for a ‘word-for-word’ translation that renders Hebrew words with the same English words where possible, rightly recognizes that the use of ‘ebed in 1 Kgs 1:9 refers to Solomon’s high-ranking attendants and translates it as ‘officials’. Similar difficulties arise in the New Testament when attempting to translate doulos, as that term also allows for a range of meanings (e.g. slave, bondservant, servant) depending on the context and the nature of the relationship in view. According to the preface of the esvuk, where doulos refers to ‘absolute ownership by a master’ they render it ‘slave’ (e.g. Rom. 6:16), but when a ‘more limited form of servitude is in view’ they translate it ‘bondservant’ (e.g. 1 Cor. 7:21–24) or ‘servant’ (e.g. John 4:51). Although other English versions do not raise this issue in their preface, they regularly practise similar approaches.

As if those difficulties are not enough, there is the further challenge of accounting for how the original audiences of the Bible would have understood the language of servitude. As we have already noted, various forms of servitude were part of the fabric of both the ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world. Based on the various ways that the Hebrew word ʿebed (as well as other related terms) is used in the Old Testament, there is clear evidence that in certain contexts the term has an honorary sense. In other words, far from communicating a sense of bondage or oppression, it communicated a privileged position of authority and status. The work of scholars such as Gerhard Sass, Walter Ollrog and Dale Martin has shown that the Greek word doulos could also refer to a person in a position of honour or leadership. There should be little doubt that when the New Testament writers used expressions such as ‘slave of Christ/God’ or ‘servant of Christ/God’ that many of the original readers/hearers initially understood such references through the framework of their cultural experience of slavery in the Greco-Roman world. This would have been especially true of Gentile converts who had little or no exposure to the Old Testament. However, that does not mean that the New Testament authors intended such references to be exclusively or even primarily understood against this Greco-Roman cultural background. Indeed, there are often strong contextual indicators that expressions such as ‘slave of Christ/God’ or ‘servant of Christ/God’ have as their primary referent the Old Testament background of key individuals raised up by God to further his creational and redemptive purposes in the world. Furthermore, the New Testament writers often take language and concepts that had certain meanings and connotations in the Greco-Roman world and reframe them in the light of the truth of the gospel such that they take on fresh significance. As the chapters that follow will demonstrate, that is certainly the case with the use of servant language.

Approach of this study

It is important to note that this book is not a word study, as Scripture uses a variety of terms and expressions to both identify and describe these key individuals. There are a variety of different terms and expressions that together express the servant of the Lord theme. Indeed, as we will see, in some instances the biblical text portrays an individual or group of people acting as a servant of the Lord without explicitly using such terminology. Thus, our interest is in the concept of the servant of the Lord, not merely the expression or terminology itself.

Each chapter will address a specific individual who is identified as a servant of the Lord. Based on a careful reading of the biblical text (with insight from the broader historical, cultural and social contexts along the way), I will attempt to identify and summarize the nature of his role within God’s purposes for both creation and redemption. Along the way we will see the consistent pattern that God uses each individual servant to produce a servant people. Therefore, tracing this servant thread throughout Scripture sheds fresh light on (1) the role of these key figures in redemptive history; (2) how these key figures point forward to Christ; (3) the identity of God’s people; and (4) how we interact with fellow believers and the world around us.

You can find the complete table of contents for this book in another blog post. The Servant of the Lord and His Servant People by Matthew S. Harmon is one of the IVP December 2020 releases.