Your Master also.—The stronger marginal reading is perhaps better, their Master and yours.

Respect of persons.—In this phrase the word “person” is used in its original sense (still lingering in our modern use of “person” and “personal,” for “body” and “bodily,”) of the persona, i.e., “the mask” of outward condition, circumstance, and privilege. In this general sense our Lord (Matthew 22:16) is said “to regard not,” and (Luke 20:21) “to accept not” the person of man, because “He teaches the way of God in truth.” This sense is illustrated in different forms by the other uses of the word “respect of persons,” and the corresponding verb in the New Testament. Thus in Acts 10:34, Romans 2:11, it is used of the distinction of privilege between Jew and Gentile, circumcision and uncircumcision; in Galatians 2:6, of apostolic dignity in the eyes of men; in James 2:1; James 2:9, of distinction of social rank; here and in Colossians 3:25, of the difference between the slave and the freeman. In the modern sense of “person,” as signifying the real man, there is, and must be, “respect of persons” in all righteous judgment, whether of God or man.

Do the same things unto them - τὰ αὐτὰ ta auta. The "same things," here seem to refer to what he had said in the previous verses. They were, to evince toward their servants the same spirit which he had required servants to evince toward them - the same kindness, fidelity, and respect for the will of God. He had required servants to act conscientiously; to remember that the eye of God was upon them, and that in that condition in life they were to regard themselves as serving God, and as mainly answerable to him. The same things the apostle would have masters feel. They were to be faithful, conscientious, just, true to the interests of their servants, and to remember that they were responsible to God. They were not to take advantage of their power to oppress them, to punish them unreasonably, or to suppose that they were freed from responsibility in regard to the manner in which they treated them. In the corresponding passage in Colossians (Colossians 4:1), this is, "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal;" see the note on that place.

Forbearing threatening - Margin, "moderating." The Greek word means to "relax, loosen;" and then, to "omit, cease from." This is evidently the meaning here The sense is, that they were to be kind, affectionate, just. It does not mean that they were to remit punishment where it was deserved; but the object is to guard against that to which they were so much exposed in their condition - a fretful, dissatisfied temper; a disposition to govern by terror rather than by love. Where this unhappy state of society exists, it would be worth the trial of those who sustain the relation of masters, to see whether it would not be "possible" to govern their servants, as the apostle here advises, by the exercise of love. Might not kindness, and confidence, and the fear of the Lord, be substituted for threats and stripes?

Knowing that your Master also is in heaven - Margin, "Some read, both your and their." Many mss. have this reading; see Mill. The sense is not materially affected, further than, according to the margin, the effect would be to make the master and the servant feel that, in a most important sense, they were on an equality. According to the common reading, the sense is, that masters should remember that they were responsible to God, and this fact should be allowed to influence them in a proper manner. This it would do in two ways:

(1) By the fact that injustice toward their servants would then be punished as it deserved - since there was no respect of persons with God.

(2) it would lead them to act toward their servants as they would desire God to treat them. Nothing would be better adapted to do this than the feeling that they had a common Master, and that they were soon to stand at his bar.

Neither is there respect of persons with him - see this expression explained in the notes on Romans 2:11. The meaning here is, that God would not be influenced in the distribution of rewards and punishments, by a regard to the rank or condition of the master or the slave. He would show no favor to the one because he was a master; he would withhold none from the other because he was a slave. He would treat both according to their character. In this world they occupied different ranks and conditions; at his bar they would be called to answer before the same Judge. It follows from this:

(1) that a slave is not to be regarded as a "chattel," or a "thing," or as "property." He is a man; a redeemed man; an immortal man. He is one for whom Christ died. But Christ did not die for "chattels" and "things."

(2) the master and the servant in their great interests are on a level. Both are sinners; both will soon die; both will moulder back in the same manner to dust; both will stand at the tribunal of God; both will give up their account. The one will not be admitted to heaven because he is a master; nor will the other be thrust down to hell because he is a slave. If both are Christians, they will be admitted to a heaven where the distinctions of rank and color are unknown. If the master is not a Christian and the servant is, he who has regarded himself as superior to the servant in this life, will see "him" ascend to heaven while he himself will be thrust down to hell.

(3) Considerations like these will if they have their proper influence, produce two effects:

(a) They will lighten the yoke of slavery while it continues, and while it may be difficult to remove it at once. If the master and the slave were both Christians, even if the relation continued, it would be rather a relation of mutual confidence. The master would become the protector, the teacher, the guide, the friend; the servant would become the faithful helper - rendering service to one whom he loved, and to whom he felt himself bound by the obligations of gratitude and affection.

(b) But this state of feeling would soon lead to emancipation. There is something shocking to the feelings of all, and monstrous to a Christian, in the idea of holding "a Christian brother" in bondage. So long as the slave is regarded as a "chattel" or a mere piece of "property," like a horse, so long people endeavor to content themselves with the feeling that he may be held in bondage. But the moment it is felt that he is a "Christian brother" - a redeemed fellow-traveler to eternity, a joint heir of life - that moment a Christian should feel that there is something that violates all the principles of his religion in holding him as A slave; in making a "chattel" of that for which Christ died, and in buying and selling like a horse, an ox, or an ass, a child of God, and an heir of life. Accordingly, the prevalence of Christianity soon did away the evil of slavery in the Roman empire; and if it prevailed in its purity, it would soon banish it from the face of the earth.

threatening—Greek, "the threatening" which masters commonly use. "Masters" in the Greek, is not so strong a term as "despots": it implies authority, but not absolute domination.

your Master also—The oldest manuscripts read, "the Master both of them and you": "their Master and yours." This more forcibly brings out the equality of slaves and masters in the sight of God. Seneca [Thyestes, 607], says, "Whatever an inferior dreads from you, this a superior Master threatens yourselves with: every authority here is under a higher above." As you treat your servants, so will He treat you.

neither … respect of persons—He will not, in judging, acquit thee because thou art a master, or condemn him because he is a servant (Ac 10:34; Ro 2:11; Ga 2:6; Col 3:25; 1Pe 1:17). Derived from De 10:17; 2Ch 19:7.

forbearing threatening; not that they may not in any sense threaten, but not always, nor too often, nor too much, and with great things on light occasions; nor should they be too forward to execute their threatenings, especially when their servants repent and amend; they should then forbear them and forgive; and so the Syriac version renders it, "forgive their offences": this is opposed to all hard rigour, and ill usage, either by words or blows. And this is a rule given by the Jews (c), that a master should not multiply clamour and anger, but should speak him (his servant) quietly, and in a still manner, and he will hear his objections, or arguments and reasons:

knowing that your master also is in heaven; meaning Christ, who employs, provides for, and uses well all his servants, and to whom masters must be accountable for their usage of servants; for he is the common master of masters and servants; and so the Alexandrian copy, and Vulgate Latin version, read, "their and your master": and the place of his habitation is mentioned, to distinguish him from earthly masters; and the more to move and excite masters to their duty, since he being in heaven overlooks and takes notice of all their actions, as the omniscient God; and being omnipotent, has it in his power to plead and avenge the cause of the injured:

neither is there respect of persons with him; as whether they are of this, or the other nation, Jew or Gentile; whether in this, or that state and condition, or in such and such circumstances of life; whether masters or servants, bond or free, or whether Canaanitish or Hebrew servants; between which the Jews (d) made a difference, and allowed of rigour to be used to the one, but required mercy and kindness to be showed to the other; and so were respecters of persons.

(c) Maimon. Hilchot Abadim, c. 9. sect. 8. (d) Maimon. Hilchot Abadim, c. 9. sect. 8.

(11) It is the duty of masters to use the authority that they have over their servants, modestly and in a holy manner, seeing that they in another respect have a common master who is in heaven, who will judge both the servant and the free.

(f) Either of freedom or bondage.