[fortheDeclaration]

The REAL difference in the use of the terms is this, 'Servant differs from slave, as the servant's subjection to a master is voluntary, the slaves is not. Every slave is a servant, but every servant is not a slave' (Webster, 1828)

So, the difference is the WILL, which is free and can choose to serve or not.

MacArthur, being a Calvinist, wants to remove the will as a real issue in serving God.

As for the word being translated into English with it's modern connotations, the Greek word 'doulos' is translated as 'servant' by both the NIV and NKJ in Jn.15:15.

[OHelix]

The REAL difference in the use of the terms is this, 'Servant differs from slave, as the servant's subjection to a master is voluntary, the slaves is not. Every slave is a servant, but every servant is not a slave' (Webster, 1828)

So, the difference is the WILL, which is free and can choose to serve or not.

Webster is expressing the same broad meaning of the word "servant" as I did in my last post, namely: "Servant" can refer to either chattel or "voluntary" servants. The word "slave" ONLY refers to chattle and NOT voluntary servants.

In Greek, "diakonos" is a word that could refer to either condition, just like the English word "Servant". However the point you seem to be absolutely refusing to acknowledge is that the Greek word "doulos" means "slave".

To Paraphrase Mr Webster: "The REAL difference in the use of terms is this, 'Diakonos differs from doulos, as the diakonos' subjection to a master is voluntary, the doulos' is not. Every doulos is a diakonos, but every diakonos is not a doulos'

Ironically, you can read a few lines down in that 1928 Websters and you'll see the following:

3. In Scripture, a slave; a bondman