For the epistle to Philemon, enjoy it here. I don't post everything here simply because its a post that is already too long.
PAUL: The
Epistle to Philemon[1]
Written to a house church (v2), this epistle is
thought provoking and unique.[2]
Beginning with Philemon, Paul recalls his prayers for this man (v4), his
“sharing of faith”(v6) and his joy and encouragement from him (v7). This
enforces that Paul has a close relationship with Philemon,[3]
and is uniquely aware of his spiritual life; he also gives a hint of his own
spiritual life, indicating his relationship with “my God.”[4]
This reinforces Paul’s equalizing factor. Just as he has shown that Philemon[5]
is ‘spiritual,’ he has indicated that he is as well.[6]
From v8-14,[7]
we have a shift in focus, though not out of the blue.[8]
Paul explains how “bold” he is ‘in Christ,’ enough to command Philemon to do
his ‘duty,’ but would prefer to “appeal to [Philemon] on the basis of
love”(v8).[9]
Paul is free to command Philemon, and he presents himself as an “old man.”[10]
What makes this remarkable is that Paul appears so confident that he can
dispense with his ‘command.’ Orders are most likely to breed resentment,[11]
so this reinforces the nature of “love” as Paul makes clear from the beginning.
Paul is confident, yet aware of the nature of his request. The use of “child”
with Onesimus as the subject (v10) now reveals why Paul has bothered writing
such a letter; on behalf of his child,[12]
Onesimus. Now Philemon is fully aware of this purpose.[13]
Playing off Onesimus’ name[14]
(useful, helpful), Paul appears to show that he finds Onesimus as
‘beneficial/useful’ to him, as well as Philemon. He affirms his own desire to
have Onesimus with him, but doesn’t do so by denigrating his character. V12
shows that Paul has sent him Onesimus back, with his own heart.[15]
While the Stoics argued that slaves have souls, Paul seems to indicate that
Onesimus is his soul.[16]
Paul has now identified with the slave much more than he has with the slave owner; in essence, he has
shown that he loves Onesimus, and for Philemon to not return his slave to Paul
would break Paul’s heart. V13 continues this, putting the emphasis back on
Philemon, who would have to give consent to an imprisoned Paul, who views
Onesimus’ return as ‘service.’[17]
The Apostle is making it difficult for the slave owner.[18]
Paul confirms the nature of this legal request by preferring that Philemon’s
good deed would indeed be voluntary.[19]
V15-16 appear to imply that Onesimus became a Christian while with Paul,
indicating the inherent tension of slaves and slave owners in the New Creation.
The parallel use of “in the flesh” and “in the Lord” exemplify life in this
world, and in the church. F.F Bruce states, “if Philemon set Onesimus free as
the spontaneous expression of the grace of God working in his heart, he would
derive real joy from the act, and the joy would be shared by Onesimus [and
Paul].”[20]
Paul promises to repay any debt Onesimus may have gained. Paul puts himself in
Onesimus’ shoes so Philemon sees Paul as well as his slave.
Short of forcing Philemon at gunpoint to manumit
Onesimus, Paul goes as far to imply a potential breach in the friendship if
Philemon doesn’t act appropriately.
Paul strips away the dichotomy [of slavery being of
social value] in the same sentence by stating that Onesimus is a beloved
brother of Philemon both in the material and the spiritual realm.[21]
The entire letter is quite awkward to think about: since Paul intends to come
and stay with Philemon in v22, Philemon can hardly be expected to have his
slave greet Paul at the door. Talk about social faux pas. Instead, Paul recognizes the practical implications
of his words in Galatians and works through the conventional means of his day
to free a slave. Not only is he risking capital[22]
but also his reputation. He is not insensitive to the needs of others, and it
is likely that Onesimus gained his freedom and served in the church (Col 4:9).[23]
Several factors make this very likely that Paul was able to secure Onesimus’
freedom:
1) Owing Paul a favor, likely due to his conversion at the hands of the
Apostle, it makes considerable sense that Philemon acquiesced to Paul’s request
and freed his slave.
2) The reference to “The Bishop Onesimus of Ephesus to whom Ignatius
wrote four or five decades later was the same man.”[24]
3) The letter was preserved and canonized seemingly without dispute,
maybe even by Onesimus as his ‘charter of freedom.’[25]
This lends power to the second point.
The parallel passage in Galatians 4:7 indicates that "no longer a
slave" should carry more than just "spiritual" equality. If a
slave is equalized with his master, then any subordination is not only awkward
but also seemingly contradictory. This is coming off the heels of Galatians
3:28. Paul also commands slaves to free themselves if possible (1 Cor 7:21),
acting consistently with the presentation of Gamaliel in regards to slavery.
YHWH’s ideal social order includes women’s equality as well as slaves, and by
claiming that slaves and masters are equal before God, God seems to state that
slavery is not part of YHWH’s purpose.[26]
Allen Bevere states, “The manumission of slaves threatened the unity and very
fabric of the empire. Thus, Paul’s implicit way of asking Philemon for
Onesimus’s freedom was a way of avoiding trouble for Paul and Philemon with the
imperial authorities precisely because his request was politically subversive.”[27]
NARRATIVE RECONSTRUCTION[28]
Onesimus returns, carrying the letter from Paul.
Philemon sees him, and orders his men to watch him. Philemon unfurls the
scroll, written in large letters and begins to read. Onesimus, trembling, sees
his wife and children behind his master. Philemon chuckles a bit, getting
through v4-7. Onesimus has spoken highly of him to Paul? Doubtful, but he
enjoys the kind words. Then he gets to v8. Paul’s boldness strikes him between
the eyes and his brow furrows. Nostrils flare. Hands grip the papyrus tightly.
Onesimus stares at his wife, wishing to hold her once before his master gives
an order.
When Philemon reads v12, he pauses. Paul, as a token
of good will, has sent Onesimus back with the letter, with Onesimus like Paul’s
own heart. Philemon takes a few steps to the left, sandals resting on cobbled
stone. The guards shift, watching as intently as Onesimus, who doesn’t bother
wiping the cold sweat forming on his neck. He shivers when he hears Philemon
chuckle, almost lightly. Philemon looks up at Onesimus, meeting him eye to eye.
“My voluntary consent…” Philemon murmurs, turning to a slave boy who offers him
a goblet of wine. He takes a sip and nods at the boy, who leaves quickly.
Turning back, Philemon stares at Onesimus, his jaw loosening.
“No longer as a slave…”
Onesimus avoids eye contact with his master, staring
at the tops of his bare feet. The torn toe nails, the scabs, the pain that is
rushing back as his body wishes to collapse. A guard steps up, eyes going cold,
grabbing Onesimus by the collar. Philemon holds up a hand, and the guard steps
back. Slowly, deliberately, Philemon approaches his trembling slave, swishing
the wine around in his goblet. Takes a second sip, running his tongue over his
teeth.
“Are you thirsty?”
SUMMATION: 1 Cor. 7:21-22
& the Epistle to Philemon
Robert Gagnon provides three reasons to understand
both texts as preferring freedom over slavery:[29]
first, for Paul, the status of slave was incompatible with the status of brother. Second, the status of slave was in tension with the
liberating redemptive event of Christ’s death. Third, freedom gave believers
greater latitude of unhinged devotion to Christ. Thus, there appears to be a
distinct tension between 1 Cor. 7:21-22, Philemon and the ‘slave’ texts in
Colossians, Ephesians, Titus and 1 & 2 Timothy.[30]
To them we now turn.
--Nick
[1] We are never told why Onesimus came to Paul. Most seem
to understand Onesimus as a runaway slave. This is possible, and Onesimus could
be seeking a mediator in Paul (as some priests functioned this way), but we are
simply never told. My own theory is that Onesimus separated himself from
Philemon (v15), indicating that the initiative was taken by Onesimus. The
reason being possibly that, since Onesimus was ‘useless’ to Philemon, maybe
Onesimus was going to be sold. While nothing proves this, perhaps Onesimus had
a family. That could inspire a husband/father to act rashly. Perhaps he stole
from Philemon and was planning on running away with his family, but was caught
and ran off on his own. Only God knows.
[2] For instance, he mentions Apphia and it is implied
that she is involved high up in the church.
[3] Possibly due to him converting Philemon, or
additionally the stories that Onesimus has told Paul.
[5] From this verse (4) on, Paul appears to be speaking
only to Philemon. The use of the singular indicates this.
[6] Most profoundly, Paul has already begun to set up
Philemon; not in a malicious way, but in that those “in Christ” relate to each
other on the basis of being “in Christ.” Right now, its one to one, a most
intimate conversation.
[7] One long sentence in the Greek.
[8] Paul has already presented Philemon’s character and
reputation, establishing him as a “co-worker” and one who encourages Paul.
Rhetorically, this is absolutely powerful.
[9] Barth and Blanke note that Paul has “renounced a
specific use of freedom of speech, [but] not his authority.” The Letter to
Philemon, 309.
[10] Age is noted as having maturity and authority, and
Paul’s use of this is indeed a socio-cultural move to present himself as having
the acceptable power to demand something of Philemon. Since Philemon has
already been told that he has “faith toward the Lord Jesus”(5), how much more
is Paul’s faithfulness to Jesus? Murphy-O’Connor points out, “any male in his
late fifties or early sixties would have been considered ‘elderly.’” Paul: A
Critical Life, 4.
[12] This isn’t the first time Paul calls his readers
‘children’: Titus 1:4; 1 Cor. 4:17.
[13] One wonders if Onesimus was the one to hand Philemon
Paul’s letter. Imagine the tension in the room. See “Narrative Reconstruction.”
[15] Paul doesn’t cite any OT or social law. Legally,
Philemon was under no obligation to manumit Onesimus. However, since Paul
identifies Onesimus as “his own heart,” this strongly implies that Paul cannot
function without his child. Thus Paul seemingly transfers the (heavy!) burden
of action to Philemon.
[17] This ‘service’ is less likely domestic and more likely
as ‘service in the gospel.’
[18] Paul has no legal right to retain Onesimus and he
knows it. Priest and mediators could sell the slave elsewhere, but they most
likely returned the slave, albeit with the understanding that the owner’s
anger/honor was assuaged. Paul’s comment that he could “command Philemon” to
free Onesimus must mean that he knows the process by which Onesimus would be
freed.
[19] Paul’s view of Philemon’s free will is certainly
compatible with Paul’s libertarianism.
[23] It isn’t entirely certain that this is the same
Onesimus, but Onesimus is a common slave name. If anything, this suggests that
slaves served in leadership.
[27] Allen R. Bevere, “Colossians and the Rhetoric of
Empire,” Jesus is Lord, Caesar is Not,
ed. Scot McKnight and Joseph B. Modica, 194. In an otherwise marvelous essay,
Bevere does unfortunately qualify his argument in that he casts doubt on
whether or not Paul was indeed asking Philemon to free Onesimus. However, based
on Paul’s inherent request to free Onesimus and the amount of
social/theological pressure placed upon Philemon, Bevere’s doubts seem
unnecessary.
[28] There are liberties taken here, but I see this as a
consistent rendering of the epistle as a whole.
[30] Many scholars chalk this up to the “real” Paul versus
“deutero” Paul. While I don’t accept non-Pauline authorship for the disputed
epistles, I can certainly understand why scholars argue thusly. See Gagnon, The
Bible and Homosexual Practice, 448;
Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians 2nd Edition, 106. Meeks assumes a hierarchy in these texts.
