Philemon

Philemon was a wealthy Christian of Colossus who hosted a house-church. He was converted under the apostle Paul (Philemon 19), perhaps when Paul ministered in Ephesus (Acts 19:10). He is remembered because of his runaway slave, Onesimus, who after damaging or stealing his master's property (Philemon 11,18), made his way to Rome, where he was converted under Paul's ministry (Philemon 10).

Onesimus later returned to his master carrying the Epistle to the Colossians and the shorter Epistle to Philemon with him. In the latter, Paul asked Philemon to receive Onesimus, not as a slave but as a "beloved brother" (Philemon 16). Nothing further is known of Philemon.

The Epistle of Philemon is the shortest and most personal of Paul's epistles. Philemon tells the story of the conversion of a runaway slave, Onesimus, and the appeal to his owner, Philemon, to accept him back. The letter is warm and masterful, reminding us that the presence of Christ drastically changes every relationship in life.

Structure of the Epistle: Philemon consists of one chapter of 25 verses. A greeting, addressed to Philemon and the church which meets in his house (verses 1-3), is followed by four verses in praise of Philemon's love and faith (verses 4-7). Paul comes to his point in verses 8-16, where he tells of his affection for Onesimus and entreats Philemon to receive him back as a "beloved brother" (v. 16). Paul is so confident that Philemon will do even more than he asks that he offers to pay any expenses Philemon has incurred and asks him to prepare the guest room for a forthcoming visit (verses 17-22). Final greetings conclude the letter (verses 23-25).

Historical Setting: The Epistle to Philemon is a companion to the Epistle to the Colossians. Both were written during Paul's imprisonment, probably in Rome (Col. 4:18; Philemon 9). They contain the names of the same greeters (compare Col. 4:7-17 with Philemon 23-25) and were delivered at the same time by Tychicus and Onesimus (Col. 4:7-9). The date for the two letters is the late 50s or early 60s.

Theological Contribution: The Epistle to Philemon is a lesson in the art of Christian relationships. No finer example of "speaking the truth in love" (Eph. 4:15) exists than this beautiful letter. While it was Philemon's legal right in the ancient world to punish or even kill a runaway slave, Paul hoped - indeed expected (v. 19) - that Philemon would receive Onesimus back as a brother in the LORD, not as a slave (v. 16). From beginning to end Paul addresses Philemon as a trusted friend rather than as an adversary (v. 22); he appeals to the best in his character (verses 4-7, 13-14,17,21). In spite of Paul's subtle pressures for Philemon to restore Onesimus, he is careful not to force Philemon to do what is right; he helps him choose it for himself (verses 8-9,14).

Special Considerations: Although Paul never, so far as we know, called for an end to slavery, the Epistle to Philemon laid the ax at the root of that cruel and deformed institution - and to every way of treating individuals as property instead of persons. If there is "one GOD and Father of all" (Eph. 4:6), and if all are debtors to Him (Rom. 3:21-26), then no person can look on another person as something to be used for his own ends. In Christ that person has become a "beloved brother".

Theology (Holman Bible Handbook; David S. Dockery, General Editor; pub. by Holman Bible Publishers)
This short letter teaches much about the sense of brotherhood that existed in early Christianity. We see the tension between the sense of equality in Christ (see Gal. 3:28) and the societal differences. Paul did not endorse slavery, nor did he want slaves to rebel against their masters. The teaching of this letter has served as an impetus for the abolition of slavery.

PHILEMON ("Exploring the New Testament" by Earle, Blaney and Hanson; published 1955)
The letter of Paul to Philemon is the only strictly personal letter among all of his writings which have been preserved. The Pastoral Epistles were written to individuals, but their messages were for groups or churches as well as for the recipient, while the message here was for Philemon alone, although greetings to the church were included (v.2).

There are five persons involved in this letter: Paul, Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, and Onesimus. Timothy is also mentioned as being present with Paul, along with Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke.

Paul was the author. The Epistle has been recognized as Pauline from the earliest times. It was written at Rome and carried to Colosse by Tychicus, who accompanied Onesimus back home (Col. 4:7-9). In all probability it was the first of Paul's Prison Epistles.

Philemon was a layman of Colosse and one of Paul's converts, in whose house the Colossian church met. Paul calls him a "fellow-worker" (v.1) and a "partner" (v.17). He may have been actively engaged at one time in Paul's evangelistic efforts. Hayes suggests that "he may have been a partner with Paul in some business enterprise". (D. A. Hayes, Paul and His Epistles, p. 332). He was a slaveowner. [For a different viewpoint, see the article, in the right column, from Albert Barne's Notes on the Bible.)

Apphia was probably the wife of Philemon, but there is no evidence available to identify her definitely. Archippus was probably their son. He held some responsible place in the Colossian church (Col. 4:17). Paul terms him "our fellowsoldier" (v.2).

Onesimus was the object of the writing of this letter. A slave of Philemon, he had run away (v.12) after having robbed his master (v.18). Arriving in Rome - the best possible place to hide - he had come in contact with Paul and had been converted. He would have known Paul, because of the association of Paul and Philemon, and may have contacted him when his freedom proved less profitable than he had expected, or when his conscience began to trouble him. He remained thereafter with Paul, becoming very useful to him, until it finally became evident to him that the Christian thing to do was to return to his master, regardless of the consequences. Tychicus agreed to accompany him, and Paul determined to try to guarantee the outcome by writing a letter to Philemon.

Slavery was common in the Roman Empire. Many of the rich owned hundreds of slaves, while a man with as few as ten was considered a poor man. The slave was the property of his master and could claim no rights of his own. The privileges granted him depended, of course, upon the good graces of his master, but by law the smallest crime was punishable by death. He had no legal right to marry, and in all respects he was but the chattel of his master.

The gospel does not legislate against slavery. To do so would be to set one class in society over against another in the name of Christ, thereby alienating the class ruled against. Slavery is only one of many evils in the world. The gospel is meant for everyone and offers salvation to all. It contains the power to remedy all of the ills of society and make brothers of all men. When a man begins to look upon his slave as a brother, recognizing him to be of equal value with himself in GOD's sight, that man is on the way to give freedom to his slave.

Paul knew all this, and he was too wise to tell Onesimus that he should be set free or to tell Philemon to free him, although he knew that such freedom would be the inevitable outcome if both of them walked in the light of GOD's truth. Paul shows us here that some results of the gospel must be given time to develop.

Paul had learned the psychology of a good approach when he had a difficult situation to deal with. In this Epistle he is at his best. He knew what Philemon's rights were as a slaveowner, and he also knew what Philemon as a Christian should do in the case of his runaway slave. But he was not quite so sure of what he would do. With the courtesy of a gentleman, the compassionate interest of a brother, and the spiritual insight of an apostle, he began by expressing joy over Philemon's reputation for love and faith and his interest in the salvation of others. This could not fail to put Philemon in a good frame of mind.

Then Paul made his appeal to Philemon. Although he had the right to command, he preferred to appeal to him on behalf of Onesimus. Although a willful, runaway slave, the latter had become converted and was like a son to Paul and a brother to the saints. Paul would have liked to keep him because of his valued services. But because he was the property of Philemon, he was sending him back. Perhaps there was something providential in the whole circumstance, because Philemon could now receive him as a brother in the LORD and not as a slave. Paul pleaded on the basis of their mutual friendship and on the basis of his own imprisonment. As for any debt that Onesimus may have owed his master, whether through robbery or failure to perform his duties, Paul would become responsible for it. At the same time he suggested that Philemon should even go so far as to cancel the debt since he owed his very life to Paul - for had not Paul led him to Christ? This he asks Philemon to do, not just for the sake of Onesimus, but for his own sake. "Brother, let me have joy of thee in the LORD: refresh my heart in Christ" (v.20).

Paul appealed to his friend in the full confidence that he would do as he had been requested, even more than that which was necessary. Furthermore, he asked to have the spare bedroom made ready against his probably visit to Colosse. He had faith in the prayers of his friends and hoped to be released from prison. Following this, Paul closed his Epistle with greetings from friends and his own benediction.

We are not told the outcome of this request. We may fondly hope that Philemon responded to the great apostle and gave Onesimus his eventual freedom. We trust also that Onesimus conducted himself in a manner worthy of that freedom. We are certain of this: Paul's little Epistle points the way to the remedy for all the social evils which afflict mankind. Through Christ the brotherhood of man can become an accomplished fact.

Introduction to Philemon (Albert Barne's Notes on the Bible)

Section 1. The History of Philemon
On Philemon, to whom this Epistle was addressed, almost nothing more is known than can be ascertained from the Epistle itself. It is short, and of a private character; but it is a bright and beautiful gem in the volume of inspiration.

From Colossians 4:9, it may be inferred that the person to whom it was addressed was an inhabitant of Colossae, since Onesimus, concerning whom this Epistle was written, is there mentioned as �one of them.� (See the notes on that verse; compare the ingenious remarks of Paley, Hor. Paul., on Colossians, No. IV.) He is said by Calmet and Michaelis to have been wealthy; but this cannot be determined with certainty, though it is not improbable. The only circumstances which seem to indicate this, are, that Onesimus had been his �servant,� from which it has been inferred that he was an owner of slaves; and that he appears to have been accustomed to show hospitality to strangers, or, as Michaelis expresses it, �traveling Christians;� (see Phm. 1:22 of the Epistle). But these circumstances are not sufficient to determine that he was a man of property. There is no evidence, as we shall see, that he was a slave-holder; and Christians in moderate circumstances were accustomed to show hospitality to their brethren. Besides, it is not said in Phm_1:22 that he was accustomed to show general hospitality; but Paul merely asks him to provide for him a lodging. It is probable that he had been accustomed to remain with him when he was in Colossae.

It is quite clear that he had been converted under the ministry of the apostle himself. This appears from what is said in Philemon 1:19; �I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self.� This cannot be understood otherwise than as implying that he had been converted under his preaching, unless the apostle, on some former occasion, had been the means of saving his life, of which there is no evidence. Indeed, it is manifest, from the general tone of the Epistle, that Philemon had been converted by the labors of the author. It is just such a letter as it would be natural and proper to write on such a supposition; it is not one which the apostle would have been likely to write to any one who did not sustain such a relation to him. But where and when he was converted, is unknown. It is possible that Paul may have met with him at Ephesus; but it is much more probable that he had himself been at Colossae, and that Philemon was one of his converts there. See the introduction to the Epistle to the Colossians.

It is evident from the Epistle that Paul regarded him as a sincere Christian; as a man of strict integrity; as one who could be depended on to do right. Thus (Phm. 1:5-7), he says that he had heard of his �love and faith toward the LORD Jesus, and toward all saints;� thus he confidently asks him to provide for him a lodging when he should come (Phm. 1:22) and thus he expresses the assured belief that he would do what was right towards one who had been his servant, who, having been formerly unfaithful, was now converted, and, in the estimation of the apostle, was worthy of the confidence and affection of his former master.

In regard to his rank in the Christian church, nothing whatever is known. Paul calls him (Phm. 1:1) his �fellow-laborer;� but this appellation is so general, that it determines nothing in regard to the manner in which be co-operated with him in promoting religion. It is a term which might be applied to any active Christian, whether a preacher, an elder, a deacon, or a private member of the church. It would seem clear, however, that he was not a traveling preacher, for he had a home in Colossae (Phm. 1:2, 1:22) and the presumption is, that he was an active and benevolent member of the church, who did not sustain any office. There are many private members of the churches, to whom all that is said of Philemon in the Epistle would apply. Yet there have been various conjectures in regard to the office which he held. Hoffmann (Introduction a.d. Lection. Eph. a.d. Colossenses, 18) supposes that he was bishop of Colossae; Michaelis supposes that he was a deacon in the church; but of either of these, there is no evidence whatever.

Nothing is known of his age, his profession, or of the time and circumstances of his death. Neither is it certainly known what effect this Epistle had on him, or whether he again received Onesimus under his roof. It may be presumed, however, that such a letter, addressed to such a man, would not fail of its object.

Section 2. The Occasion upon which the Epistle was written
This can be learned only from the Epistle itself, and there the circumstances are so marked as to make a mistake impossible.

(1) Philemon had had a servant of the name of Onesimus. Of the character of this servant, before Paul became acquainted with him, nothing more is known than that he had been �unprofitable� to Philemon (Phm. 1:11), and that he bad probably done him some wrong, either by taking his property, or by the fact that he had escaped from him (Phm. 1:18). It is not necessary to suppose that he was a slave: for all that is implied of necessity in the word which is employed to designate his condition in Philemon 1:16 (doulos), and all that is stated of him in the Epistle, would be met by the supposition that he was bound to Philemon, either by his parents or guardians, or that he had bound himself to render voluntary service.

(2) for some cause, this servant had fled from his master, and had gone to Rome. The cause of his escaping is unknown. It may be that he had purloined the property of his master, and dreaded detection; or that he had, by his base conduct in some other way, exposed himself to punishment; or that he merely desired freedom from oppression; or that he disregarded the bonds into which he himself, or his parents or guardians, had entered, and had therefore escaped. Nothing can be inferred about his condition, or his relation to Philemon, from the fact that he ran away. It is perhaps quite as common for apprentices to run away, as it is for slaves; and they who enter into voluntary bonds to render service to another, do not always regard them.

(3) in some way, when at Rome, this servant had found out the apostle Paul, and had been converted by his instrumentality. Paul says (Phm. 1:10) that he had �begotten him in his bonds� (en tois desmois mou) which seems to imply that Onesimus had come to him, and not that Paul had searched him out. It does not appear that Paul, when a prisoner at Rome, was allowed to go at large (compare Acts 28:30), though he was permitted to receive all who came to him. Why Onesimus came to the apostle, is not known. It may have been because he was in want, and Paul was the only one in Rome whom he had ever seen; or it may have been because his mind had become distressed on account of sin, and he sought him out to obtain spiritual counsel. Conjecture on these points is useless, where there is not even a hint that can serve as a clue to find out the truth.

(4) from some cause, equally unknown, Onesimus, when converted, was desirous of returning to his former master. It is commonly assumed that his returning again was at the instigation of the apostle, and that this furnishes an instance of his belief that runaway slaves should be sent back to their masters. But, besides that there is no certain evidence that he ever was a slave, there is as little proof that he returned at the instigation of Paul, or that his return was not wholly voluntary on his part. For the only expression which the apostle uses on this subject (Phm. 1:12), �whom I have sent again� - (anapempsa) - does not necessarily imply that he even proposed it to him, still less that he commanded it. It is a word of such general import, that it would be employed on the supposition that Onesimus desired to return, and that Paul, who had a strong wish to retain him, to aid him in the same way that Philemon himself would do if he were with him (compare Phm. 1:13), had, on the whole, concluded to part with him, and to send him again, with a letter, to his friend Philemon. It is just such language as he would have used of Timothy, Titus, or Epaphroditus, if employed on an important embassy at the request of the apostle; compare Luke 7:6,7:10,7:19;20:13; Acts 10:5;15:22; 1Corinthians 4:17; 2Corinthians 9:3; Ephesians 6:22; Philippians 2:19,2:23,2:25,2:28; 1Thessalonians 3:2,3:5; Titus 3:12, for a similar use of the word �send� (pempo).

There is nothing in the statement which forbids us to suppose that Onesimus was himself disposed to return to Philemon, and that Paul �sent� him at his own request. To this, Onesimus might have been inclined from many causes. He may have repented that he left his master, and had forsaken the comforts which he had enjoyed under his roof. It is no uncommon thing for a runaway apprentice, or servant, when he has seen and felt the misery of being among strangers and in want, to wish himself well back again in the house of his master. Or he may have felt that he had wronged his master in some way (compare the notes at Phm. 1:18), and, being now converted, was desirous of repairing the wrong. Or he may have had friends and kindred in Colossae whom he was desirous of seeing again. Since any one of these, or of many other supposable causes, may have induced him to desire to return to his master, it should not be assumed that Paul sent him against his will, and thence be inferred that he was in favor of sending back runaway slaves to their masters against their will. There are many points to be proved, which cannot be proved, to make that a legitimate inference; see the notes at Philemon 1:12.

(5) whatever were the reasons why Onesimus desired to return to Philemon, it is clear that he was apprehensive of some trouble if he went back. What those reasons were, it is impossible now to determine with absolute certainty, but it is not difficult to conjecture what they may have been, and any of the following will account for his apprehensions - either:

that he had done his master wrong by the mere act of leaving him, depriving him of valuable services which he was bound to render; or
that he may have felt that the mere act of running away had injured the character of his master, for such an act always implies that there is something in the dealings of a master which makes it desirable to leave him; or
that he had in some way injured him in respect to property, by taking that which did not belong to him, (Phm. 1:18) or
that he owed his master, and he may have inferred from his leaving him that he meant to defraud him, (Phm. 1:18) or
that the laws of Phrygia were such that Onesimus apprehended that if he returned, even penitent, it would be judged by his master necessary to punish him, in order to deter others from committing a similar offense.

The laws of Phrygia, it is said, allowed the master to punish a slave without applying to a magistrate. See Macknight. It should be said also that the Phrygians were a severe people (Curtius, Lib. v. c. 1), and it is not improbable that, from the customs there, Onesimus may have apprehended harsh treatment if he returned. - It is not proper to assume that any one of these was certainly the reason why he feared to return, for this cannot be absolutely determined. We should not take it for granted that he had defrauded his master - for that is not necessarily implied in what is said in Philemon 1:18, and we should not impute crimes to men without proof; nor should we take it for granted that he feared to be punished as a runaway slave - for that cannot be proved; but someone or more of these reasons doubtless operated to make him apprehensive that if he returned he would meet with, at least, a cold reception.

(6) to induce his master to receive him kindly again, was the main object of this courteous and kind Epistle. For a view of the arguments upon which he urges this, see the Analysis of the Epistle. The arguments are such, that we should suppose they could not be resisted, and we may presume, without impropriety, that they had the desired effect upon the mind of Philemon - but of that we have no certain evidence.

Section 3. The Time and Place of Writing the Epistle
There can be no doubt that this letter was written from Rome about the time when the Epistle to the Colossians was written; compare the introduction to that Epistle. The circumstances which conduct to this conclusion are such as the following:

(1) Paul at the time when it was written was a prisoner; Phm_1:1. �Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ;� Phm_1:10. �Whom I have begotten in my bonds;� compare Phm_1:23. �Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus.�

(2) it was written when he had hopes of obtaining his liberty, or when he had such a prospect of it that he could ask Philemon, with confidence, to �prepare him a lodging� (Phm. 1:22).

(3) Timothy was with him at the time when it was written (Phm. 1:1), and we know that Paul desired him to come to him to Rome when he was a prisoner there as soon as possible (2Tim. 4:9). �Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me.�

(4) we know that Onesimus was actually sent by Paul to Colossae while he was a prisoner at Rome, and it would be morally certain that, under the circumstances of the case, he would send the letter to his master at that time. No other instance is mentioned in which he sent him to Colossae, and the evidence is as certain as the nature of the case admits, that that was the time when the Epistle was written (see Col. 4:9).

(5) the same persons are mentioned in the salutations in the two Epistles, at least they are so far the same as to make it probable that the Epistles were written at the same time, for it is not very probable that the same persons would in another place, and on another occasion, have been with the apostle. Thus, Aristarchus, Mark, Epaphras, Luke, and Demas, join in the salutations both to the church at Colossae and to Philemon. Probably at no other time in the life of Paul were all these persons with him, than when he was a prisoner at Rome. These considerations make it clear that the Epistle was written while Paul was a prisoner at Rome and at about the same time with the Epistle to the Colossians. If so, it was about a.d. 62.

Section 4. The Character of this Epistle
This letter is almost wholly of a private character, and yet there is scarcely any portion of the New Testament of equal length which is of more value. It is exquisitely beautiful and delicate. It is a model of courtesy and politeness. It presents the character of the author in a most amiable light, and shows what true religion will produce in causing genuine refinement of thought and language. It is gentle and persuasive, and yet the argument is one that we should suppose would have been, and probably was, irresistible. It is very easy to conceive that the task which the apostle undertook to perform was one which it would be difficult to accomplish - that of reconciling an offended master to a runaway servant. And yet it is done with so much kindness, persuasiveness, gentleness, and true affection, that, as the letter was read, it is easy to imagine that all the hostility of the master was disarmed, and we can almost see him desiring to embrace him who bore it, not now as a servant, but as a Christian brother; Phm_1:16 �It is impossible,� says Doddridge, �to read over this admirable Epistle without being touched with the delicacy of sentiment, and the masterly address, that appear in every part of it. We see here, in a most striking light, how perfectly consistent true politeness is, - not only with all the warmth and sincerity of a friend, but even with the dignity of the Christian and the Apostle. And if this letter were to be considered in no other view than as a mere human composition, it must be allowed to be a master-piece in its kind.

As an illustration of this remark, it may not be improper to compare it with an epistle of Pliny, that seems to have been written on a similar occasion (Lib. ix. Let. 21); which, though penned by one that was reckoned to excel in the epistolary style, though it has undoubtedly many beauties, yet must be acknowledged by every impartial reader vastly inferior to this animated composition of the apostle.� As a specimen of the courtesy and politeness which the Christian ought to practice at all times, as well as furnishing many valuable lessons on Christian duty (see the remarks at the close), it deserves a place in the volume of inspiration; and a material chasm would be produced in the instructions which are needful for us, if it were withdrawn from the sacred canon.