The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (140 page)

Philemon was the master of a slave named Onesimus. The letter provides a number of possible biographical details concerning Philemon. First, Paul presented Philemon in glowing terms as a cherished coworker (v. 1) and a model of love and faith toward Jesus (v. 5). Philemon's love and faith had also overflowed to all the believers (v. 5), whom he had often refreshed (v. 7). Second, the apostle Paul probably played a significant role in Philemon's conversion (v. 19) because Paul parenthetically commented that Philemon owed his “own self” to the apostle.
²³⁰
Third, Philemon was probably wealthy since he hosted the
church (v. 2) in Colossae (see Col 4:9) and was able to provide a guest room for Paul (v.22).
²³¹

Provenance

Questions concerning the provenance of Philemon are dependent on the provenance of Colossians. Paul was in prison when he wrote both letters. In addition to the other similarities sketched above, Colossians indicates that Onesimus was a resident of Colossae (Col 4:9). Thus one may safely infer that Philemon resided in the same place as his slave. Many scholars conclude that these similarities between the two letters suggest that they were written at the same time and place and were sent together to Colossae.
²³²
The time and place, however, continue to be vigorously contested.

The three major proposals regarding the provenance of Philemon are Rome, Ephesus, and Caesarea, with Rome and Ephesus being the most seriously debated.
²³³
In favor of Rome, external evidence dating to the fourth and fifth centuries “uniformly attributes” the provenance of Philemon to Rome.
²³⁴
Other scholars believe that two factors in Philemon favor an Ephesian imprisonment: (1) it is more likely that Onesimus would flee to Ephesus as the nearest metropolis, not the distant city of Rome; and (2) Paul's request to Philemon for a room in the near future (Phlm 22) fits more readily with the shorter distance between Ephesus and Colossae.
²³⁵

Those who hold to a Roman imprisonment make two points in response. First, the proximity of Ephesus to Colossae cuts both ways. It may be that Onesimus would seek the anonymity found within the capital of the Roman Empire because a place like Ephesus was too close for comfort. Second, Paul's request for lodging does not preclude a Roman imprisonment because he could still make the trip in about five weeks. Carson and Moo argued that the reference to an imminent arrival could have been a way to put further pressure on Philemon and to obtain a favorable decision from him.
²³⁶

Occasion

Scholars have suggested five possible scenarios for the letter's occasion: (1) traditional hypothesis; (2) sanctuary hypothesis; (3) mediation hypothesis; (4) “sent” hypothesis; and (5) Knox hypothesis. The traditional hypothesis regarding the letter's occasion can be sketched as follows. Philemon had a runaway slave named Onesimus, who may have add
ed to his crime of desertion by stealing from his master (v. 18). Subsequent to his escape, Onesimus encountered Paul in prison (or house arrest). The apostle befriended Onesimus and eventually led him to Christ. Paul now faced a difficult decision. Should he send his valued helper Onesimus back to his master Philemon? Though Paul desired to keep Philemon with him, he knew that he must send Onesimus back to Philemon. But he did so with the expressed expectation that Philemon would return Onesimus to Paul in order to provide him with further assistance, perhaps with the additional hope that Philemon would grant freedom to his slave, who was now a fellow slave of Christ with Philemon and thus a fellow brother in Christ.
²³⁷
This portrayal has come under fire recently because of the improbability that Onesimus just happened to stumble on Philemon's close friend, Paul. Carson and Moo capture this attitude well in saying that “[s]uch a coincidence seems more in keeping with a Dickens novel than with sober history.”
²³⁸

Therefore, other views have been proposed in lieu of the traditional view. The sanctuary hypothesis suggests that the fugitive Onesimus fled to Paul's home for protection in keeping with the Roman statute that considered the home a place of sanctuary. The mediation hypothesis offers a different construal of the events by claiming that Onesimus was not a
fugitivus
(Lat. for “fugitive”) in legal terms but rather a slave who had somehow wronged his master and thus sought out Paul for mediation as the
amicus domini
(Lat. for “friend of the master”).
²³⁹
The “sent” hypothesis simply states that the Colossian congregation sent Onesimus to minister to some of Paul's physical needs while in prison.
²⁴⁰

The Knox hypothesis refers to the view championed by John Knox, who offered the earliest (1935) and most elaborate revision of the traditional view. Knox's theory essentially consists of five parts. First, he argued that Archippus was the owner of Onesimus and thus the ultimate addressee of the letter. Second, he theorized that Paul actually sent the letter to Philemon, the overseer of the churches in that region, in order that it might be read aloud in the Colossian church. Third, Paul devised this strategy in order that the added pressure on Archippus would cause him to release Onesimus for Christian service. Fourth, the mysterious letter to Laodicea (Col 4:16) is really a reference to this letter to Philemon. Fifth, this request to release Onesimus represents the “ministry” that Paul called upon Archippus to complete (Col 4:17).
²⁴¹

How should the reader evaluate these various proposals? In the case of the “sent” hypothesis, the exegesis is questionable at times.
²⁴²
Knox's reconstruction is sometimes
insightful and always ingenious but ultimately founders upon the rocks of speculation and improbability.
²⁴³
For example, almost all Pauline scholars reject Knox's public reading theory because it is simply incompatible with the internal evidence of the letter. The full frontal assault of a public reading would completely negate Paul's deft and delicate handling of this sensitive issue exemplified in the letter itself.

It is much more difficult to adjudicate between the traditional, sanctuary, and mediator hypotheses since none of these views is free from difficulty. The following points of critique and evaluation have been raised.

1. The sanctuary and mediation proposals have difficulty answering why Onesimus would seek Paul for sanctuary or mediation if he were in the distant capital. Could Onesimus not have found a closer place of sanctuary or a closer person to serve as mediator?
   
2. The traditional view does not require a “coincidental” meeting between Paul and Onesimus. Even if a proposed scenario involves a chance encounter, it is not inconsistent with the providential activity of God evidenced elsewhere in Scripture.
   ²⁴⁴
   
3. The traditional view that considers Onesimus as a fugitive is problematic because Paul does not use the customary legal terms or verbs of flight.
   ²⁴⁵
   
4. Pliny's letter to Sabinianus
   (Ep.
   9.21) is an impressive literary and historical parallel for the mediation hypothesis.
   ²⁴⁶
   
5. The runaway slave hypothesis has difficulty explaining the absence of any echoes of Onesimus's regret or repentance for this criminal act in the letter.
   ²⁴⁷
   

Paul left the reader to wrestle with these questions because he did not explicitly state the reasons behind Onesimus's flight. Therefore dogmatism should be avoided. The practice of appealing to precedents in the ancient world is problematic because plentiful examples exist of runaway slaves and mediation. Carson and Moo rightly noted a further caveat in that the traditional view allows for other possibilities. Perhaps, for example, Onesimus fled to Rome and then subsequently had second thoughts about his escape, so he sought out Paul for refuge or mediation.
²⁴⁸
In any case, questions such as these do not materially affect the understanding and appreciation of the overall message of the book.

LITERATURE

Literary Plan

Recent research on Philemon focuses on rhetorical criticism. F. F. Church read Philemon through the lens of deliberative rhetoric as the prescript (vv. 1—3); the
exordium
(vv. 4—7);
probatio
(vv. 8—16); and
peroratio
(vv. 17—22). This rhetorical device aims “to demonstrate love or friendship and to induce sympathy or goodwill, in order to dispose the hearer favorably to the merits of one's case.”
²⁴⁹
Others have argued along epistolary lines that Philemon is a letter of mediation or intercession.
²⁵⁰
J. P. Heil and J. W. Welch independently advocated a chiastic structure for Philemon in which verse 14 is the central point.
²⁵¹

The hardest decision for the outline of the letter is where the body ends and the close begins. Many think the body extends from verses 8 to 22 and the final greetings begin in verse 23-
²⁵²
Though certainty is nearly impossible, it may be preferable to read verse 20 as the close of the letter body, with verses 21—25 forming the closing.

OUTLINE

1. OPENING (1-7)
   
   1. Salutation (1-3)
      
   2. Thanksgiving and Prayer (4-7)
      
2. BODY: THREE APPEALS FOR ONESIMUS (8-20)
   
   1. Initial Appeal: He is Useful for Both You and Me (8-11)
      
   2. Second Appeal: Accept Him as a Brother in Christ (12-16)
      
   3. Third Appeal: Refresh My Heart by Sending Onesimus Back (17-20)
      
3. CLOSING (21-25)
   

UNIT-BY-UNIT DISCUSSION

I. Opening (1-7)

A. Salutation (1—3)
The letter opens with the customary identification of the senders (Paul and Timothy; v. 1) and the recipients (Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, and the house church; v. 2) as well as the grace salutation (v. 3).

B. Thanksgiving and Prayer (4—7)
Paul offered a thanksgiving (v. 4) for the report of Philemon's love and faith (v. 5). He also prayed that Philemon's participation in the faith
would be effective through knowledge (v. 6). Philemon's act of refreshing the hearts of the believers brought joy and encouragement to Paul (v. 7).

II. Body: Three Appeals for Onesimus (8-20)

A. First Appeal: He Is Useful for Both You and Me (8—11)
Paul lovingly issued a series of fatherly pleas to Philemon on behalf of Onesimus as Paul's son (v. 10). Paul appealed to Philemon as an aged and imprisoned man, not as an authoritarian apostle (vv. 8—9)- The first appeal focused on the current usefulness of Onesimus to both Philemon and Paul, which is contrasted with the former uselessness of Onesimus to Philemon (v. 11). The expression involves a pun involving Onesimus's name, which means “profitable” or “useful.” Previously, he had been “useless”
(achrēston)
, but now he had become “useful”
(euchreston)
to Philemon as well as Paul.
²⁵³

B. Second Appeal: Accept Him as a Brother in Christ (12—16)
The second appeal (vv. 12—16) petitioned Philemon to accept Onesimus back as a beloved brother, not a slave (vv. 15—16). Paul sent Onesimus back for this purpose, though Paul would have preferred to keep Onesimus, who could take Philemon's place in ministering to Paul in prison (v. 13). Paul did not act according to this desire because he wanted Philemon's free and heartfelt consent to this good deed (v. 14).

C. Third Appeal: Refresh My Heart by Sending Onesimus Back (17—20)
The third appeal (vv. 17—20) again asked for the acceptance of Onesimus (v. 17) in light of the partnership between Paul and Philemon. The apostle assumed a fatherly role in that anything that Onesimus owed to Philemon could be charged to Paul, even though Philemon was already a debtor who owed Paul everything (vv. 18—19). Paul expressed confidence that Philemon would refresh his heart (v. 20), just as Philemon had previously refreshed the hearts of the believers (v. 7).

III. Closing (21-25)

Paul concluded the letter with the confident expectation that Philemon would exceed his expectant appeals (v. 21), which many take as veiled reference to granting Onesimus his freedom.
²⁵⁴
He also urged Philemon to prepare a place for him in light of his hope that Philemon's own prayers for Paul's release would be answered (v. 22). Paul also extended greetings to Philemon from others (vv. 23—24), followed by the familiar grace benediction (v. 25).

Something to Think About:
Faith Changes Everything

P
aul was in prison when he wrote his letter to Philemon, the Christian master of the runaway slave Onesimus. Yet in his opening words he identified himself, not as a prisoner of Rome, but as “a prisoner of Christ Jesus” (v. 1). The way Paul saw it, he was in prison by the will of God. While others may have been slaves of their earthly masters, by faith Paul was God's slave (see Titus 1:1, “Paul, a slave of God”). Such faith changes everything.

Faith also changed everything in the life of Paul's new protégé, Onesimus. Apparently, the slave Onesimus had run away from his master Philemon and then met Paul in prison in Rome. There, it appears, Paul shared the gospel with this desperate man, and he was converted to Christ. Accordingly, Paul referred to Onesimus as “my child, whom I fathered while in chains” (v. 10). Onesimus, whose name means “useful,” would have been “useful” for Paul, but he chose to send him back to his master so that he would be “useful”
—
truly useful, now that he had become a Christian
—
to him.

In his letter to Philemon, Paul appealed to his friend to receive Onesimus back “no longer as a slave, but more than a slave
—
as a dearly loved brother” (v. 16). Onesimus was a changed man, and Paul urged Philemon to recognize that his relationship with Onesimus had changed as well: they were now brothers in Christ. This is a wonderful example of how Paul envisioned Christianity to transform not only individuals but also social structures such as slavery.