Author: Charlie Garrett

Saturday, 21 July 2018

…no longer as a slave but more than a slave—a beloved brother, especially to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord. Philemon 1:16

The reason that Paul alluded to in the previous verse as to why Onesimus may have departed from Philemon for a while is now revealed. Paul believes that it may be that the Lord was behind the scenes, directing the events, so that Philemon might receive him “no longer as a slave but more than a slave.” This is now truly the first time that the status of Onesimus, in relation to Philemon, has been revealed.

Until this point, it was really unknown what their relationship to one another was. But now, we find that Onesimus was Philemon’s slave. And yet, Onesimus had obviously run away from him. This wasn’t like someone not showing up for work in today’s world. It is similar to a military man going AWOL from his post. This was a direct crime against his master.

If one was reading this letter for the first time, they would truly understand the extreme care that Paul has taken to ensure every word was meticulously chosen and written out. The life of Onesimus could be in jeopardy, depending on the reaction of Philemon. But Paul appeals to him to receive him not merely as a slave, but ever more closely as “a beloved brother.” The words, “no longer,” are intended to direct Philemon’s heart away from the master/slave relationship and to have him look at the union of fellowship which has come about because of a third party who intervened in both of their lives, the true Master of both of them.

A new relationship exists between the two because of the new-found faith of Onesimus. Yes, he was a slave to Philemon, but he was now a brother in Christ. Paul implores him to receive him as such. He then increases the hope of such a reception by saying, “especially to me.”

Paul had a new brother in Christ, one he had come to love as a son (verse 9). He was asking for that to be considered. It was Philemon’s right to act as he chose towards his property, but it was his duty as a Christian to consider Paul’s feelings and needs as well. And so the appeal by Paul would be hard to turn down. What Christ had done in both of their lives necessitated them to consider one another’s needs, hopes, and feelings. However, Paul doesn’t stop there. He then adds on another thought for Philemon to consider by saying, “but how much more to you.”

Paul’s appeal is actually of less weight than what Philemon should consider in doing right towards Onesimus. There was already a set relationship between the two. It is almost impossible to find any close relationship which has not been strained at times. But those that are based within the home are normally overlooked in a different way than those outside the home. Further, Onesimus was willing to voluntarily come back to Philemon, carrying the very letter that Paul wrote in order to face whatever decision was rendered. And even more, in coming back, he would be far less likely to repeat such disobedience in the future, having learned that his rebellion was a cause of real trouble for any and all who were touched by it. Unlike a person returned by force, he was willing to return on his own, thus showing that he understood the seriousness of his actions and a willingness to not repeat them.

Philemon was being asked to consider this and apply these things from both a human and a divine perspective. As Paul says it, “both in the flesh and in the Lord.” In the flesh, refers to Philemon’s human side. He had gained a brother in Christ, but that still involves a human element. We all deal with other Christians from our human perspective. The dynamic changes when another comes to Christ, but everything about who we are, and who they are, remains in a physical state. Philemon could expect a better worker. Onesimus could hope for a more accepting master.

And both of them would also have to consider their state “in the Lord.” How one perceives the grace and mercy that has been bestowed on himself is an indication of how he will then pass those same benefits on to others. As Jesus Himself said, “…to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little” (Luke 7:47). Both Philemon and Onesimus had been forgiven much in Christ. If Philemon forgave Onesimus’s minor offense against him because of Christ, Onesimus would go to great lengths to be the best worker – slave or free – that he could be in the future.

Finally, like an earlier verse, this verse has been used to speak against slavery. Commentators have attempted to show that because of the new relationship between them in Christ, slavery is entirely unacceptable. No such thought is on Paul’s mind. He has elsewhere told both bondservants and masters to handle the relationship properly, not to end it (see Ephesians 6:5-9). He didn’t tell them that the relationship was wrong. Instead, he told them how to correctly handle it.

Today, the relationship is changed one from bonded slavery to employers and employees, but it is actually similar in how the relationships are handled. To use such faulty logic concerning what is wholly acceptable, both in a given society and within the pages of Scripture, will eventually lead to even nuttier ideas, such as socialism and communism. Societies choose how to handle earthly relationships; but the common and decent treatment of others, regardless of the type of relationship, is outlined in the pages of Scripture.

Life application: Keep all things in context, and do not insert personal biases or presuppositions into Scripture. Let the word speak for itself. If someone is opposed to a social issue, such as slavery, they are to make their case apart from the Bible if the Bible is silent, or neutral, on that issue.

Lord God, we come before You to offer our gratitude and praise for what You have done for us. Regardless of our station in life. Whether rich or poor, slave or free, we have all of the riches of eternity before us, and our chains of sin have been broken; we are free. May we now live out our lives always in anticipation of the wonder and blessing which lies ahead. In doing this, we will always be filled with gratefulness and praise for what You have done! Amen.

Friday, 20 July 2018

For perhaps he departed for a while for this purpose, that you might receive him forever, Philemon 1:15

Paul now sums up his thoughts of verses 12-14, as is indicated by the word “For.” He is making a summary statement as to why he is sending Onesimus back, including a possible reason why things turned out as they had. This is indicated by the word tacha, translated as “perhaps.”

The word’s meaning is “quickly,” and thus it is used in the sense of “quick to assume as true.” Paul is making a speculation about why things turned out as they did concerning Philemon, Onesimus, and himself. He knows it is not mere chance, but he also cannot speak for God as to why things occurred as they did without God specifically revealing the matter to him. And so to avoid claiming something as God’s actual intent without knowing what the actual intent was, he simply speculates. And the speculation is based on the separation which occurred between Philemon and Onesimus.

The words, “he departed,” fail to convey Paul’s masterful use of the language employed here. The word is in the passive voice, not the active. First, he doesn’t say, “ran away.” This would have reopened a wound which he has spent many verses trying to heal. To say he ran away would simply bring back to memory the need for punishment of his disobedient slave. Everything said thus far would be overshadowed by the act of disloyalty perpetrated against him. He also doesn’t say “departed,” which would indicate an active leaving for whatever reason – be it to escape permanently or to take off for a summer to join the circus. Rather, the passive voice should be translated as, “was parted.” This then fits like a glove over the word “perhaps,” uniting them into a combined thought concerning the guiding hand of God.

God was still behind what occurred. Even if it was active on Onesimus’ part, it was still passively directed by God. This then would correspond to the similar account of what occurred between Joseph and his brothers. They actively cast him into the pit, and they actively sold him off to slavery; but Joseph confirms that God was in the background, directing the events for a greater purpose –

“But now, do not therefore be grieved or angry with yourselves because you sold me here; for God sent me before you to preserve life.” Genesis 45:5

Next, Paul notes that this parting was “for a while.” The Greek reads, “for an hour.” It was both a finite amount of time, and a short one at that. If there was a parting, the time was well used in meeting a set, determined purpose. Philemon could argue over a long separation, filled with exotic travels and interesting stories, but how could he not see that such a short separation, filled with such obvious, carefully orchestrated, and specific events was intended to reveal the behind-the-scenes workings of God? In this, he could not argue that he was truly deprived of his property in an unnecessary way.

Understanding Paul’s intent of these words, he next says that all of it was “for this purpose…” It is an introductory statement leading to his climatic conclusion which is, “that you might receive him forever.”

He said that they “were parted.” There was intent and purpose in what occurred, and there was an end to that parting, as is evidenced by Onesimus standing there awaiting Philemon’s completion of reading Paul’s letter. Now, instead of a parting there is receiving. In the parting there was perceived loss. However, in his return there is gain. The Greek word Paul uses here, apechó, signifies “to have by separating from.” In other words, by letting go of one thing, you are able to possess another. It is used at times to signify “receiving payment.” Someone lets go of their time in employment in order to receive payment in return.

Therefore, Paul is saying that Onesimus was parted from Philemon so that Philemon could receive Onesimus in a new way. The parting was temporary (for an hour), but now the return can be “forever.” The word Paul chooses, aiónios, is consistently translated as “eternal.” There was the breaking of a lesser-quality human bond, and there is now new gain in an eternal one. The spiritual has replaced the carnal. This is not speculation on Paul’s part. Even if the purpose of God for the separation was not fully known, the result of that separation is. Onesimus has become a believer, and so – by default – there is now a new relationship between him and Philemon which exists. It will now be up to Philemon to decide which relationship is of the highest value to him.

Life application: Paul would not claim inspiration in what occurred when it was not specifically granted to him. He, an apostle of Jesus Christ, was denied the full revelation of events which specifically pertained to him and to two of his brothers in Christ. What an absolute tragedy that people believe the lies of preachers and other supposed “holy men of God” who continually make claims concerning God’s purposes in things they have no idea about. The very best thing you can do is run from someone who claims they have a word from the Lord or a special insight into what God intends – be it prophecy (the rapture is next week!) or life guidance (give, and your breakthrough is just ahead!). Stand on the word of God alone, and know that not everything that occurs will be explained to us in this present life.

Lord God, help us to be wise and discerning concerning people who claim to have “a word” from You. It is true that we have “the word” from You in the Holy Bible. That is sufficient. Those who go beyond this are showing their true nature; a nature we should quickly walk away from. Help us to be sound in our theology, reasonable in what we believe, and not duped by those who falsely claim that they have special revelation from You apart from Scripture. Amen.

Thursday, 19 July 2018

But without your consent I wanted to do nothing, that your good deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary. Philemon 1:14

Paul’s words of the previous verse said that he “wished to keep” Onesimus with him. He then said that this was so that he could minister to Paul on Philemon’s behalf. He was writing as if Philemon’s help was to be conducted through Onesimus. He now says, “But without your consent.”

Obviously, Philemon would not be helping Paul if he didn’t consent to help him. Therefore, he couldn’t claim Philemon’s help without consent. And so without this consent, he says, “I wanted to do nothing.” In the previous verse, the tense of the verb “I wished” was imperfect. That now changes to “I wanted” in the aorist tense. In essence, he was first saying, “I was wishing.” Now he is saying, “I am finally determined.” One could think of him saying, “I had really hoped to keep him with me, but I firmly decide that he must be sent back.” There is a subtle plea for mercy, and then there is the acknowledgment that he must do what is right in order to allow the plea to be granted.

Imagine someone (Mark) having $50.00 that belonged to someone else (Gordon). Mark may need $20.00 for lunch. He could say, “Gordon wouldn’t mind me spending $20.00 for lunch.” Further, Gordon owes Mark a giant debt of another kind. What an incentive to help himself to the small amount of $20.00!

As noted in the previous verse, it may be true that Gordon wouldn’t mind Mark taking the money, but there may be more involved than just whether Gordon minded or not. He may need all $50.00 to pay his car registration. To go spending that money, without specific approval, would be wrong. Further, even if Gordon didn’t mind, Mark’s spending the money without Gordon’s approving it in advance would then deprive Gordon of his right to bless his not-so-clearly thinking friend.

This is akin to what Paul is saying now. “I know that you would be willing to minister to me, and that you would be willing to do so through Onesimus, but I also know that without your consent, it would be inappropriate for me to keep him.” Paul next relays to Philemon exactly what should be relayed from Mark to Gordon, by saying, “that your good deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary.”

Paul is doing what is right in all ways with this matter, and yet he is doing it in such a way that it would be the epitome of ingratitude for Philemon to take any other course of action than to respond favorably to Paul’s request. It is a masterful way of having the matter settled in his favor, or showing the true nature of Philemon in the process. Paul is allowing Philemon to be gracious to Paul while still directing him to do the right thing. This is actually similar to how he handled the matter of collection from the church in Corinth for the saints in Jerusalem in 2 Corinthians 9:1-5.

Life application: Using tact is always a good way of leading people to make the right decisions while allowing them the dignity of not looking bad in the process. It is a skill which must be developed, and it should be carefully applied in sensitive matters. Paul was a master at it, and his example will serve us well in related matters, if we will simply take advantage of it.

Lord God, grant us the wisdom to be tactful in how we conduct our affairs with others. Feelings can easily be hurt over what we might think of as minor issues. And so be with us as we interact with others, knowing that we also desire the same respect and care from them over matters which concern us. And because Your word shows us examples of how to conduct ourselves in such ways, grant us the wisdom to read that precious gift daily. To Your glory. Amen.

Wednesday, 18 July 2018

…whom I wished to keep with me, that on your behalf he might minister to me in my chains for the gospel. Philemon 1:13

The words, “whom I wished to keep,” refer to Onesimus who was Paul’s “own heart.” He had a great desire that he would keep him there with him. However, the verb is in the imperfect tense. As Vincent’s Word Studies notes, “The imperfect tense denotes the desire awakened but arrested.”

In other words, the desire in Paul was stirred to keep Onesimus (as he says) “with me,” but he knew that it would be inappropriate to do so, and so he quieted his desire. It could be translated more understandably as “whom I was wishing to keep with me.” He then explains the reason for it by saying, “that on your behalf he might minister to me.”

The Greek more literally reads, “in your behalf.” In other words, he is hinting that if Philemon were there in person, he would want to tend to Paul in the manner that Onesimus also would have tended to him. As Onesimus was Philemon’s slave, even if he didn’t minister to Paul directly, he would have been happy to appoint Onesimus to fill that role.

Paul is tactfully saying that in returning Onesimus to Philemon, he was doing it out of what was appropriate, even though having him stay would have been something Philemon would have agreed to anyway. He is making it more and more impossible for Philemon to turn down the request which he will make in the verses ahead. And this is especially true because the ministering on Philemon’s behalf for Paul was because he was in “chains for the gospel.”

Paul was a prisoner because of his proclamation of the gospel. It is the gospel which Paul preached to Philemon, and to which Philemon responded. How could he then turn down the request Paul will make when it is exactly the same need that he once had, and which was filled in Paul’s sharing with him the good news? Every single word, including its tense, is being used to relay to Philemon the importance of the matter to Paul, and each word is given to convince him that no other option would be acceptable than the granting of the request which Paul will eventually make.

Life application: There are things that we may desire, but which we are not permitted to have. Paul’s words show us that even though he knew that Philemon would certainly grant what he wished, he could not act on that knowledge without going through the proper process of allowing Philemon to actually make the final decision. In other words, the end does not justify the means. We cannot say, “I knew what the outcome would be, and so I skipped to the end and avoided all the unnecessary steps to save time.” In the end, we are not God, and we may actually have not thought of every possible option. We must do what is right each step of the way.

Lord God, the Bible shows us time and time again that the end does not justify the means. We must follow the proper path in whatever thing we do in order to get to the end of the matter. This can be especially hard when following that path may not get us to the end we feel is best. But this is life, and it is You who have set the moments of our existence. Help us then to live in Your will always, no matter where the proper path takes us. Amen.

Tuesday, 17 July 2018

I am sending him back. You therefore receive him, that is, my own heart, Philemon 1:12

The Greek verb of the first sentence is what as known as an epistolary aorist. It literally reads, “I did send.” The letter assumes the arrival of Onesimus at the time it is received, even though he is with Paul at the time it is written. Paul has either asked Onesimus to return to Philemon, or Onesimus desired to return and Paul agreed that it was right to do so. Being a runaway slave, Philemon then has the right to do with him as he wished. He could even have him executed. But the return of Onesimus now almost required leniency by Philemon. And this for several reasons.

First, the tense of the verb assumes that Onesimus is standing there with Philemon. If Onesimus had desired to take the letter and run away in the opposite direction, Philemon would not be reading the letter. Thus, Onesimus voluntarily returned to his master.

Secondly, Paul then says, “You therefore receive him.” Though this is a recommendation, it is based upon everything he has written up to this point. All of the heartfelt words which preceded this note concerning the return of Onesimus would have to be rejected. Philemon’s state as a Christian in Paul’s eyes was on trial.

Would he prove to be a merciful brother, a faithful friend, and a loving follower of Christ? Or, would he throw all such thoughts to the wind and come down on Onesimus with a heavy hand? Had Philemon understood the infinite display of mercy that was extended toward him in Christ? The offense by Onesimus was actually trivial in comparison to it. How would he respond to the heartfelt pleas of his aged, imprisoned friend?

A variation in source texts arises here. Some leave out the words, “You therefore receive.” The difference is noted between the following two translations:

I am sending him back to you, sending my very heart. (ESV)
I am sending him back. You therefore receive him, that is, my own heart, (NKJV)

This difference is not as great as it seems. The word “receive” is found in verse 17, and so a copyist’s eyes may have seen it there and then looked back down and added into the text. Or, it was a part of the original. However, either way, the intent is the same because of it being included in verse 17.

Thirdly, Paul then says of Onesimus, “that is, my own heart.” Speaking of Onesimus, he now shows the extent of love he has developed for Onesimus. He had become Paul’s son (verse 10), and he was profitable to him (verse 11). And yet, he was willing to send him back to Philemon to face whatever might happen because of his certainty that it was the right thing to do. Onesimus, despite being his very heart, was still the property of Philemon. To not send him back would make Paul a possessor of another’s property. To send him anywhere else would make him guilty of agreeing to wrongdoing. This is explicitly stated in Ephesians 6:5-8 –

“Bondservants, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ; ⁶ not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, ⁷ with goodwill doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men, ⁸ knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free.”

To write these words in Ephesians, and then to not expect them to be followed through with because Onesimus had become “my own heart” to him, would make Paul (and Onesimus) guilty of violating the very prescriptive words that he had penned elsewhere. Such could not be considered acceptable. A duty to Philemon existed, and it needed to be accomplished.

Now in this verse is seen the reason for all of Paul’s carefully penned words which preceded it.

Life application: Commentaries on this verse, and the verses to come, follow along with the personal views of the commentators on the issue of slavery. Some justify slavery based on Paul’s needing to send Onesimus back to Philemon. Thus, it is argued that slavery is wholly condoned by the Bible. Others argue the exact opposite, claiming that Paul’s words appeal to ending Onesimus’ slavery (as seen in the coming verse) despite the issue of property which needs to be settled first. Neither view is acceptable concerning the issue. The Bible makes no statement either way. It simply accepts slavery as a part of the human condition and leaves it up to the ruling powers to choose how they will handle the matter. It is wholly inappropriate to use the Bible as a tool to promote one’s personal agenda by taking select verses out of their intended context.

Lord God, Your word is far too precious for us to use it for justifying personal views on issues which we find offensive or that we favor, if those verses are taken out of context in the process. Help us to keep your word in its intended context at all times. From there, we can make our own decisions concerning moral issues and work to have them realized in the land (and in the government) in which we live. Help us to never misuse Scripture in the process. Amen.