BLOG

Philemon, Part 3, Paul's appeal

Paul begins almost all his letters with thanksgiving, but this one is particularly personal and heartfelt. Philemon 4-7 says,

⁴ I thank God always, making mention of you in my prayers, ⁵ because I hear of your love and of the faith which you have toward the Lord Jesus and toward all the saints; ⁶ and I pray that the fellowship of your faith may become effective through the knowledge of every good thing which is in you for Christ’s sake. ⁷ For I have come to have much joy and comfort in your love, because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you, brother.

Paul’s prayer life is relational, not institutional. His prayers were not written by others to be repeated word for word. His thanksgiving to God is based not only on wishful thinking but upon what others have reported about Philemon and the Colossian church as a whole. In his letter to the Colossians, probably written at the same time, Paul repeated his confidence in their faith and love (Colossians 1:3, 4). Note that in Colossians 4:7-9 Paul tells the church that Onesimus was accompanying Tychicus as he hand-delivered Paul’s general epistle to the church and his personal letter to Philemon himself.

Paul expressed the same thankfulness in regard to the Ephesian saints in Ephesians 1:15, 16,

¹⁵ For this reason I too, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you and your love for all the saints, ¹⁶ do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers.

Faith in Christ and love for the brethren appear to be the most important characteristics of genuine discipleship. In writing about this to Philemon himself, he acknowledges the truth of his character, his love, and his faith. After reminding Philemon of his great reputation of faith and love, Philemon, in his treatment of Onesimus, could hardly deviate from Christ’s example.

Paul the Elder Appeals to Philemon

Philemon 8, 9 says,

⁸ Therefore, though I have enough confidence in Christ to order you to do what is proper, ⁹ yet for love’s sake I rather appeal to you—since I am such a person as Paul, the aged [presbytes], and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus—

Here Paul calls himself presbytes, an old man, but also classifying himself as an “elder” (presbyteros) in the sense of a respected leader. See, for example, 1 Timothy 5:17,

⁵ The elders [presbyteros] who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.

Paul was, indeed, not only an apostle but an elder as well in a spiritual sense, having been instrumental in fathering Philemon in the faith. Paul himself earlier had conveyed the seed of the word which had begotten Christ in both Philemon and Onesimus. The Fifth Commandment, then, also applies: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12).

The implication is that Philemon should acquiesce to the request of his own father and elder in Christ, even as Onesimus was also complying to the request of his spiritual father by returning to Philemon.

Leviticus 19:32 also commands respect for age, saying,

³² You shall rise up before the grayheaded and honor the aged, and you shall revere your God; I am the Lord.

By Paul’s wording, he makes a subtle appeal to the law itself.

Philemon 10, 11 says plainly,

¹⁰ I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment, ¹¹ who formerly was useless to you, but now is useful both to you and to me.

Onesimus had been “useless” (unprofitable) because he had escaped earlier and was no longer a source of labor and profit to Philemon. As I wrote earlier, Onesimus’ name means “useful, profitable,” and Paul implies that Onesimus, the believer, is now “useful” to both of them.

Honoring Philemon’s Rights

In Philemon 12-14 Paul explains,

¹² I have sent him back to you in person, that is, sending my very heart, ¹³ whom I wished to keep with me, so that on your behalf he might minister to me in my imprisonment for the gospel; ¹⁴ but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will [hekousios, “willingly, voluntarily”].

Paul wanted to keep Onesimus with him in Rome, but he also recognized that this would have violated the property rights of his friend, Philemon. The Eighth Commandment says, “You shall not steal” (Exodus 20:15).

Honoring the Rights of Escaped Slaves

Paul was navigating skillfully between Roman law and God’s law. Both had to be taken into account, because if the Roman authorities had discovered that Onesimus was an escaped slave, he could have been prosecuted and returned to his lawful owner—in this case, Philemon. But God’s law also had to be taken into account, for Deuteronomy 23:15, 16 says,

¹⁵ You shall not hand over to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you. ¹⁶ He shall live with you in your midst, in the place which he shall choose in one of your towns where it pleases him; you shall not mistreat him.

This seems to contradict Paul’s decision to send Onesimus back to his slave owner. Surely Paul was familiar with this law, so why would he feel compelled to do this? Paul does send Onesimus back — but no longer as a slave, rather as a beloved brother (verse 16). He was not sending Onesimus back to an oppressive master but to a fellow slave of Jesus Christ, the Redeemer. In doing so, Paul honors Roman law outwardly, but he fulfills the spirit of God’s law — liberation through reconciliation and love.

The law itself was interpreted by the ancient rabbis to mean that Israel was to give asylum to slaves who were escaping from foreign countries, where slaves had no rights and could be abused at the whim of their masters.

Rabbinic Traditions

In Tractate Gittin 45a (Babylonian Talmud), the rabbis discuss this command in a humanitarian context:

• They applied it especially to slaves who fled from pagan or cruel masters into Israelite territory.
• The principle: if a fugitive seeks refuge “among you,” he must be protected, not extradited.
• The rabbis saw this as an asylum law—a direct expression of Israel’s national memory of freedom from Egypt.

So we read in Sifre Deuteronomy § 254,

“If a slave of a foreigner flees to the land of Israel, do not deliver him up, but let him dwell in your midst.”

Later Jewish commentators, such as Maimonides (Rambam) in Mishneh Torah, expanded the law’s moral implications:

• The principle applies to anyone seeking refuge from oppression, not merely literal slaves.
• To send such a person back was to “hand him over to violence,” violating the sanctity of life (Hilchot Avadim 8:10).

So, rabbinic tradition read this not narrowly, but as a moral paradigm of compassion and asylum. Thus, Israel was to be a haven of justice for any oppressed person who sought shelter. God’s law mandates slavery as a means of paying off debt, and it is even the death penalty to refuse to submit to the ruling of the biblical judge (Deuteronomy 17:9-12). Yet such slaves did not lose their basic rights under God. It was unlawful to abuse a slave (Exodus 21:26, 27), and if a man abused his slave, the slave was to be set free.

So also, foreign slaves who escaped abuse were to be given asylum in Israel, and Israelites were forbidden from oppressing them. Such ex-slaves were required to obey the law of the land, and they received equal justice if Israelites abused them. Leviticus 24:22 says,

²² There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the Lord your God.

Again, we read in Numbers 15:15, 16,

¹⁵ As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the alien who sojourns with you, a perpetual statute throughout your generations; as you are, so shall the alien be before the Lord. ¹⁶ There is to be one law and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you.

Paul understood this, having studied under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), and we have no reason to believe that Paul disagreed with their interpretation of Deuteronomy 23:15, 16, regarding escaped slaves. It is a pity, however, that the Jews later claimed that the divine law was for Jews only and that all non-Jews were given only the so-called Noahide laws of Genesis 9:1-7. This two-tier standard of righteousness was a total violation of the laws of God.