« Prev Philemon 1:1 Next »







OF 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 Col 4:9, it may be inferred that the person to whom it was addressed, was an inhabitant of Colosse, since Onesimus, concerning whom this epistle was written, is there mentioned as "one of them." See Barnes "Col 4:9".

Comp. 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, "travelling Christians." See Phm 1:22. 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 Colosse. It is quite clear that he had been converted under the ministry of the apostle himself. This appears from what is said in Phm 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 labours 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 Colosse, and that Philemon was one, of his converts there. See Intro. 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-labourer;" but this appellation is so general, that it determines nothing in regard to the manner in which he cooperated 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 travelling preacher, for he had a home in Colosse, (Phm 1:2,22;) 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 (Intro. ad Lection. Ep. ad Colossenses, % 18) supposes that he was bishop of Colosse; 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.


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 had 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 Phm 1:16, (doulov,) 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. Phm 1:16.

(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 toiv desmoiv 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 Ac 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"— anepemqa —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, 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. Comp. Lu 7:6,10,19; 20:13; Ac 10:5; 15:22; 1 Co 4:17; 2 Co 9:3; Eph 6:22; Php 2:19

Php 2:23,25,28; 1 Th 3:2,5; Tit 3:12, for a similar use of the word send (pempw.) 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, (See Barnes "Phm 1:18,) and, being now converted, was desirous of repairing the wrong. Or he may have had friends and kindred in Colosse 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 favour 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 Barnes "Phm 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

(a.) 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

(b.) 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

(c.) 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

(d.) that he owed his master, and he may have inferred from his leaving him that he meant to defraud him, Phm 1:18; or

(e.) 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 defence. 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 Phm 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 some one 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 on 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 on the mind of Philemon—but of that we have no certain evidence.


THERE can be no doubt that this letter was written from Rome about the time when the epistle to the Colossians was written. Comp. Intro. to the 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. "Paul a prisoner of Jesus Christ," Phm 1:1. "Whom I have begotten in my bonds," Phm 1:10. Comp. 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, 2 Ti 4:9: "Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me."

(4.) We know that Onesimus was actually sent by Paul to Colosse 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 Colosse, 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 Colosse 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.


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 arid 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 practise 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.




THE epistle embraces the following subjects:—

I. The salutation, Phm 1:1-3.

II. A mention of the excellent account which the apostle had heard of Philemon, and the occasion which he had for thankfulness on his behalf, Phm 1:4-7.

(a.) He always remembered him in his prayers, Phm 1:4.

(b.) He-had heard of his faith and love, and of his kindness towards those who bore the Christian name, Phm 1:5.

(c.) He desired that his goodness in making others, in common with him, partakers of the expression of his faith, might be even more effectual in securing the proper acknowledgment of it wherever it might be known, Phm 1:6.

(d.) He says that he had great joy and consolation from the happiness which he had conferred on Christians who needed his aid, Phm 1:7.

III. The main subject of the epistle—the desire that he would receive his servant Onesimus again, and the arguments to persuade him to do it, Phm 1:8-21.

(1.) He places it on the ground of entreaty, not of command. He might, in virtue of his apostolic office, enjoin many things on him, and possibly this, yet he chooses to place it wholly on other grounds, and to make it a matter of personal friendship, Phm 1:8.

(2.) Particular reasons why he should do it:—

(a.) for love's sake—love to Paul—now an old man, and in prison on account of their common religion, Phm 1:9.

(b.) Paul regarded Onesimus as his own son, and asked that he might be received and treated as such, Phm 1:10.

(c.) He assures Philemon that, whatever he might have been formerly, he would now find him to be profitable to himself, Phm 1:11.

(d.) He assures him that Onesimus was especially dear to him, and that he would have been very useful to him in his circumstances, but that he did not think it proper to retain him with him without the consent of Philemon. Onesimus, therefore, was not sent back as a worthless vagabond, and Philemon, in receiving him, might be sure that he was receiving one whom Paul believed was fitted to be eminently useful, Phm 1:12-14.

(e.) He suggests to Philemon that probably it was so arranged by divine Providence, that Onesimus should depart in order that he might receive him again in a far more tender and endearing relation, not as a servant, but as a Christian brother, Phm 1:15,16.

(f.) He appeals to the personal friendship of Philemon, and asks that if he regarded him as a participator with him in the hopes of the gospel, or as a fellow-labourer in a common cause, he would receive him as he would himself, Phm 1:17.

(g.) He says that he would himself become security for Onesimus if he owed Philemon anything, or had in any way wronged him, Phm 1:18,19.

(h.) He concludes the argument by referring to the happiness which it would give him if Philemon would receive his former servant again; and with the expression of his conviction that he would do more than he asked in the matter, and then asks that, while he showed favour to Onesimus, he would also prepare a lodging for him, for he hoped soon to be with him, Phm 1:20-22. Perhaps by this last suggestion he hoped also to do much to favour the cause of Onesimus—for Philemon could hardly turn him away when he expected that Paul himself would soon be with him. Such an argument would be likely to be effectual in the case. We do not like to deny the request which a friend makes in a letter, if we expect soon to see the writer himself. It would be much more easy to do it if we had no expectations of seeing him very soon.

IV. The epistle closes with affectionate salutations from certain persons who were with Paul, and who were probably well known to Philemon, and with the customary benediction, Phm 1:23-25.

1. Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ. A prisoner at Rome in the cause of Jesus Christ. See Barnes "Eph 3:1"

See Barnes "2 Ti 1:8".


And Timothy our brother. Timothy, it seems, had come to him agreeably to his request. 2 Ti 4:9. Paul not unfrequently joins his name with his own in his epistles. 2 Co 1:1; Php 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Th 1:1; 2 Th 1:1.

As Timothy was of that region of country, and as he had accompanied Paul in his travels, he was doubtless acquainted with Philemon.

Unto Philemon our dearly beloved and fellow-labourer. See Intro. & 1. The word rendered fellow-labourer (sunergov,) does not determine what office he held, if he held any, or in what respects he was a fellow-labourer with Paul. It means a co-worker, or helper, and doubtless here means that he was a helper or fellow-worker in the great cause to which Paul had devoted his life, but whether as a preacher, or deacon, or a private Christian, cannot be ascertained. It is commonly, in the New Testament, applied to ministers of the gospel, though by no means exclusively, and in several instances it cannot be determined whether it denotes ministers of the gospel, or those who furthered the cause of religion, and co-operated with the apostle in some other way than preaching. See the following places, which are the only ones where it occurs in the New Testament, Ro 16:3,9,21; 1 Co 3:9; 2 Co 1:24; 8:23; Php 2:25; 4:3;; Col 4:11; 1 Th 3:2;; Phm 1:24; 3 Jo 1:8.

{a} "prisoner" Eph 3:1 {b} "fellow-labourer" Php 2:25

« Prev Philemon 1:1 Next »
VIEWNAME is workSection