Philemon

Everything changes. Some times for the better. Often not.

For better or for worse, we are in the midst of another Christmas season. Many love it. Some hate it. But for you, when you hear the word ‘Christmas’, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Honestly, was it ‘Jesus’ or was it some ‘thing’?

By the way, how did Christmas ever become an increasingly expanding ‘season’? Christmas music began, this year, even before Thanksgiving had arrived. Ah, yes. It was better for the business community, right?

Why has ‘making money’ become the now explicit ‘reason for the season’? Isn’t the ‘love of money’ the antithesis of what Jesus was all about? So, why the near equivalence between Christmas and income generation? The answer is painfully simple - because we don’t really listen to what Jesus taught.

So, where is the ‘Christ’ of ‘Christmas’? Like many things, he got lost along the way. The cure, though, isn’t to put ‘Christ’ back into the day. Rather, it is to invite ‘Christ’ into our hearts every day.

An annual celebration of the incarnation - God becoming flesh - is not commanded in the Bible. Well, not at least as a ‘day’ to be remembered. The incarnation (as well as the resurrection) is celebrated by our faith in God’s grace - by walking in the Spirit 24/7. 

None of this is intended to suggest that we ought to ignore Christmas as either a day or season, but simply to remind us that what we currently celebrate has very little relevance to the actual and most momentous event in human history.

Mankind has a penchant for ‘missing the point’. God became flesh and dwelt among us in order to make us his moment-by-moment dwelling place. A truly God glorifying celebration of the birth of the Christ would be a transformed life. The church lost sight of Christ when it became a religion. Then the religion, called Christianity, further distanced itself from Christ when it adopted a ‘day’ called Christmas. The next distancing act occurred when Christmas disappeared in the more generic ‘seasons greetings’ and/or ‘happy holiday’ Xmas. Now, if we are truly honest, the whole month of December could be more accurately designated as the ‘$mas‘ season.  Truly, ‘Christ-is-missed’.  

So, what’s Christmas have to do with Paul’s letter to Philemon?

‘Missing the salient point’ was exactly what the apostle Paul was trying to get across to  Philemon. Even the most committed among us can lose sight of the ‘truth’ of Christ when our cultural practices are more earnestly embraced and deeply ingrained than our love of God. It is not that we don’t love God, nor that these practices are ‘wrong’, but that they can become baffles to the Truth, inadvertent ‘idols’.

Even those who have a ‘heart after God’s own heart’ will, on occasion, need a ‘Nathan’ who is willing to ‘call a spade a spade’ and get us back on track (2 Sam 12:1-13). Those who truly know and love God will, hopefully, always welcome correction (Prv 12:15) no matter how painful the ‘letting go’ of error might be.

Philemon, the best we can discern, was a rather wealthy businessman who had become a Christian. He was, somewhat unbelievably to 21st century American Christians, paradoxically a ‘true’ believer in Christ as well as a slave owner. But, before we judgmentally jump all over Philemon, we need to recall that it wasn’t very long ago that most Christian pastors in our country condoned slavery as a biblically sound, textually provable, ‘Christian’ practice. For some, it was even viewed as a God commanded Christian obligation.

God always meets us exactly where we are. In doing so our heart can be changed long before our cultural notions catch up with our head. The heart can often grasp what the mind cannot yet see. Yet, at the same time, it is easier to ‘see’ the literal ‘facts’ of scripture, while missing the over-arching ‘truth’ of scripture. In fact, the ‘truth’ may line up exactly opposite to the ‘facts’. (For more on this particular issue, check out my post on Inspiration)

It is said that nearly half (60 million people) of the Roman empire during the first century was made up of slaves. That kept everyone a little bit on edge. Roman citizens lived with the constant fear of an organized slave revolt. Thus slaves who ran away were often severely punished, setting an example that inculcated fear in others who might have considered escaping their plight or killing their masters. Christian slave owners similarly punished their slaves because of the same contextually reasonable ‘fear’.

It is curious how we can from one side of our mouth preach ‘love you neighbor’, while from the other side promote notions that are gender, racial, and/or identity biased. Some times it is difficult to add two plus two and come up with the correct answer. We automatically interpret life through our cultural filters - at least until some kind soul brings our contradictions to our attention.

Although scholars continue to argue over the details, most conclude that Paul wrote this very personal letter some time between 60-62 AD, from Rome, while he himself was under house arrest. Paul was, for all intents and purposes, ‘enslaved’ by the empire for his belief in and teachings of Christ. It was out of this context, as a ‘slave’ to Rome, that Paul wrote to the Christian, Philemon, about how he should treat his slaves.

Another believer, Tychicus (Gk. ‘by chance’), seemingly Paul’s oft employed courier (2 Tim 4:12; Eph 6:21), was given several letters that Paul had written (Phe 19; Col 4:18)  and commissioned him to deliver to the church in Laodicea and in Colossae (Col 4:7,8,16). These were ‘house’ churches. In Laodicea at least one house church met in the home of Nympha (Col 4:15), and in Colossae one house church met in the home of Philemon (Phe 2). Since it seems clear that the Colossians received their letter, it must have reached them ‘before’ the great earthquake that totally demolished their city.

Now to Paul’s letter to Philemon.

1. Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our beloved brother and fellow worker.

It is obvious from the very beginning of this letter that Philemon was much loved and respected in the church. In fact, that is what Philemon’s name actually means in the Greek - ‘beloved’. I think this is an important point to note since we can be much loved by others and genuine in our love for God, yet also - as already mentioned - be unintentionally blind to inconsistencies between our faith and our practices. In fact, we all hold, to some degree, incongruous beliefs.

Paul is curiously playful in this letter, even though he wrote about a very serious topic. I wonder if his playfulness was a not-so-subtle attempt to ‘prepare’ the heart of Philemon for what he was about to say. A slave is a ‘prisoner’ of sorts to a master/owner. Paul presented himself here as a prisoner - both to Christ and to Rome because of Christ. Bound by Rome, Paul was free in Christ. Bound by Christ, Paul was freed from Rome (Rom 6:22; 1 Cor 7:22; 9:19; Gal 3:28). We’ll see more of this as we pursue our study of this letter.

2. and to Apphia our sister, and to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house.

Apphia (Gk. ‘bountiful’), a sister in Christ, may have been Philemon’s wife. Archippus (Gk. ‘master of horses’) was uniquely singled out here in the beginning of this letter possibly because he was the believing son of Philemon or maybe as the acting elder in their house church. In the letter received by the Colossians, they were asked to say to Archippus:

“Take heed to the ministry which you have received in the Lord, that you may fulfill it.”

It seems as if Paul had heard that Archippus may have been waving in his commitment to Christ possibly having learned about the arrest of Epaphras (Gk. ‘out of lust’) - the assumed founder of their house church (Col 1:7).

Even though this is the most personal letter we have of Paul’s, notice that it is not merely written to Philemon, but to his family and to the church that met in his house. In our modern culture we are inclined to view the individual as a fully accountable ‘whole’, yet this was not necessarily the cultural expectation in earlier times. Though an individual may well have been approached first, even confidentially (Mt 18:15), the family or the community was the ‘whole’ within which an individual was a vital part. Therefore Philemon was accountable to the church as a whole (Mt 18:16-20; 1 Cor 12:12-27;  Eph 4:4-16).

3. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

What Paul was writing to him about was not something that Philemon could ultimately accomplish on his own, nor even with the accountability of his church. Paul could offer good counsel, the church could encourage Philemon to accept Paul’s counsel, and Philemon could graciously receive Paul’s counsel - but true heart change would require the miraculous grace of God. God’s grasp of Philemon would be the only source of lasting success.

Peace is always evidence of God’s presence. When we live by law, our attempts to conform ourselves to ‘right’ behavior yields only a pseudo peace at best. Yet, when we surrender our whole being to God, the changes in us become His work, not ours, and the result is a restful - ‘refreshed’ - spirit. No wonder the final words of Paul to Philemon were, ‘the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit’.

4,5. I thank my God always, making mention of you in my prayers because I hear of your love and of the faith which you have toward the Lord Jesus and toward all the saints;

Though some have suggested that Paul had never been to Laodicea (Col 2:1) or to Colossae (Col 1:4), nor may have ever personally met Philemon (Phe 5), I tend to think such conclusions read too much into these texts. It seems from Acts 18 that Paul, on his third missionary journey, traveled from Antioch, through Galatia and Phrygia and thus very likely passed through Colossae and Laodicea on the way to Ephesus. It may have been during that time that Paul met and converted Philemon and may have even met Onesimus.

On the other hand, it is possible - as often suggested - that Epaphras and Philemon, met Paul in Ephesus. From that experience they went back to southern Phrygia and founded the Laodicean and Colossae house churches. Paul clearly had these churches on his heart as he prayed, if not because he had previously visited them, then because Epaphras had brought him news of them (Phe 23). Yet, there is reason to believe that Paul had a much more personal acquaintance with Philemon (Phe 19) as we will also examine later.

Paul commended Philemon not only for his love of God, but particularly for being a willing vehicle of the love of God to all the saints. This is an important acknowledgment. Philemon loved ‘all’ the ‘saints’. Maybe his growth in Christ had not yet transcended his cultural and political prejudices. Maybe his ‘love’ for others only extended to those who had accepted Christ, as once had Peter’s (Acts 10:28). We may truly love God and be authentic lovers of others without realizing the breath and depth of love for those who are unlovely or live outside our religious ‘bubble’. Philemon had not yet understood Jesus’ commandment to ‘love even an enemy’ (Mt 5:44), for if he had it would have been a no-brainer to extrapolate the principle to ‘love your slave’.

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.

Paul not only prayed for Philemon to continue being the lover of God and of others as he had been, but that he would grow to be an even greater lover. But how?

Three ingredients were essential. The first was having a healthy context. Paul called it the fellowship (Gk. ‘koinonia’) of his faith. In other words, his ‘church’. Spiritual maturity requires a spiritual community. This is likely the reason why Paul addressed this very personal letter to the whole ‘fellowship’ and not just to Philemon.

The second thing he needed was ‘good’ knowledge. He had to be devoted to learning ever more about the ‘ways of Christ’. Only as he was willing to continually receive truth could his faith family help him implement those truths. In fact, as he grew in knowledge his whole fellowship would be blessed, growing along with him. Paul sent ‘knowledge’ about the breath and depth of love that was going to push Philemon out of his comfort zone. None of us ever ‘have the truth’ in full. We can have Jesus, the Truth, yet be ever growing in our understanding of how to live out the Truth.

The third essential element was his relationship with Christ. Philemon would become more energized for the things of God to the degree that he kept his eyes upon Jesus. All had to be done for ‘Christ’s sake’.

If Philemon would receive counsel, allow his community of faith to be his support group for implementing that counsel, and did all this because of his love for Christ - he would continue to mature from faith to faith - and so would his entire church family - again, by the empowering grace of God.

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 seemed to practice a ‘strengths-based’ approach to ministry. He practiced the very thing he later wrote to the Ephesians - ‘building up the body of Christ..to the fullness of Christ...speaking the truth in love..’ (Eph 4:12-16). Conversion is a life long process.

Paul found joy and comfort in having learned that ‘the hearts of the saints’ were being ‘refreshed’ because of the love Philemon had for them. Having fellowship with those who truly love (Gk. agape) you ‘just as you are’, is abundantly ‘refreshing’. We can all find ‘joy and comfort’ in knowing that our loved ones live in the blessedness of that kind of community.

The word ‘refresh’, used here and again in verse 20, is translated in Mt 11:28 as ‘rest’. “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” The ‘saints’ were ‘refreshed’ through the ministry of Philemon, it seems, because he permitted Jesus to speak and act through him to them. Paul confirms that the compassionate embrace of Jesus was alive and well in the church that met in Philemon’s house.

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

Just before mentioning the name of the person Paul is concerned about, he humbled himself to the very level of that person - Onesimus. In essence, Paul was saying that his own imprisonment was not unlike that of Onesimus. Thus he spoke empathically, as one with Onesimus in captivity, though he was an apostle and had the ‘right‘ to speak authoritatively - commanding obedience where he thought necessary. This was not such a case.

Love does not work through coercion or manipulation. While we are ‘free‘ in Christ to exercise the power of our ecclesiastical position, we choose instead to trust that ‘love wins’, that love is a far more powerful agent for change than any commandment or threatened consequence.  Paul appealed (implores, begs, pleads) from humility rather than from position, from love rather than as an ‘elder’ (Gk. ‘presbutes’). There are, as we see in other letters written by Paul, a time to assert authority - yet those times are few and are usually directed at those who have become a spiritual obstacle to others and have resisted, resented, and/or rebuffed ‘kind’ correction.

The love of God protects the conscience of others as the channel through which the Spirit speaks to the heart of man. (1 Cor 8:7-12; 10:25-29; 2 Cor 4:2) An authoritarian approach insists on obedience whether or not a person is convicted that what is being commanded is truth. When a person obeys simply from fear of consequences rather than from personal conviction, the voice of conscience is often weakened.

10. I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment,

Having led Onesimus to Christ, Paul had spiritually adopted him as his own ‘son’. The context reminds us that Onesimus had not received Christ while in the home of Philemon, but only after having met with Paul in Rome. There is again a hint that the love that Philemon had, though genuine, was exercised rather selectively - excluding slaves.

The cultural milieu of Philemon’s time may have conditioned him to treat his slaves differently than non-slaves. Fear of a slave revolt required a manner of treatment to keep slaves in check. That ‘treatment’ was antithetical to the way of Jesus, yet so deeply ingrained in the culture of the elite that the contradictions weren’t easily noted. Or, if they were, a safe alternative was not discerned. Paul spotted this contradiction as a common ‘lack’ of knowledge (Gk. ‘ginosko’). Confident in Philemon’s genuine love for God and for others, he spoke to this issue, believing that Philemon would make the necessary changes out of his love for Christ regardless of his culture.

All of us have been blinded by our culture in some form. Despite our love for God, we unwittingly act contrary to the ways of God because of ingrained notions. When these contradictions becomes known, the genuine lover of God is immediately overwhelmed by a sense of painful shame for having ‘obscured’ the spirit of Christ in ignorance. Humbled yet again by revelation, we simultaneously rejoice in our God who, despite our poor witness to his grace, has chosen us to serve him.

11. who formerly was useless to you, but now is useful both to you and to me.

Philemon was just struck broadside by this revelation. As this truth was sinking in, Paul removed some of the ‘sting’ with another interesting play on words.

The Greek for ‘useless’ is the word ‘achrestos’. When it is pronounced it sounds very similar to ‘aChristos’. Onesimus was ‘useless’ (‘achrestos’) as long as he was ‘Christless’ (‘achristos’). Curiously, the name Onesimus means ‘profitable’, ‘useful’. This suggests that he was ‘destined’ by grace to be ‘useful’ when he finally gave his heart to Christ. Unfortunately, Philemon could only see Onesimus as a ‘useless’ slave and neglected to introduce him to Christ so that he could actually live up to his name. Slaves are far better slaves when free in Christ.

“Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; not by way of eye-service, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free. And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.” (Eph 6:5-9)
12,13. I have sent him back to you in person, that is, sending my very heart, whom I wished to keep with me, so that on your behalf he might minister to me in my imprisonment for the gospel;

After his conversion, Onesimus had embraced a whole new and spiritually healthy way to live in the world - even if his lot was to continue as a slave of Philemon. Whether a slave or not, he was ‘free’ in Christ, yet willingly a bond-servant to Christ. He could now serve Philemon ‘usefully’, like never before. Paul loved what had grown in the heart of Onesimus.

Epaphras may have been sent by the church that met in Philemon’s house to minister to Paul’s needs while imprisoned. Interestingly, it seems that Epaphras got himself arrested as well (v. 23) while trying to fulfill his task to Paul. Had Onesimus illegally run from Philemon in order to become ‘lost’ in Rome and then, coincidentally, bumped into these two men, only to be ‘found’ by Christ? Or, had Onesimus abandoned his post when he heard that Paul and Epaphras were imprisoned? Had he purposefully sought them out in their need or his need?

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 (voluntary).

If we take a cynical view of these texts we could assume that Philemon wasn’t such a nice man and that Paul was merely cleverly manipulating him by kind words. Was Paul placing Philemon between the proverbial hard place and a rock by making this rather personal letter public, then pre-maturely exalting Philemon as a hero, hoping that he would be forced to live up to Paul’s hyperbole?

On the other hand, with a far less jaundiced perspective, did Paul so highly respect Philemon that he had no doubt that his man would grasp any new knowledge that would honor his Lord?

I believe this latter explanation is more valid simply because Paul actually sent Onesimus back home, when - as he later said - he could have just hung on to Onesimus. If he had, Philemon would have had to travel over a thousand miles to retrieve him - assuming, as we have, that Paul was writing from Rome rather than from some place nearer to Colossae. So, why send him back with Tychicus unless you really believed that the heart of Philemon had been regenerated and that he was truly teachable in the Lord?

Love suffers loss rather than to cling to things or to people. Paul trusted that the heart of Philemon could hear and would obey the voice of the Spirit. All Paul could do was to point out the truth as he knew it and then to leave it all in the Spirit’s hands. This is an incredible revelation of mature faith. Speak the truth in love and then place it all on the altar, never pushing anyone to operate contrary to their convictions. Too often our religious practice does not allow for individual conviction which inclines those who want to belong, to do so dishonestly - at the cost of spiritual growth. If we live contrary to our convictions then how can we hear the voice of the Spirit who speaks through our conscience?

15. For perhaps he was for this reason separated from you for a while, that you would have him back forever.

Was Paul suggesting (i.e. ‘for perhaps’) that ‘providence’ was at work? Or, was he being facetious, playing on another cultural notion that everything happens for a reason? Whatever the case, Paul certainly placed the eternal as more valuable than the temporal.

As we journey through this life by faith in Christ we will suffer many losses. Yet, those painful losses are only for a season for those who believe in the resurrection. “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen...being strangers and exiles on the earth..desiring a better country, that is, a heavenly one.” (Heb 11:1,13,16)

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

The advantage belongs to Philemon. He would not only have Onesimus back as his ‘possession’, but now as the Lord’s servant. Wouldn’t it be ‘cool’ if all that has been taken from us would be returned twice as good? Wasn’t that the Old Testament teaching regarding restitution?

17. If then you regard me a partner, accept him as you would me.

This reflects an often quoted teaching of Paul,

“Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other just as God in Christ also has forgiven you. (Eph 4:32)

If we remember how God in his grace accepts us despite our ‘evil’, we ought to extend grace to all others - including those who have wronged us. Paul’s algorithm, or better, the spiritual ‘transitive property of equality’, was quite simple:

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C:

In other words, if Philemon was one with Christ, and Paul was one with Christ, then they were both partners in Christ. If Onesimus was one with Christ, he was a brother in Christ to Paul and thus a brother/partner in Christ to Philemon.

18,19. But, if he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge it to my account; I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand, I will repay it (not to mention to you that you owe me even your own self as well).

It is pretty awesome to forgive someone for what they have perpetrated against you, but to also go the ‘extra mile’ and to take the consequences for what they have done as your own debt..well, that’s evidence of ‘heavenly’ citizenship.

“He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him.” (Is 53:5,6)

“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” (2 Cor 5:21)

How often, even as Christians, we say to others, ‘I forgive you, but there are consequences for what you did that are yours alone to bear.’ If, though, we followed the teachings of Jesus and the applied them as Paul did, wouldn’t we not only forgive but also assume upon ourselves the consequences that justly belonged to the other? Isn’t true compassion ‘suffering alongside’ another, whereas sympathy is simply feeling sorry for someone else as they suffer alone?

Imagine what that might be like. Say, for example, that the police caught a teen who had stolen your car. You are thrilled to have your car back. You might even forgive the thief for stealing your car. But what if he was given a sentence of 30 days for stealing your vehicle? Is your forgiveness really forgiveness if you permit him to suffer the consequences, even if you felt sympathy for the kid? Wouldn’t your forgiveness be proven genuine if you did the jail time for him, compassionately, in his place? Preposterous, you say? But isn’t that exactly what Jesus did and what Paul was willing to do for Onesimus?

Grace is more than forgiving another, it is taking the place of another to suffer the unavoidable consequences for what ‘they’ did - whether or not they even appreciate what you do for them.

Had Onesimus stolen property from Philemon when he went on the lam? Or, was he himself the ‘property’ that was stolen? Paul didn’t seem to know of anything in particular that Onesimus had taken or if he had ‘wronged’ Philemon in some way - except to have run away. Whatever the case, he was willing to cover the loss. He made this official by stating so in this letter, written by his own hand. This letter was his guarantee. If all that had been ‘stolen’ was Onesimus himself, then this ‘property’ was being returned. If restitution required double, then Onesimus was being returned no longer as a useless slave, but a more than useful slave. His return was double payment since he was then both a slave and a brother.

Another important aspect to this text is what was parenthetical. Paul drove home the notion to ‘do for others what you would have them do to you.’ We don’t know the background story of Philemon. We don’t know what the Lord forgave him for. We do know, from this text, that Paul led him to Christ just as he had later led Onesimus to Christ.

If we even vaguely grasp the value of ourselves being led to Christ, we will forever feel indebted to those who permitted the Lord to use them to reach us. Paul was bringing this point back up to consciousness, because he wanted Philemon to ‘pay it forward’.

20. Yes, brother, let me benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart in Christ.

How can a man or women in Christ refuse this kind of a request? Paul was in prison in Rome. He no longer had the freedom that Philemon still enjoyed. Paul wanted to vicariously live through Philemon in the way that Philemon would now receive Onesimus as a brother in Christ.

21. Having confidence in your obedience, I write to you since I know that you will do even more than what I say.

The way of grace is not frugal, but unmeasurably extravagant. The story of the prodigal son underscores this notion. The father, like God himself, responded to the return of his younger son not merely with forgiveness, but with an outpouring of love far beyond what anyone could have conceived as reasonable. The fact that the oldest son took offense at his fathers extravagance certainly underscored it’s cultural inappropriateness. But God is like that. He meets us where we are, yet treats us as if we are far beyond where we are. Paul was confident that Philemon understood the way of grace. He was, of course, Philemon’s first semester spiritual teacher. This letter was then a second semester course on grace.

22. At the same time also prepare me a lodging, for I hope that through your prayers I will be given to you.

Paul made it clear that he believed in intercessory prayer. (Phil 1:19). He believed that Philemon had been praying for him, just as he had been praying for Philemon. More, Paul had hope that God still had a work for him to accomplish and that he would be set free to visit Philemon.

In the mean time, Philemon was as slave to his cultural context. Onesimus was a slave to Philemon. Paul was a slave to Rome. Yet, all were now free in Christ.

23-25 Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, greets you, as do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke, my fellow workers. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with your spirit.

Two of the four authors of our gospels were with Paul. Notice the difference between Epaphras being designated as a ‘fellow prisoner’ and the others being called ‘fellow workers’. Paul was under house arrest. He was permitted to have others there to help him in his work, but Epaphras was there as Paul was. He was not free to leave.

Another interesting point is that Barnabas’ cousin, Mark (Col. 4:10), was with Paul. Earlier (Act 15:38-40) Paul and Barnabas had had a falling out over this same person. Mark had abandoned Paul during one missionary journey and Paul did not want him along on the next. Yet, Paul and Mark were, thankfully, reconciled (2 Tim 4:11). This is our ministry - reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18,19).

One other fellow worker is mentioned here. His name is Demas. Curiously, Demas was there as a believer, yet he was also Paul’s ‘Judas’. Demas left service for the kingdom of God to serve the kingdom of the flesh (2 Tim 4:10). There is no record of their reconciliation.

So, how did this story end? We are not quite sure. The confidence of Paul leaves us hopeful that all turned out just as he had believed it would.

There is, however, a curious note in history. It was written that Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch was arrested some 35 years later and was being taken to his execution. Along the way he spoke highly of the Bishop of Ephesus, named Onesimus.

Maybe, though, the absence of a response from Philemon is exactly what we need, since grace operates independently of a response. A life of grace is about a new way of ‘being’ as a child of God - however the rest of the world responds.