Notes

1. Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 178–79; Rupprecht, “Philemon,” 635; Arzt-Grabner, Philemon, 192.

2. Herbert Carson, The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians and Philemon (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), 112.

3. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 198; O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 286; Stuhlmacher, Der Brief an Philemon, 36; Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 324; Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 487; Ryan, “Philemon,” 253; Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 362; Moo, Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, 397–98.

4. Others have argued for a different two-part (vv. 8–14, 15–20; e.g., Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 322) or three-part structure (vv. 8–14, 15–16, 17–20; e.g., Moo, Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, 399).

5. See also Allen, “The Discourse Structure of Philemon,” 87, who further argues for the presence of an inclusio formed by the phrase “in Christ” in v. 8 and “in the Lord” in v. 16.

6. Although neither the verb “to appeal” (παρακαλῶ) nor an imperative is found here, most scholars recognize an implicit appeal embedded in this statement concerning the divine will. The lack of an explicit appeal in this critical sentence can be partially explained by Paul’s decision to appeal to Philemon on the basis of “love” (v. 9).

7. This not only allows God to be at the center of Paul’s appeal, but it also paves the way for Paul to consider another interpersonal relationship, one between himself and Philemon, in his further instructions for Philemon (vv. 17–20).

8. This is a strong inferential conjunction. In the NT, its function is comparable to the more frequently used particle οὖν; διό is mostly limited to Acts and the letters. Cf. BDF §451.

9. Among the contemporary versions, only GNB explicitly links this conjunction with the participle (“though I have,” ἔχων): “For this reason I could be bold enough.”

10. Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 307–8. Cf. Moule, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 144; Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 104.

11. NASB, NET; Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 346.

12. ASV, HCSB; cf. KJV, NKJV, NRSV, GNB, NLT, TNIV, ESV, NIV; Harris, Colossians and Philemon, 268.

13. Cf. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 196: “although I have full authority in Christ to command you.”

14. Heinrich Schlier, “παρρησία, κτλ.,” TDNT, 5:882.

15. Even when Paul does exercise such authority to command, he does not use this verb (cf. 1 Cor 5:1–5); Polaski, Paul and the Discourse of Power, 63 n. 48.

16. Paul does, however, encourage Titus to exercise such authority (cf. Titus 2:15).

17. John Howard Schütz, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (SNTSMS 26; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1975), 221.

18. Cf. Petersen, Rediscovering Paul, 132.

19. Cf. TEV: “I make a request.”

20. Cf. BDAG, 764: “to urge strongly,” or “to make a strong request for something.”

21. David Hartman, “Epistolary Conventions and Social Change in Paul’s Letters,” in Ancient History in a Modern University (ed. T. W. Hillard et al.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 2:203.

22. Cf. Kathy Ehrensperger, Paul and the Dynamics of Power: Communication and Interaction in the Early Christ-Movement (London: T&T Clark, 2007), 174–75.

23. For a further discussion of Paul’s rhetoric of love, see Christopher Kumitz, Der Brief als Medium der ἀγάπη: Eine Untersuchung zur rhetorischen und epistolographischen Gestalt des Philemonbriefes (Europäische Hochschulschriften 23.787; Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2004), 211–14.

24. In the NT, only Zechariah identifies himself as an “old man” (Luke 1:18), but not in a context where the term would enhance the rhetorical force of one’s authority or appeal.

25. See Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 338–39; O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 290; Petersen, Rediscovering Paul, 126–28; Harris, Colossians and Philemon, 259–60; Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 321.

26. With the major exceptions being GNB and REB.

27. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 199; Stuhlmacher, Der Brief an Philemon, 37–38; Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 105; Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 348; Ben Witherington III, Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 67; Moo, Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, 405; Cousar, Philippians and Philemon, 102.

28. See J. N. Birdsall, “ΠΡΕΣΒΥΤΗΣ in Philemon 9: A Study in Conjectural Emendation,” NTS 39 (1993): 625–30.

29. Wansink, Chained in Christ, 161.

30. Some suggest that “old man” was considered a title of honor in the ancient world; cf. Carolyn Osiek, Philippians, Philemon (ANTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 2000), 135, but this does not seem to be the focus of the text.

31. Ronald F. Hock, “A Support for His Old Age: Paul’s Plea on Behalf of Onesimus,” 79. Hock also points to the common sentiment as reflected in a classical description of one who is miserable: “an old man with no means of support” (Diogenes Laertius 6.51).

32. For discussion of this title, see comments on v. 1.

33. In our translation of v. 9, “to you” is supplied for the sake of clarity.

34. See O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 290; Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 325; Moo, Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, 406–7.

35. Knox, Philemon among the Letters of Paul, 20.

36. Winter, “Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” 6.

37. P.Oxy. 7.1070.8; 10.1298.4; 12.1494.6; Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 107; Peter Arzt-Grabner, “ ‘Bitten für’ oder ‘Bitten um’? Zur Problematik des Textvergleichs am Beispiel von Phlm 10,” PzB 13 (2004): 49–55. In the NT itself, one can also point to the use of the preposition to introduce a topic (“concerning”): 1 Cor 7:25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12; 1 Thess 4:9, 13; 5:1; cf. Petersen, Rediscovering Paul, 179 n. 50.

38. J. G. Nordling, “Onesimus Fugitivus: A Defense of the Runaway Slave Hypothesis in Philemon,” JSNT 41 (1991): 110.

39. P.Oxy. 1.1070.7–10; P.Tebt. 1.58.52.55; P.Sarap. 92; P.Sarap. 95; cf. Brook W. R. Pearson, “Assumptions in the Criticism and Translation of Philemon,” 262–63, who also argues that the semantic overlaps between the περί and ὑπέρ go both directions, as ὑπέρ also appears in contexts where one would have expected περί (John 1:30; 2 Cor 7:4).

40. Meeks, First Urban Christians, 87.

41. In Greek, this name appears at the end of the verse, thus further suspending the tension of this text (cf. ASV, REB, NJB, HCSB, NET). In English, however, this name must be placed at the center (cf. NAB, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, TNIV, ESV, NIV).

42. Though not necessarily so; cf. A. L. Connolly, “Onesimos,” NewDocs 4:179–81.

43. See, e.g., “He is like a son to me because I led him to Christ here in jail” (CEV).

44. Derrett, “The Function of the Epistle to Philemon,” 76.

45. Cf. Collins, The Power of Images in Paul, 73.

46. Osiek, Philippians, Philemon, 127.

47. Taylor, “Onesimus,” 259–81.

48. BDAG, 711.

49. E.g., Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida, A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1977), 125.

50. E.g., Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 108.

51. E.g., O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 292.

52. Winter, “Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” 4.

53. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, 312. See also Allen D. Callahan, “Paul’s Epistle to Philemon: Toward an Alternative Argumentum,” HTR 86 (1993): 361.

54. See the discussion in Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 340–41. This is the way this contrast is used in Hermas, Vision 3.6; Marianne Meye Thompson, Colossians and Philemon (THNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 217.

55. Ryan, “Philemon,” 235.

56. This word is missing in many manuscripts from diverse textual traditions ( A C D 0278 1739 1881 ).

57. See Andrew Wilson, “The Pragmatics of Politeness and Pauline Epistolography: A Case Study of the Letter to Philemon,” JSNT 48 (1992): 113, who considers this construction as emphasizing their common needs.

58. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 200. See esp. the well-known confusion of the two terms in Suetonius, Claud. 25.4. One also finds the wordplay between “useful” and “Christians” in the literature of the early Christian centuries; see G. H. R. Horsley, “Christian Inscriptions from Phrygia,” NewDocs 3:129.

59. Metzger, Textual Commentary, 589. This reading is supported by A 33. Some manuscripts supply the imperative “receive” (προσλαβοῦ, see v. 17) as a verb to go with the accusative αὐτόν.

60. Cf. NLT: “I am sending him back to you, and with him comes my own heart.”

61. As an epistolary aorist, this verb is to be translated as a present tense in English.

62. Cf. Luke 23:7; 23:15; Acts 25:21; Winter, “Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” 21.

63. Knox, Philemon among the Letters of Paul, 21.

64. Moule, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 145.

65. MM, 37.

66. While Onesimus’s departure would sadden Paul, this is not the main point of this expression (cf. CEV: “Sending Onesimus back to you makes me very sad”). To reduce this term to an emotional expression misses the rhetorical force of this identification.

67. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 341.

68. For this use of this verb, see Acts 25:22: “I would like (ἐβουλόμην) to hear this man myself.” Cf. BDF §359(2).

69. Louw and Nida, §25.

70. Cf. BDAG, 182, 448.

71. Dunn, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 330; cf. Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 110.

72. Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 363.

73. Thus Winter, “Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” 9; Pearson, “Assumptions in the Criticism and Translation of Philemon,” 276–77; Ryan, “Philemon,” 236; Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 352–53.

74. Cf. Wolf-Henning Ollrog, Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission (WMANT 50; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1979), 101–6.

75. Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 371, who further argue, “applied to Onesimus’s eventual future service to Paul, this would mean that, even when suffering cannot be avoided, the slave will occupy a place of honor and will be richly rewarded by God himself” (375).

76. Cf. Harris, Colossians and Philemon, 264.

77. Cf. “I am in prison for the sake of Christ” (Phil 1:13, NET).

78. Heil, “The Chiastic Structure and Meaning of Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” 184, maintains that this verse is the center of the chiastic structure of Paul’s argument in this letter.

79. This possessive pronoun (“your,” σῆς) “serves to emphasize or to contrast”; see BDAG, 934.

80. Cf. P.Grenf. II.14(a), P.Tebt. I.6, P.Tebt. 1.104, BGU IV.1051; MM, 129. See also Arzt-Grabner, Philemon, 220.

81. S. R. Llewelyn and R. A. Kearsley, “ ‘Slaves, Obey Your Masters’: The Legal Liability of Slaves,” NewDocs 7:194.

82. Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 352.

83. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 342; Ryan, “Philemon,” 237; Wilson, Colossians and Philemon, 354. Others, such as Witherington, Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians, 76, suggest that “good thing” refers to a series of things that Philemon is to accomplish: friendly reception of Onesimus, granting Onesimus freedom, and sending Onesimus back to serve (with) Paul.

84. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 202.

85. This is the reading adopted by the earlier versions of NIV (1973–84). Note the change to “voluntary” in TNIV and the 2011 NIV.

86. Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 184. In Attic legal texts, the term is used in reference to “premeditated” (ἑκούσιοι) versus “unpremeditated” (ἀκούσιοι) murders; cf. P. Dimakis, “The Vocabulary of Legal Terms,” in History of Ancient Greek (ed.A.-F. Christidis; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007), 1084.

87. This conjunction is left untranslated in many contemporary versions (cf. NAB, REV, NJB, NRSV, CEV, GNB, NLT, TNIV, NIV).

88. This is how the phrase is taken by most commentators, with the notable exception of Callahan, Embassy of Onesimus, 43, who confuses this phrase with the postpositive conjunction “for” (γάρ), and therefore takes this phrase as a reference to “on account of Paul’s wish that Onesimus minister to Philemon.”

89. BDAG, 992. Elsewhere in the NT, the word appears only in Rom 5:7.

90. Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 112. Cf. Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 184.

91. Bratcher and Nida, Translator’s Handbook, 127.

92. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 202; O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 295; Harris, Colossians and Philemon, 265; Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 112; Ryan, “Philemon,” 245, Moo, Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, 419. Some, however, take it as a deponent verb with an active meaning of “leave” or “depart”; cf. Isak J. du Plessis, “How Christians Can Survive in a Hostile Social-Economic Environment: Paul’s Mind concerning Difficult Social Conditions in the Letter to Philemon,” in Identity, Ethics, and Ethos in the New Testament (ed. Jan G. van der Watt; BZNW 141; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2006), 402; Arzt-Graber, Philemon, 103-4.

93. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 342.

94. Fitzmyer, Letter to Philemon, 112.

95. Nordling, “Onesimus Fugitivus,” 109.

96. Pearson, “Assumptions in the Criticism and Translation of Philemon,” 265. See also Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 395: “by using the passive form, Paul did not intend to ‘veil’ what is declared by a majority to be the slave’s ‘guilt’ of escaping.”

97. Martin, “The Rhetorical Function of Commercial Language,” 328.

98. Stuhlmacher, Der Brief an Philemon, 41.

99. Moule, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 146.

100. See a parallel in Rom 6:6, where a similar thought concerning freedom from slavery is expressed within a purpose clause: “For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer [μηκέτι] be slaves to sin.”

101. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 3,43.

102. See esp. Callahan, Embassy of Onesimus, 44–47, who argues that “all indications here are that if Onesimus was a doulos, he was, like Paul and his associates (see Phil. 1:1), a doulos tou theou, a slave of God.”

103. BDAG, 1104.

104. Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, 203; O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon, 297.

105. Cf. BDF §230. Cf. TNIV, NIV: “better than a slave.”

106. Recognizing that an explicit call is absent, some still see at least a textual opening that allows for an implicit appeal; see, e.g., Stuhlmacher, Der Brief an Philemon, 43; G. Francois Wessels, “The Letter to Philemon in the Context of Slavery in Early Christianity,” in Philemon in Perspective: Interpreting a Pauline Letter (ed. D. Francois Tolmie; BZNW 169; New York/Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011), 164–68.

107. See, e.g., Wright, Colossians and Philemon, 185.

108. Barclay, “Paul, Philemon and the Dilemma of Christian Slave Ownership,” 175, who further notes: “If we think about the situation in practical terms we will see that there were immense difficulties in either of the two main options to Philemon—to retain Onesimus as a slave or to manumit him.”

109. Taylor “Onesimus,” 271. For more on manumission, see Introduction to Philemon.

110. This is, therefore, the center of Paul’s rhetorical force in this sentence; cf. Witherington, Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians, 80; Aasgaard, “My Beloved Brothers and Sisters,” 257–60.

111. Zelnick-Abramovitz, Not Wholly Free, 336.

112. Moule, Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 148.

113. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 343.

114. Some, such as Harris, Colossians and Philemon, 269, suggest that “in the flesh” describes Onesimus’s earthly status as a slave, while “in the Lord” describes his spiritual identity as a brother, thus: “since he is now related to you by spiritual ties as a fellow Christian, as well as by human ties as a slave in your household.” This reading is also adopted in some contemporary versions: “both as a man and as a brother in the Lord” (NLT; cf. GNB). This, however, misreads the Greek where both prepositional phrases clearly modify the phrases, “especially to me, but how much more to you,” which in turn modify “a beloved brother.” See the detailed discussion in Barth and Blanke, Letter to Philemon, 450–73.

115. Taylor “Onesimus,” 272, sees this return as the completion of his conversion since “he would be resocialised into the household of which he was already legally a part, but as identifying fully with its cultic life.”

116. Barclay, “Paul, Philemon and the Dilemma of Christian Slave Ownership,” 175. See also comments on v. 16. In response, Taylor, “Onesimus,” 269, notes that “it is abundantly clear from verse 21 that Paul expects to be obeyed, and this presupposes that he is issuing an unambiguous if tactful directive.”

117. Hans Küng, Why I Am Still a Christian (trans. David Smith et. al.; ed. E. C. Hughes; Nashville: Abingdon, 1987), 51–52.

118. This may also explain the significance of the indirect references to both the conversions of Onesimus (v. 10) and Philemon (v. 19) in this letter.

119. Miroslav Volf, “Soft Difference: Theological Reflections on the Relation between Church and Culture in 1 Peter,” ExAud 10 (1994): 18–19, italics his.