Philemon 1-21 (II); Now, A Brother

What is most amazing, however, is the way that Paul loads up the personal language in the letter as a way of expressing his desires for Onesimus. Almost every sentence of the epistle pulsates with a sense of the new obligations that believers have to each other because they are in Christ. That is, Paul is so convinced of the transformative nature of the Gospel that he believes that it ought to have implications in this most personal and intimate relationship--master/slave. Let's look at the way Paul uses words here to build up what I call a new kind of family-- a family in Christ.

He does so through explicit family language. Already in v. 1 Paul calls Timothy a brother and refers to Philemon, the recipeint of the letter, as a "beloved co-worker." Language of sisterhood is also present (v. 2). But it is when Paul addresses Philemon personally in vv. 4-7 that the theological language of faith, hope and love is married to the personal language of family. Note that the general words of vv. 4-6, which are reminiscent of some other Pauline letters (such as I Thess. 1), is supplemented by the highly personal v. 7. It reads, literally, "For I have much joy and comfort (paraklesis--the word used to describe the ministry of the Holy Spirit in other passages) because of your love, because the inner spirit of the saints rests on account of you, brother." The word I just translated "inner spirit" is the Greek splankna--the "viscera." The verb form of this noun is used in Luke 15:20 to describe the reaction of the father when seeing the prodigal son at a distance--his heart pours out to him. Paul uses this kind of language to talk about the trusting relationship Philemon's has with the saints in general. Lest Philemon miss the point, Paul adds the word adelphos (brother) at the end of v. 7. It is much more powerful rhetorically to put "brother" in at this point than if he had done so in v. 1, where he calls Timothy "brother." "Brother" is now connected with the attitude that God demonstrates (i.e., God is a splanknic God) and is not simply seen as a formal greeting that could easily be passed over by Philemon.

III. The Rhetorical Force of the Letter

It really is impossible to separate completely the personal tone and rhetorical force of the letter. What I will show here is how Paul combines rhetoric and family language in vv. 8-21 to make a most radical and bold appeal to Philemon--i.e. to let Paul have Onesimus at his disposal rather than at his owner's use. Paul feels he can make this appeal because, in a word, Philemon owes him his own life (v. 19). Paul is tantalizingly elusive on what he means with respect to Philemon owing him his life; let's just look closely at the text for what we can infer.

Paul has been commending Philemon in vv. 4-7 for a reason. He has a request (to let Onesimus be with Paul). Though he feels that he has the freedom to command Philemon (v. 8), he would rather advise him (v. 9). Well, friends, what is the rhetorical effect of such language? You guessed it. Paul is giving a command. He rests his "request," however, on the fact that he is an older man and that he suffers in chains for the sake of Christ. Now that Paul's situation is clear, he asks Philemon for mercy towards his (i.e., Paul's!) child.

The language of generation, age and youth is overpowering in vv. 9-10. Paul is the old man; nevertheless he has given birth (!) to the "child" Onesimus. None of the three family-type words is probably literally true. Paul is no older than he is in his other prison letters, but he never calls himself "old." He doesn't bear children literally, and Onesimus is certainly not a child. But Paul will pull out all the rhetorical stops because of the message he wants to give.

On what basis does Paul hope that Philemon will respond? Well, Onesimus formerly wasn't useful to Philemon (when he had left him?) but now he is useful to both. Paul uses a common word from the Greek language (on utility), but he will use it with a theological twist. Onesimus' "utility" now is because he is a Christian. It no longer rests in how many cows he can milk; how much cleaning he can do; how many physical burdens he can relieve from Philemon. We have a new concept of utility here, a utility in Christ.

Verse 12 shows Paul at his rhetorical best. He is sending Onesimus to Philemon but, in fact, he is just sending his own heart (splankna again) back to Philemon. That is, Onesimus is covered or coated, so to speak, with the dripping viscera of Paul. He may look like Onesimus; he may sound like Onesimus but, in fact, he is really Paul in Onesimus' guise. That is what Philemon is receiving with Paul's letter. Paul then explains that he would have liked to keep Onesimus with him (hint, hint!), but he sends him back so that Philemon can "freely" determine what to do with him (i.e., to return him to Paul). I think that anyone reading Paul closely at this point and knowing the energy and focus of the Apostle realizes that Paul is telling Philemon to let Onesimus return to Paul. Indeed, if we look at Colossians as written after Philemon, we can take Col 4:9 as an indication that Philemon let Onesimus do just that--just as Paul wanted.

The remaining seven verses (15-21) continue the family language (note the mention in v. 16 that Philemon is to receive Onesimus now as a brother) and put extra pressure on Philemon. Notice how Paul has doled out "brother" language in this epistle. He begins by calling Timothy, the missionary, his brother (v. 2). Then, in v. 7, Philemon is brought into this brotherly relationship. Now, in v. 16, Onesimus, who was formerly Paul's child (v. 10), is now Philemon's brother. By stringing out his use of the word adelphos, Paul has increased the moral value of the term and put slave and free on an equal footing. Then, as if to try to summarize the entire argument, Paul will use the word adelphos again in v. 20 to refer to Philemon. In that passage adelphos is connected once again to splanknos, but this time it refers to the "viscera" of Paul.

Paul wil pay whatever Onesimus "owes" Philemon. Speaking of owing, Paul then finishes with the clincher. 'You,' Philemon, owe me your very life (v. 19). How can anyone resist the power of Paul's family language and his rhetorical appeal?

Conclusion

The great author of the last generation, John Gunther, was once asked about the greatness of Mahatma Gandhi. In what did Gandhi's greatness consist? Gunther responded: 'Gandhi was 1/3 your father; 1/3 God; and 1/3 Tammany Hall.' I think this captures Paul's appeal in Philemon pretty accurately. He was sort of a "father" to Philemon; he was certainly a spiritual father. But we also see a "Tammany Hall" (i.e., powerful/compelling)-style to Paul. The Gospel may indeed put us all on different footing with respect to each other, but somehow Paul seems to occupy a place higher on the mountain. In fact, the Gospel doesn't get rid of power relationships; it simply rearranges them. Philemon, no doubt, learned that through this most interesting letter.

2856