Phile 8-21 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 8. Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ . Though I might have much boldness as an apostle of Christ. He means that he was invested with authority by the Lord Jesus, and would have a right, as an apostle, to enjoin what ought to be done in the case which he is about to lay before him. Comp. . To enjoin thee that which is convenient . To command what is proper to be done. The word convenient here, (τοανηκον,) means that which would be fit or proper in the case. Comp. . The apostle implies here that what he was about to ask, was proper to be done in the circumstances, but he does not put it on that ground, but rather asks it as a personal favour. It is usually not best to command a thing to be done, if we can as well secure it by asking it as a favour. Comp. . (e) "though"

Philemon 8-21

Verse 8. Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ. Though I might have much boldness as an apostle of Christ. He means that he was invested with authority by the Lord Jesus, and would have a right, as an apostle, to enjoin what ought to be done in the case which he is about to lay before him. Comp. 1Thes 2:6,7.

To enjoin thee that which is convenient. To command what is proper to be done. The word convenient here, (τοανηκον,) means that which would be fit or proper in the case. Comp. Eph 5:4. The apostle implies here that what he was about to ask, was proper to be done in the circumstances, but he does not put it on that ground, but rather asks it as a personal favour. It is usually not best to command a thing to be done, if we can as well secure it by asking it as a favour. Comp. Dan 1:8,11,12.

(e) "though" 1Thes 2:6 Verse 9. Yet for love's sake. For the love which you bear me, and for the common cause.

I rather beseech thee. Rather than command thee.

Being such an one as Paul the aged. πρεσβυτης--an old man. We have no means of ascertaining the exact age of Paul at this time, and I do not recollect that he ever alludes to his age, though he often does to his infirmities, in any place except here. Doddridge supposes that at the time when Stephen was stoned, when he is called "a young man," (νεανιας, Acts 7:58,) he was twenty-four years of age, in which case he would now have been about fifty-three. Chrysostom supposes that he may have been about thirty-five years old at the time of his conversion, which would have made him about sixty-three at this time. The difficulty of determining, with any degree of accuracy, the age of the apostle at this time, arises from the indefinite nature of the word used by Luke, Acts 7:58, and rendered a young man. That word, like the corresponding word, νεανισκος, neaniskos, was applied to when in the rigour of manhood up to the age of forty years, Robinson Lex. Phavorinus says a man is called νεανισκος, neaniskos, a young man, till he is twenty-eight; and πρεσβυτης, presbytes, from forty-nine till he is fifty-six. Varro says that a man is young (juvenis) till he is forty-five, and aged at sixty. Whitby. These periods of time, however, are very indefinite; but it will accord well with the usual meaning of the words to suppose that Paul was in the neighbourhood of thirty when he was converted, and that he was now not far from sixty. We are to remember, also, that the constitution of Paul may have been much broken by his labours, his perils, and his trials. Not advanced probably to the usual limit of human life, he may have had all the characteristics of a very aged man. Comp. the Note of Benson. The argument here is that we feel that it is proper, as far as we can, to grant the request of an old man. Paul thus felt that it was reasonable to suppose that Philemon would not refuse to gratify the wishes of an aged servant of Christ, who had spent the rigour of his life in the service of their common Master. It should be a very strong case when we refuse to gratify the wishes of an aged Christian in anything, especially if he has rendered important services to the church and the world.

And now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ. In the cause of Jesus Christ; or a prisoner for endeavouring to make him known to the world. Comp. Eph 3:1 Eph 4:1; Eph 6:20. Col 4:10. The argument here is, that it might be presumed that Philemon would not refuse the request of one who was suffering in prison on account of their common religion. For such a prisoner we should be ready to do all that we can to mitigate the sorrows of his confinement, and to make his condition comfortable. Verse 10. I beseech thee for my son Onesimus. That is, my son in the gospel; one to whom I sustain the relation of a spiritual father. Comp. 1Timm 1:2. The address and tact of Paul here are worthy of particular observation. Any other mode of bringing the case before the mind of Philemon might have repelled him; If he had simply said, "I beseech thee for Onesimus;" or, "I beseech thee for thy servant Onesimus," he would at once have reverted to his former conduct, and remembered all his ingratitude and disobedience. But the phrase "my son," makes the way easy for the mention of his name, for he had already found the way to his heart before his eye lighted on his name, by the mention of the relation which he sustained to himself. Who could refuse to such a man as Paul-- a laborious, servant of Christ--an aged man, exhausted with his many sufferings and toils--and a prisoner--a request which he made for one whom he regarded as his son? It may be added, that the delicate address of the apostle in introducing the subject, is better seen in the original than in our translation. In the original, the name Onesimus is reserved to come in last in the sentence. The order of the Greek is this: "I entreat thee concerning a son of mine, whom I have begotten in my bonds--Onesimus." Here the name is not suggested, until he had mentioned that he sustained to him the relation of a son, and also till he had added that his conversion was the fruit of his labours while he was a prisoner. Then, when the name of Onesimus is mentioned, it would occur to Philemon not primarily as the name of an ungrateful and disobedient servant, but as the interesting case of one converted by the labours of his own friend in prison. Was there ever more delicacy evinced in preparing the way for disarming one of prejudice, and carrying an appeal to his heart?

Whom I have begotten in my bonds. Who has been converted by my efforts while I have been a prisoner. On the phrase "whom I have begotten," see 1Cor 4:15. Nothing is said of the way in which he had become acquainted with Onesimus, or why he had put himself under the teaching of Paul. See the Intro., 2. (3.)

(f) "Onesimus" Col 4:9 (g) "begotten" 1Cor 4:15 Verse 11. Which in time past was to thee unprofitable. Either because he was indolent; because he had wronged him, (comp. Phm 1:18;) or because he had run away from him. It is possible that there may be an allusion here to the meaning of the name Onesimus, which denotes profitable, (from ονινημι, fut. ονησω, to be useful, to be profitable, to help;) and that Paul means to say that he had hitherto not well answered to the meaning of his own name, but that now he would be found to do so.

But now profitable to thee. The Greek here is ευχρηστον, euchreston, but the meaning is about the same as that of the word Onesimus. It denotes very useful. In 2Ti 2:21, it is rendered, meet for use; in 2Ti 4:11, and here, profitable. It does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament.

And to me. Paul had doubtless found him useful to him as a Christian brother in his bonds, and it is easy to conceive that, in his circumstances, he would greatly desire to retain him with him.

(a) "in time past" 1Pet 2:10 Verse 12. Whom I have sent again. That is, to Philemon. This was, doubtless, at his own request, for

(1.) there is not the slightest evidence that he compelled him, or even urged him to go. The language is just such as would have been used on the supposition either that he requested him to go and bear a letter to Colosse, or that Onesimus desired to go, and that Paul sent him agreeably to his request. Comp. Php 2:25, "Yet I suppose it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother, and companion in labour," etc. Col 4:7,8, "All my state shall Tychicus declare unto you, who is a beloved brother, and a faithful minister and fellow-servant in the Lord: whom I have sent unto you for the same purpose, that he might know your estate," etc. But Epaphroditus and Tychicus were not sent against their own wills--nor is there any more reason to think that Onesimus was. See Intro., & 2. (4.)

(2.) Paul had no power to send Onesimus back to his master unless he chose to go. He had no civil authority; he had no guard to accompany him; he could entrust him to no sheriff to convey him from place to place, and he had no means of controlling him, if he chose to go to any other place than Colosse. He could indeed have sent him away from himself; he could have told him to go to Colosse, but there his power ended. Onesimus then could have gone where he pleased. But there is no evidence that Paul even told him to go to Colosse against his own inclination, or that he would have sent him away at all unless he had himself requested it.

(3.) There may have been many reasons why Onesimus desired to return to Colosse, and no one can prove that he did not express that desire to Paul, and that his "sending" him was not in consequence of such a request. He may have had friends and relatives there; or, being now converted, he may have been sensible that he had wronged his former master, and that he ought to return and repair the wrong; or he may have been poor, and a stranger in Rome, and may have been greatly disappointed in what he had expected to find there when he left Philemon, and may have desired to return to the comparative comforts of his former condition.

(4.) It may be added, therefore,

(a.) that this passage should not be adduced to prove that we ought to send back runaway slaves to their former masters against their own consent; or to justify the laws which require magistrates to do it; or to show that they who have escaped should be arrested and forcibly detained; or to justify any sort of influence over a runaway slave to induce him to return to his former master. There is not the least evidence that any of these things occurred in the case before us; and if this instance is ever appealed to, it should be to justify what Paul did --AND NOTHING ELSE.

(b.) The passage shows that it is right to aid a servant of any kind to return to his master if he desires it. It is right to give him a "letter,"and to plead earnestly for his favourable reception if he has in any way wronged his master--for Paul did this. On the same principle, it would be right to give him pecuniary assistance to enable him to return--for there may be cases where one who has fled from servitude might wish to return. There may be instances where one has had a kind master, with whom he would feel that on the whole he could be more happy than in his present circumstances. Such cases, however, are exceedingly rare. Or there may be instances where one may have relatives that are in the neighbourhood or in the family of his former master, and the desire to be with them may be so strong that on the whole he would choose to be a servant as he was before, rather than to remain as he is now. In all such cases it is right to render aid--for the example of the apostle Paul goes to sustain this. But it goes no further. So far as appears, he neither advised Onesimus to return, nor did he compel him; nor did he say one word to influence him to do it; nor did he mean or expect that he would be a slave when he should have been received again by his master. Phm 1:16.

Thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels. There is great delicacy also in this expression. If he had merely said, "receive him," Philemon might have thought only of him as he formerly was. Paul, therefore, adds, that is, mine own bowels"---"one whom I so tenderly love that he seems to carry my heart with him wherever he goes." Doddridge. Verse 13. Whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead. "That he might render me the service which I know you would if you were here." The Greek is, "for thee;" (υπερσου;) that is, what he should do for Paul might be regarded as done by Philemon himself.

He might have ministered unto me. He might have rendered me assistance, (διακονη;) to wit, in such a way as one who was in bonds would need.

(b) "that in thy stead" 1Cor 16:17, Php 2:30 Verse 14. But without thy mind would I do nothing. Nothing in the matter referred to. He would not retain Onesimus in his service, much as he needed his assistance, without the cordial consent of Philemon. He would not give him occasion for hard feeling or complaint, as if Paul had induced him to leave his master, or as if he persuaded him to remain with him when he wished to return-- or as if he kept him away from him when he owed him or had wronged him. All that is said here is entirely consistent with the supposition that Onesimus was disposed to return to his master, and with the supposition that Paul did not compel or urge him to do it. For it is probable that if Onesimus had proposed to return, it would have been easy for Paul to have retained him with him. He might have represented his own want of a friend. He might have appealed to his gratitude on account of his efforts for his conversion. He might have shown him that he was under no moral obligation to go back. He might have refused to give him this letter, and might have so represented to him the dangers of the way, and the probability of a harsh reception, as effectually to have dissuaded him from such a purpose. But, in that case, it is clear that this might have caused hard feeling in the bosom of Philemon, and rather than do that he preferred to let him return to his master, and to plead for him that he might have a kind reception. It is, therefore, by no means necessary to suppose that Paul felt that Onesimus was under obligation to return, or that he was disposed to compel him, or that Onesimus was not inclined to return voluntarily; but all the circumstances of the case are met by the supposition that, if Paul retained him, Philemon might conceive that he had injured him. Suppose, as seems to have been the case, that Onesimus "owed" Philemon, (Phm 1:18,) and then suppose that Paul had chosen to retain him with himself, and had dissuaded him from returning to him, would not Philemon have had reason to complain of it? There was, therefore, on every account, great propriety in his saying that he did not wish to use any influence over him to retain him with him when he purposed to return to Colosse, and that he felt that it would be wrong for him to keep him, much as he needed him, without the consent of Philemon. Nor is it necessary, by what is said here, to suppose that Onesimus was a slave, and that Paul believed that Philemon had a right to him and to his services as such. All that he says here would be met by the supposition that he was a hired servant, and would be in fact equally proper even on the supposition that he was an apprentice. In either case, he would feel that he gave just ground of complaint on the part of Philemon if, when Onesimus desired to return, he used any influence to dissuade him from it, and to retain him with himself. It would have been a violation of the rule requiring us to do to others as we would wish them to do unto us, and Paul therefore felt unwilling, much as he needed the services of Onesimus, to make use of any influence to retain him with him without the consent of his master.

That thy benefit. The favour which I might receive from thee by having the services of Onesimus. If Onesimus should remain with him and assist him, he would feel that the benefit which would be conferred by his services would be in fact bestowed by Philemon, for he had a right to the service of Onesimus, and while Paul enjoyed it, he would be deprived of it. The word rendered benefit here αγαθον --means good, and the sense is, "the good which you would do me;" to wit, by the service of Onesimus.

Should not be as it were of necessity. As it would be if Paul should detain Onesimus with him without affording Philemon an opportunity of expressing his assent. Paul would even then have felt that he was in fact receiving a "good" at the expense of Philemon, but it would not be a voluntary favour on his part.

But willingly. As it would be if he had given his consent that Onesimus should remain with him.

(c) "willingly" 2Cor 9:7 Verse 15. For perhaps he therefore departed for a season. Perhaps on this account, or for this reason διατουτο he left you for a little time. Greek, "for an hour"--προςωραν. The meaning is, that it was possible that this was permitted, in the providence of God, in order that Onesimus might be brought under the influence of the gospel, and be far more serviceable to Philemon as a Christian, than he could have been in his former relation to him. What appeared to Philemon, therefore, to be a calamity, and what seemed to him to be wrong on the part of Onesimus, might have been permitted to occur in order that he might receive a higher benefit. Such things are not uncommon in human affairs.

That thou shouldest receive him for ever. That is, in the higher relation of a Christian friend and brother; that he might be united to thee in eternal affection; that he might not only be with thee in a far more endearing relation during the present life than he was before, but in the bonds of love in a world that shall never end.

(a) "perhaps" Gen 14:5-8 Verse 16. Not now as a servant. The adverb rendered "not now," (ουκετι,) means no more, no further, no longer. It implies that he had been before in this condition, but was not to be now. Comp. Mt 19:6, "They are no more twain." They were once so, but they are not to be regarded as such now. Mt 22:46, "Neither durst any man from that day forth, ask him any more questions." They once did it, but now they did not dare to do it. Lk 15:19, "And am no more worthy to be called thy son," though I once was. Jn 6:66, "And walked no more with him," though they once did. See also Jn 11:54, 14:19, 17:11, Acts 8:39, Gall 4:7; Eph 2:19. This passage, then, proves that he had been before a servant--δουλος--doulos. But still it is not certain what kind of a servant he was. The word does not necessarily mean slave, nor can it be proved from this passage, or from any other part of the epistle, that he was at any time a slave. Eph 6:5. 1Timm 6:1. The word denotes servant of any kind, and it should never be assumed that those to whom it was applied were slaves. It is true that slavery existed in the heathen nations when the gospel was first preached, and it is doubtless true that many slaves were converted, 1Cor 7:21; but the mere use of the word does not necessarily prove that he to whom it is applied was a slave. If Onesimus were a slave, there is reason to think that he was of a most respectable character, comp. Col 4:9; and indeed all that is implied in the use of the term here, and all that is said of him, would be met by the supposition that he was a voluntary servant, and that he had been in fact intrusted with important business by Philemon. It would seem from Phm 1:18, ("or oweth thee aught,") that he was in a condition which made it possible for him to hold property, or at least to be intrusted.

But above a servant, a brother beloved. Christian brother. Comp. Notes, 1Timm 6:2. He was especially dear to Paul himself as a Christian, and he trusted that he would be so to Philemon.

Specially to me. That is, I feel a special or particular interest in him, and affection for him. This he felt not only on account of the traits of character which he had evinced since his conversion, but because he had been converted under his instrumentality when he was a prisoner. A convert made in such circumstances would be particularly dear to one.

But how much more unto thee. Why, it may be asked, would he then be particularly dear to Philemon? I answer, because

(1.) of the former relation which he sustained to him--a member of his own family, and bound to him by strong ties;

(2.) because he would receive him as a penitent, and would have joy in his returning from the error of his ways;

(3.) because he might expect him to remain long with him, and be of advantage to him as a Christian brother; and

(4.) because he had voluntarily returned, and thus shown that he felt a strong attachment to his former master.

In the flesh. This phrase is properly used in reference to any relation which may exist pertaining to the present world, as contradistinguished from that which is formed primarily by religion, and which would be expressed by the subjoined phrase, "in the Lord." It might, in itself, refer to any natural relation of blood, or to any formed in business, or to any constituted by mere friendship, or to family alliance, or to any relation having its origin in voluntary or involuntary servitude. It is not necessary to suppose, in order to meet the full force of the expression, either that Onesimus had been a slave, or that he would continue to be regarded as such. Whatever relation of the kind, referred to above, may have existed between him and Philemon, would be appropriately denoted by this phrase. The new and more interesting relation which they were now to sustain to each other, which was formed by religion, is expressed by the phrase "in the Lord." In both these, Paul hoped that Onesimus would manifest the appropriate spirit of a Christian, and be worthy of his entire confidence.

In the Lord. As a Christian. He will be greatly endeared to your heart as a consistent and worthy follower of the Lord Jesus.

On this important verse, then, in relation to the use which is so often made of this epistle by the advocates of slavery, to show that Paul sanctioned it, and that it is a duty to send back those who have escaped from their masters that they may again be held in bondage, we may remark,

(1.) there is no certain evidence that Onesimus was ever a slave at all. All the proof that he was, is to be found in the word δουλος --doulos--in this verse. But, as we have seen, the mere use of this word by no means proves that. All that is necessarily implied by it is that he was in some way the servant of Philemon-- whether hired or bought cannot be shown.

(2.) At all events, even supposing that he had been a slave, Paul did not mean that he should return as such, or to be regarded as such. He meant, whatever may have been his former relation, and whatever subsequent relation he might sustain, that he should be regarded as a beloved Christian brother; that the leading conception in regard to him should be that he was a fellow-heir of salvation, a member of the same redeemed church, a candidate for the same heaven.

(3.) Paul did not send him back in order that he might be a slave, or with a view that the shackles of servitude should be riveted on him. There is not the slightest evidence that he forced him to return, or that he advised him to do it, or even that he expressed a wish that he would; and when he did send him, it was not as a slave, but as a beloved brother in the Lord. It cannot be shown that the motive for sending him back was, in the slightest degree, that he should be a slave. No such thing is intimated, nor is any such thing necessary to be supposed in order to a fair interpretation of the passage.

(4.) It is clear that, even if Onesimus had been a slave before, it would have been contrary to the wishes of Paul that Philemon should now hold him as such. Paul wished him to regard him "not as a servant," but as a "beloved brother." If Philemon complied with his wishes, Onesimus was never afterwards regarded or treated as a slave. If he did so regard or treat him, it was contrary to the expressed intention of the apostle, and it is certain that he could never have shown this letter in justification of it. It cannot fail to strike any one that if Philemon followed the spirit of this epistle, he would not consider Onesimus to be a slave; but if he sustained the relation of a servant at all, it would be as a voluntary member of his household, where, in all respects, he would be regarded and treated, not as a "chattel, or a "thing," but as a Christian brother.

(5.) This passage, therefore, may be regarded as full proof that it is not right to send a slave back, against his will, to his former master, to be a slave. It is right to help one if he wishes to go back; to give him a letter to his master, as Paul did to Onesimus; to furnish him money to help him on his journey if he desires to return; and to commend him as a Christian brother, if he is such; but beyond that, the example of the apostle Paul does not go. It is perfectly clear that he would not have sent him back to be regarded and treated as a slave; but being able to commend him as a Christian, he was willing to do it, and he expected that he would be treated, not as a slave, but as a Christian. The case before us does not go at all to prove that Paul would have ever sent him back to be a chattel or a thing. If, with his own consent, and by his own wish, we can send a slave back ta his master to be treated as a Christian and as a man, the example of Paul may show that it would be right to do it, but it does not go beyond that.

(6.) In confirmation of this, and as a guide in duty now, it may be observed, that Paul had been educated as a Hebrew; that he was thoroughly imbued with the doctrines of the Old Testament; and that one of the elementary principles of that system of religion was, that a runaway slave was in no circumstances to be returned by force to his former master. "Thou shalt NOT deliver unto his master the servant that is escaped from his master unto thee," De 23:15. It cannot be supposed that, trained as he was in the principles of the Hebrew religion--of which this was a positive and unrepealed law, and imbued with the benevolent spirit of the gospel--a system so hostile to oppression, the apostle Paul would have constrained a slave who had escaped from bondage to return to servitude against his will.

(7.) It may be added, that if the principles here acted on by Paul were carried out, slavery would speedily cease in the world. Very soon would it come to an end if masters were to regard those whom they hold, "not as slaves," but as beloved Christian brothers; not as chattels and things, but as the redeemed children of God. Thus regarding them, they would no longer feel that they might chain them, and task them, and sell them as property. They would feel that, as Christians and as men, they were on a level with themselves; and that they who were made in the image of God, and who had been redeemed with the blood of his Son, ought to be FREE.

(b) "brother beloved" Mt 18:8, 1Timm 6:2 (c) "and in the Lord" Col 3:22 Verse 17. If thou count me therefore a partner. The word rendered partner, (κοινωνος,) means a partaker, a companion. The idea in the word is that of having something in common (κοινος) with any one --as common principles; common attachments; a common interest in an enterprise; common hopes. It may be applied to those who hold the same principles of religion, and who have the same hope of heaven, the same views of things, etc. Here the meaning is, that if Philemon regarded Paul as sharing with him in the principles and hopes of religion, or as a brother in the gospel, so that he would receive him, he ought to receive Onesimus in the same way. He was actuated by the same principles, and had the same hopes, and had a claim to be received as a Christian brother. His receiving Onesimus would be interpreted by Paul as proof that he regarded him as a partaker of the hopes of the gospel, and as a companion and friend. For a plea in behalf of another, strongly resembling this, see Horace, Epis. Lib. 1, Ep. 9.

(a) "partner" 2Cor 8:23 Verse 18. If he hath wronged thee. Either by escaping from you, or by failing to perform what he had agreed to, or by unfaithfulness when he was with you as a servant, or by taking your property when he went away. Any of these methods would meet all that is said here, and it is impossible to determine in which of them he had done Philemon wrong. It may be observed, however, that the apostle evinces much delicacy in this matter. He does not say that he had wronged him, but he makes a supposition that he might have done it. Doubtless, Philemon would suppose that he had done it, even if he had done no more than to escape from him, and, whatever Paul's views of that might be, he says that, even if it were so, he would wish him to set that over to his account. He took the blame on himself, and asked Philemon not to remember it against Onesimus.

Or oweth thee ought. It appears from this, that Onesimus, whatever may have been his former condition, was capable of holding property, and of contracting debts. It is possible that he might have borrowed money of Philemon, or he may have been regarded as a tenant, and may not have paid the rent of his farm, or the apostle may mean that he had owed him service which he had not performed. Conjecture is useless as to the way in which the debt had been contracted.

Put that on mine account. Reckon, or impute that to me--εμοιελλογει. This word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in Rom 5:13, where it is rendered imputed. Rom 5:13. It means to reckon; to put to one's account, to wit, what properly belongs to him, or what he assumes. It never implies that that is to be charged on one which does not properly belong to him, either as his own act, or as that which he has assumed. In this case, it would have been manifestly unjust for Philemon to charge the wrong which Onesimus had done, or what he owed him, to the apostle Paul without his consent; and it cannot be inferred from what Paul says here that it would have been right to do so. The steps in the case were these:

(1.) Onesimus, not Paul, had done the wrong.

(2.) Paul was not guilty of it, or blameworthy for it, and never in any way, or by any process, could be made to be, or conceived to be. It would be true for ever that Onesimus and not he had done the wrong.

(3.) Paul assumed the debt and the wrong to himself. He was willing, by putting himself in the place of Onesimus, to bear the consequences, and to have Onesimus treated as if he had not done it. When he had voluntarily assumed it, it was right to treat him as if he had done so; that is, to hold him responsible. A man may assume a debt if he pleases, and then he may be held answerable for it.

(4.) If he had not assumed this himself, it never could have been right for Philemon to charge it on him. No possible supposition could make it right. No agency which he had in the conversion of Onesimus; no friendship which he had for him; no favour which he had shown him, could make it right. The consent, the concurrence, on the part of Paul, was absolutely necessary in order that he should be in any way responsible for what Onesimus had done.

(5.) The same principle prevails in imputation everywhere.

(a.) What we have done is chargeable upon us.

(b.) If we have not done a thing, or have not assumed it by a voluntary act, it is not right to charge it upon us.

(c.) God reckons things as they are. The Saviour voluntarily assumed the place of man, and God reckoned, or considered it so. He did not hold him guilty or blameworthy in the case; but as he had voluntarily taken the place of the sinner, he was treated as if he had been a sinner. God, in like manner, does not charge on man crimes of which he is not guilty. He does not hold him to be blameworthy, or ill-deserving for the sin of Adam, or any other sin but his own. He reckons things as they are. Adam sinned, and he alone was held to be blameworthy or ill-deserving for the act. By a divine constitution comp. Rom 5:12, seq., he had appointed that if he sinned, the consequences or results should pass over and terminate on his posterity--as the consequences of the sin of the drunkard pass over and terminate on his sons, and God reckons this to be so--and treats the race accordingly. He never reckons those to be guilty who are not guilty; or those to be ill-deserving who are not ill-deserving; nor does he punish one for what another has done. When Paul, therefore, voluntarily assumed a debt or an obligation, what he did should not be urged as an argument to prove that it would be right for God to charge on all the posterity of Adam the sin of their first father, or to hold them guilty for an offence committed ages before they had an existence. The case should be adduced to demonstrate one point only--that when a man assumes a debt, or voluntarily takes a wrong done upon himself, it is right to hold him responsible for it. Verse 19. I Paul have written it with mine own hand. It has been inferred from this, that Paul wrote this entire epistle with his own hand, though this was contrary to his usual practice. Comp. Rom 16:22; 1Cor 16:21; Gall 6:11. He undoubtedly meant to refer to this as a mark of special favour towards Philemon, and as furnishing security that he would certainly be bound for what he had promised.

I will repay it. I will be security for it. It is not probable that Paul supposed that Philemon would rigidly exact it from him, but if he did, he would feel himself bound to pay it.

Albeit I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me thine own self besides. Paul had doubtless been the means of the conversion of Philemon, and whatever hope he cherished of eternal life, was to be traced to his instrumentality. Paul says that this was equivalent to his owing himself to him. It is very life--his eternal welfare---was to be traced to his labours. What he asked now of him was a small matter compared with this, and he seems to have supposed--what was probably true--that for this consideration, Philemon would not think of exacting of him what he had voluntarily obligated himself to obey.

(*) "do not say" "not to say" Verse 20. Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord. "By showing me this favour in receiving, my friend and brother as I request." The phrase, "in the Lord," here seems to mean that, if this request was granted, he would recognise the hand of the Lord in it, and would receive it as a favour from him.

Refresh my bowels in the Lord. The bowels, in the Scriptures, are uniformly spoken of as the seat of the affections--meaning commonly the upper viscera, embracing the heart and the lungs. Isa 16:11. The reason is, that in any deep emotion this part of our frame is peculiarly affected, or we feel it there. Comp. Robinson's Lex. on the word σπλαγχνον. See this illustrated at length in Sir Charles Bell's "Anatomy of Expression," p. 85, seq. Ed. London, 1844. The idea here is, that Paul had such a tender affection for Onesimus as to give him great concern and uneasiness. The word rendered "refresh"--αναπαυσον--means to give rest to, to give repose, to free from sorrow or care; and the sense is, that by receiving Onesimus, Philemon would cause the deep and anxious feelings of Paul to cease, and he would be calm and happy. Comp. Phm 1:7.

(a) "refresh" Phm 1:7 Verse 21. Having confidence in thy obedience. That you would comply with all my expressed desires.

I wrote unto thee. "I have written to you;" to wit, in this epistle.

Knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say. In all the respects which he had mentioned--in receiving Onesimus, and in his kind treatment of him. He had asked a great favour of him, but he knew that he would go even beyond what he had asked.

(b) "confidence" 2Cor 7:16 (+) "obedience" "compliance"