Philemon 1:13,14

13. whom I would fain have kept with me, that in thy behalf he might minister unto me in the bonds of the gospel; 14. but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.

a.

The information in Philemon 1:13 would certainly go far to convince Philemon that a marvelous change had come over Onesimus. Once he was an unprofitable slave; now Paul desired to keep him with him, so that he could be of assistance to him.

b.

The I in Philemon 1:13 is emphatic: I, Paul, personally have been wanting to keep Onesimus with me. The verb is in a continuous past tense (imperfect). Paul's desire to keep Onesimus with him had been continuous. It had not been interrupted by lapses into loafing or wrongdoing by Onesimus.

c.

These verses do not suggest that Paul expected Philemon to send Onesimus back to Rome to help him. On the contrary Paul expected to be visiting Philemon at Colossae soon. Philemon 1:22. Paul mentions the service of Onesimus to him merely to prove to Philemon the sincerity of Onesimus-' conversion.

d.

Philippians 2:20 suggests that Paul had a distinct shortage of helpers with him during part of his imprisonment in Rome. Therefore the assistance of Onesimus would be the more appreciated. Cf. 1 Timothy 4:11.

e.

Paul declares that Onesimus had been helping him in thy behalf, or in your place. He thus indicates that Philemon was indebted to him, since Paul had won Philemon to Christ. Philemon owed Paul a debt of service, even though Paul did not demand payment (like the merchant his pound of flesh). Thus when Philemon's slave turned to Christ and assisted Paul it was somewhat as if Philemon were paying off his debt to Paul by granting time off to Onesimus to serve Paul.

f.

The service rendered by Onesimus was in the bonds of the gospel. This can mean that Paul himself was in the bonds of the gospel, as in Philemon 1:1. Or it can mean that Philemon (and every one of us) in is bonds (i.e. obligation) to help other people by the very facts and truths of the gospel. The latter meaning is broader, and is probably to be preferred.

g.

The fact that Paul would not keep Onesimus without Philemon's consent shows the high value which Paul set on individual property rights. He recognized Philemon's right (his right in the sight of God) to dictate what should be done with his bond servant Onesimus. As Christians we have come so far in our revulsion to slavery that Paul's rather pedantic attention to Philemon's legal rights as master seems to us more a violation of Onesimus greater right to be free than a necessary preservation of Philemon's rights. Perhaps we have all been brainwashed a bit in this line of thinking. Too long have the property rights of people been disregarded in futile socialistic attempts to force everyone into equality.

Thus Paul would not keep Onesimus without Philemon's mind (his consent, resolve, and judgment). Furthermore Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 7:20-22, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Titus 2:9-10, and Colossians 3:22-25 indicate that he expected Onesimus to be obedient and subject to Philemon's wishes.

h.

Nonetheless we must not fail to notice that Paul fully desired and expected Philemon to do the good thing, to forgive, accept, and (almost inevitably it would seem to us) emancipate Onesimus, and then doubtless help him in every way possible to enter into the mainstream of free human society.

The whole issue was this: On what basis should this be done? By compulsion (as by state or ecclesiastical law), or by free will? The apostle Paul chose to effect social changes in people's lives by appealing to the sanctified free will of saints rather than by force.

i.

The idea that our good works should be done by free will and not legalistic compulsion applies not only to our treatment of one another (as in the case of Philemon and Onesimus), but to such matters as our giving (2 Corinthians 9:7) and our Christian labors (1 Peter 5:2).