Q: In Phm 1, how do you pronounce "Philemon?
A: People pronounce it two different ways: with the accent on the first syllable and the accent on the second syllable. Cruden’s Concordance, The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary, Strong's Concordance, the KJV, and the Funk and Wagnall’s Standard Desk Dictionary unanimously say it is pronounced as "phil-E-mon" with the accent on the second syllable.
Q: In Phm 1, what value does the short book of Philemon have in the Bible?
A: Given that this is a letter from the apostle Paul, and was accepted as Scripture by the early church, we should cherish Philemon as God’s word, even if (hypothetically speaking) we could not see any value at all in Philemon.
Yet we can see great value in this brief book. While many other books discuss doctrine and practice, Philemon gives us a good example of one way to relate to fellow Christians on sensitive issues.
The book of Philemon also shows that while God tolerated slavery back then, that was not His perfect will.
Q: In Phm 1 and 2 Tim 1:8, how did the Lord take Paul as a prisoner?
A: Paul was not imprisoned by Jesus; Paul was imprisoned on account of Jesus, as 2 Timothy 1:12 shows.
Q: In Phm 10, how do you pronounce the name "Onesimus?
A: The New International Bible Dictionary p.735 and Cruden's Concordance both say o-NES-i-mus, with all vowels short except the first o, and the accent on the second syllable.
Q: In Phm 10, 2 Tim 1:2, Tt 1:4, and 1 Cor 4:17, why did Paul call Onesimus, Timothy, and Titus his sons, since Jesus said in Mt 23:9 to call no man your father?
A: Philippians 2:22 shows that Paul called Timothy his son, not because of a biological relationship, but because Timothy was as close as a son in serving the Gospel.
Onesimus was a useful as a son, and as dear as a son to Paul, while Paul was in Rome.
It is not a lie to use a metaphor that is not literally true, when the speakers and hearers realize it is a metaphor.
Q: In Phm 10, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for Onesimus?
A: There may be, actually. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History 3:36, mentions letter o Ignatius to the Ephesians (ch.1). Ignatius mentions Onesimus as the pastor there. It does not explicitly say it was the same Onesimus, though.
Q: In Phm 10-15, why does Paul tolerate slavery?
A: Paul is indirectly telling Philemon to free Onesimus. As to why Paul did not prohibit slavery altogether, see the discussion on Ephesians 6:5-8 and Ephesians 6:9. See When Critics Ask p.509-510, When Cultists Ask p.281-282, and Hard Sayings of the Bible p.642-644 for more info.
Q: In Phm 11, why is Paul calling Onesimus formerly unprofitable?
A: In Greek, the name Onesimus means "useful". Paul is making a pun here, as Onesimus was Philemon’s runaway slave. A slave that ran away is not very profitable.
Q: In Phm 12 (KJV), what does "bowels" mean here?
A: The King James Version accurately translated the Greek word splagchna. The modern equivalent is that Paul is sending his "very heart" back to Philemon.
Q: In Phm 12-15, what is Paul basically saying?
A: There are four things.
1. Paul is asking something of Philemon, which he will explain. (Philemon 8)
2. Onesimus became Paul’s son in faith, a Christian. (Philemon 10)
3. Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon. (Philemon 12)
4. Paul is asking Philemon to free Onesimus, his runaway slave Paul sent back to Philemon.
Q: In Phm 16, what does "in the flesh" mean?
A: The literal words are "in flesh" as Jay P. Green’s Literal Translation says. "In the flesh" is what the KJV, NKJV, NASB, and NRSV translate. There are three interpretations.
Friend: "in the flesh and in the Lord" means that Onesimus would serve him in a physical way, and give him fellowship as a believer. This is probably why the NIV translates this "as a man". (The Believer’s Bible Commentary p.215)
Perhaps still a slave: "in the flesh" refers to a person-to-person relationship, but that it could also mean retaining the master-slave relationship. (The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.773)
Brother: Philemon and Onesimus were physically brothers. In other words, Philemon had enslaved his own brother. 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.314 has this view.
In common with all interpretations, is that there is the restoring of some kind of natural relationship
Q: In Phm 17-18, is this a perfect example of the doctrine of imputed righteousness?
A: 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.67-68 says yes. Just as our sins were charged to Christ’s "account" Paul offered to pay everything Onesimus owed Philemon.
There are three similarities between this and Christ’s atonement.
1. It is not unjust for Paul to pay Onesimus’ bills. Paul volunteered to do it for him, just as Christ volunteered for us.
2. There is no record of whether Paul paid this, or Onesimus paid it, or Philemon forgave any debts. Likewise Christ’s offer is for all, but the payment is not made for those who do not wish to accept Christ.
Differences: Most analogies are not perfect, and neither is this one. It was up to Philemon whether to take Paul up on his offer. Onesimus did not have a lot of say here. In contrast, we are saved by grace "through faith", and as Hebrews 4:2 shows, the gospel message was of no value to some, because it was not combined with faith.
Q: In Phm 19, why is Paul reminding Philemon that he owes Paul his own soul?
A: For Onesimus’ sake, Paul is being heavy-handed here. Paul is in effect saying, "if you, Philemon are grateful to me for sharing the Gospel with you to save your soul, show your gratitude by freeing Onesimus from slavery."
Q: In Phm 19, was it wrong for Paul to be so assertive and heavy-handed?
A: No. Paul loved both Philemon and Onesimus. Paul knew freeing a slave was a financial sacrifice, and though difficult, Philemon should do it. Sometimes Christians should be more assertive about good things, for the sake of others.
Q: In Phm 24 and Col 4:14, why is Paul with Demas, since Demas turned away because Demas loved this world in 2 Tim 4:10?
A: Like others, Demas first helped in the ministry and then later turned away. Did Demas ever come back and was Demas saved? We can hope so, but we have no record either way.
Q: In Phm, what evidence do we have that this book should be in the Bible?
A: Frankly, since Philemon is such a short book, we do not have as many references to Philemon as the other books. Here are three reasons we know this should be in the Bible.
1. Paul wrote it, and he was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul’s words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.
2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.
3. Early church evidence
It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)
Ambrosiaster 4th century
Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down three sermons on Philemon. He says that Paul wrote this letter to Philemon, an admirable man, in Homily 1.
Jerome 420 A.D.
Augustine c.400 A.D.
We still have all of these today.
Q: How do we know that Phm today is a reliable preservation of what was originally written?
A: There are at least three good reasons.
1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.
2. Evidence of the early church. See the previous question for a few of the writers who referred to verses in Philippians.
3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Philemon show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.
p87 contains Phm 13-15,24-25 with gaps (c.125 A.D.) Handwriting is nearly identical to p46. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of p87 on p.608.
Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.
Philemon was not preserved in Vaticanus
Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.
Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century
Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4th century
Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century
Bezae Cantabrigiensis 5th/6th century
Q: In Phm, what are the manuscript variations with the Textus Receptus, the basis for the KJV?
A: Jay P. Green, Sr. in the Interlinear Bible records variations in approximately 5 words between the Textus Receptus and the majority text. These are in 4 places. (Philemon 6,7,12,17, with two words in verse 12) Green does not record any additional alternates.
Q: In Phm, what are the manuscript variations?
A: The Letter to Philemon has a total of about 329 Greek words and a word-for-word accuracy of 98.2%, with only 6 words in question. These are in 4 verses (5 places), out of 25 total verses. Below are the variations with the primary choice and the top alternate choice. Aland, from which this primarily is based, also gives a judgment of the degree of certainty for each variation.
Phm 2 "the sister" (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, original Bezae Cantabrigiensis, some Sahidic Coptic, Bohairic Coptic) vs. "the beloved" (Corrected Bezae Cantabrigiensis, Byzantine Lectionary, a Sahidic manuscript, Chrysostom)
Phm 6 "our" vs. "your (plural)"
Phm 12 "whom I sent back yours" vs. "whom I sent back to you" (2 words)
Phm 25 "lord" vs. "our lord" (Sinaiticus does not have "our" and Alexandrinus and the Byzantine Lectionary do) (p87 has a gap here)
Phm 25 Add the word "amen" at the end (Aland, NRSV) (Alexandrinus does not have "amen" and Sinaiticus and the Byzantine Lectionary do. p87 c.125 A.D. also has amen at the end)
Some manuscripts have the postscript, "To Philemon written from Rome, by/of/through/via Onesimus a servant."
Bibliography for this question: The Greek New Testament Third Edition by Kurt Aland et al., The Greek New Testament Fourth Edition by Kurt Aland et al., Interlinear Greek-English New Testament by George Ricker Berry, the Interlinear Bible by Jay P. Green, The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament 2nd edition by Bruce M. Metzger, The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts edited by Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett, The Expositor's Greek Testament edited by W. Robertson Nicoll, and footnotes in the NASB, NIV, NKJV, and NRSV Bible translations. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible : An Introduction to Paleography by Bruce M. Metzger also has interesting information on the characteristics and quality of the copying of each manuscript.
