In this post I will examine that verse to see why I
believe this to be true.
The Letter’s Message
As Paul and Timothy write to Philemon (v. 1)—the
latter being the primary author (in light of the use of the first person
singular from v. 4 on)—Paul appeals to Philemon, a wealthy Colossian Christian
(see Col. 4:9, 17) and host of a house church (vv. 1-2), to receive back and be
reconciled to Onesimus, a slave who most likely stole from Philemon and then
fled. In the providence of God, Onesimus meets Paul in Rome, becomes a
Christian, and now there is a desire to make things right with his master.
In the midst of Paul’s appeal in behalf of Onesimus
(verses 8-20), Paul describes the transformation of Onesimus (vv. 8–12) and
then affirms how helpful the slave would be to Paul in his current imprisonment
(vv. 13–14). Yet, he then turns his attention to the relation of Onesimus and
Philemon, asserting that God has been sovereignly involved in this situation
perhaps so that the master may receive the slave back now as a fellow Christian
(vv. 15–16) who will therefore be all the more useful to Philemon. He concludes
with a direct appeal for Philemon to take Onesimus back as he would receive
Paul himself (vv. 17–20).
Philemon 14
In verses 13-14, Paul clarifies that though he would
very much like to keep Onesimus with him as a helper—by implication treating
him as a freedman—nevertheless, Paul knew this would not be right. Paul does
not want Philemon to be forced into treating Onesimus differently now that the
latter has returned. He wants the master to treat him differently because he
truly wants to do so (14). Verse 14 reads: “but I preferred to do nothing
without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but
of your own accord.”
There are three terms Paul uses in this verse to
address free choice on the part of Philemon. We will look at each of them in
turn so we can grasp how Paul views human freedom.
To begin, Paul did not want to do anything without
Philemon’s “consent” (gnōmē).
Elsewhere Paul uses gnōmē
to refer to the results of the thinking process—i.e. a judgment or opinion—what
one believes to be true (cf. 1 Cor. 1:10; 7:25, 40; 2 Cor. 8:10). In this context
the translation “consent” (ESV; RSV; NASB; NKJV; HCSB; NIV; NLT) is good. In
other words, Paul desires Philemon to have heard Paul’s rationale for having
Onesimus stay and to have agreed that it was good and thus to have agreed
before Paul kept the slave with him.
It appears that what Paul is writing here in v. 14 not
only applies to having Onesimus stay with Paul (which Paul did not pursue), but
also to Philemon receiving Onesimus back with a different relationship. This is
implied from the likelihood that this letter was sent to Philemon by Tychicus
and Onesimus (Col. 4:7-9) and so as Philemon read it, Onesimus would have
already been back in his presence. So, what Paul says in v. 14 refers not
merely to the possible scenario (if he had kept Onesimus in Rome), but also to
the actual situation—i.e. what Philemon will do with Onesimus now. The
implication is that Paul desires Philemon to think through the rationale from
Paul and to treat the slave differently than he had previously—because this
truly is his desire.
The second significant term Paul uses to speak of
Philemon’s free choice is this: Paul did not want goodness shown to Onesimus to
be “by compulsion” (anagkē).
This term is used elsewhere by Paul to refer to a decision and action that one
carries out that he has not truly come to desire in his heart (2 Cor. 9:7).
That appears to be the meaning here. Paul does not desire that Philemon would
engage in a decision or good action that is forced upon him and that goes
contrary to what he truly wants.
It appears that in these first two terms used by Paul
he is primarily emphasizing that he would prefer Philemon to make a choice to
change his view of and relationship with Onesiumus—and most likely to forgive
him—that does not by-pass Philemon’s intellect and affections.
However, before moving on, we must not miss that in
verses 6 and 21 Paul clarifies that the good actions are ones which Philemon
should do; they are ones which would be to Christ’s glory! So, there is very
strong influence and causation present in the context of this lack of
will-by-passing-compulsion.
The third significant term Paul uses is found in the
last phrase: “but of your own accord” (hekousios). The word hekousios
is used only here in the New Testament. It is used several times in the LXX to
refer to a “freewill offering,” i.e. an offering for which there is no specific
obligation to make, but is made simply because one desires to do it (Lev. 7:16;
Nu. 15:3; 29:39; Ps. 119:108). It is
used in classical Greek literature to refer to something that is opposed to
legal compulsion (BAGD, 243).
Nine Reasons To See Compatibilistic Freedom In Philemon 14
Because this last term (hekousios) is one of the
few places in the Bible where explicit mention is made of “free will” (as seen
in an earlier edition of the ESV) or a concept very close to this, it is
important to focus in on this word even further. I believe there are nine
reasons why this word should be understood to refer to a concept more
resembling what Calvinists have termed compatibilistic freedom rather than
libertarian freedom.
1.
Philemon is a brother in Christ, a “fellow worker,” who hosts a church in his
home. Paul believes him to be one who is changed and therefore can and should
love others graciously, with a changed heart (Philemon 1-2 [cf. Rom. 12:1-21;
15:1-7; Eph. 4:1-5:2; Phil. 2:1-4f., et al.]). In other words, the fact that
the indicative (what has happened to change the Christian) logically precedes
the imperative (what a Christian ought to do) in Paul’s theology elsewhere
would suggest at the very least that Paul is not expecting Philemon to make a
decision whose movement starts in his own heart apart from God’s previous
saving and transforming grace. What is more, there is nothing in this letter
that would suggest Paul believes this decision by Philemon would be done in
such a way that it is not accomplished as part of the “all things” which God
works after the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11). So, to summarize this first
point, Paul most likely sees Onesimus as having the general moral ability to do
what is right toward Onesimus. And, whatever Philemon chooses to do as a free
act can, at one and the same time, happen because it is what God has ordained
to take place. In other words, it can be free and caused.
2.
Paul believes Philemon to be one who has love toward Jesus Christ and the
saints already (5). This undergirds the love and action toward Onesimus to
which Paul is calling the wealthy saint. It is a motive that should move strongly
or determine his choices in regard to Onesimus. In other words, Paul believes the Spirit of God has so changed Philemon that he has the moral ability to love Onesimus as he should.
3.
Similarly to the previous reason, Paul himself has experienced the love of
Philemon and it has brought him joy and comfort (7). He believes that Philemon
will respond to Onesimus in a similar fashion. In other words, there exists in
Philemon antecedent character, convictions, and affections which should move
him to make the choices Paul also would desire. So, Paul believes the Spirit of
God has so changed Philemon that he has the moral ability to love Onesimus as
he should, and this change should shape whatever desire Philemon has toward
Onesimus and what actions he takes. An additional strong influence is Paul’s
argumentation that he believes the Spirit will use to bring Philemon to the
right decision.
4.
Paul seems to utilize significant rhetorical strategy in order to persuade
Philemon to act toward Onesimus with a changed relationship and brotherly love
(cf. the entire letter, especially 16, 17). In other words, Paul is bringing
upon Philemon strong influence toward a particular decision. As in all Paul’s
epistles, he believes the Holy Spirit will use the very reasoning and word of
God he shares to bring readers to Christ-like and God-glorifying decisions. And
so, strong influences and even divine causation can bring about free choices
(those for which the person has the strongest preference at the moment). In
other words, the Spirit of God can move Philemon to the point he also has the
particular moral ability to make the right decision and can actualize that
decision.
5.
The language of verses 8-9, 14 does not demand that the movement must start in
the heart of Philemon apart from the work of God’s Spirit, apart from the
decisive decree of God, and apart from any decisive persuasion on the part of Paul. It is preferable (especially in light of what
we discovered about the first two terms) to take the language as primarily
focusing upon the need for true desire and willfulness on the part of Philemon
that does not by-pass his own intellect and affections, rather than as a choice
that is not caused or determined. In other words, Paul believes that the Spirit
can move Philemon from merely a general moral ability for the right decision to
a particular moral ability wherein the right decision is actualized and it will
remain a genuinely free choice.
6.
In v. 21 Paul writes, “confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing
that you will do even more than I say.” Even though Paul is not commanding
Philemon how he must act toward Onesimus and even though he wants Philemon to
act in accordance with what he truly wants to do, he also believes that
changing his view toward Onesimus and acting graciously toward him in Christian
love is the right thing to do—i.e. what the Spirit of God would have him to do.
Since this is the case, Paul believes Philemon will do what is right, what he
should do because he wants to do it—and this because, as a transformed
Christian, he wants to please God and God wants him to do it. This verse, as
much as any in the short letter, implies that Paul believes Philemon will do
what is right because he is a changed man and because, as a result, he wants to please
God (his desires have been transformed). As such, though Paul wants the
movement to come from Philemon’s heart, it does not have to be ultimately from
his heart only and thus does not have to be decided apart from previous
movements (both divine and human)! This is consistent with compatibilistic
freedom, not libertarian freedom.
7.
According to verse 6, part of doing what is right in this case is doing it “for
the sake of Christ” (eis
Christon). This is part of Paul’s appeal to the
spirit of Philemon, which has been transformed by the Spirit of God and is now
being led by that Spirit. Paul believes the Spirit will use these words to
persuade Philemon freely to do what is right, that which glorifies Christ.
After all, the regenerate person has been delivered from moral blindness (2
Cor. 4:4) to the kind of general moral ability wherein he sees God’s glory in
Christ (2 Cor. 4:4) and desires to honor Christ (Phil. 1:20-23).
8.
Paul’s closing words, “the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit,”
strongly suggest that Paul believes the transforming grace of Jesus Christ must
be behind true Christian action (including love) and thus moves the heart of
the saint (in this case Philemon) to do what God desires (see Titus 2:11-14). Paul
is not suggesting that a person has the power in herself, apart from the Spirit
of God, to do what which is right. It must be by saving and transforming grace.
9.
Finally, Paul’s means of persuasion and what he desires from Philemon are very
similar to the manner in which he seeks to persuade the Corinthians in 2
Corinthians 8-9. There he brings to bear
upon them strong reasons for giving, wants their giving to be something they
truly want to do, and believes God’s Spirit will graciously work in them so
that their actions will show the reality of their profession and will glorify
God. In other words, it is compatibilistic freedom.
Conclusion
If the understanding of Philemon 14 that I have just
set forth is accurate, the end result is this: If Philemon freely (i.e. with
his consent and according to his preference) chooses to accept back Onesimus as
a brother, treat him differently, and be reconciled to him—as he should do for
the glory of Christ—the following antecedents would have moved, caused, and
determined this choice: God’s predestination; Philemon’s regeneration and
justification; his ongoing transformation by the Holy Spirit; his conviction
that what pleases God is important; his desire to glorify Jesus Christ; his
love for Onesimus; the Spirit working through the power of the Word of God; and
perhaps a respect for the Apostle Paul, just to name a few. As can be seen, then, this entire process of
choice on the part of Philemon is very consistent with compatibilistic freedom.
What I have argued in my explanation of this text is
that how Paul sought to influence Philemon, what he believed about the
transformation of the wealthy Christian, and the expectation of how he would
respond, all are in line with compatibilistic freedom—and that the choice
Philemon would prefer to make is the one Paul sought to convince him to make,
and, at that point he could not genuinely make the alternate choice, because he
would not want to do so.[1]
So, genuine human freedom from Paul’s perspective is
what the Calvinist would term compatibilistic freedom.
Before leaving the subject of human freedom, in my
next post I will address some additional problems found in the concept of libertarian
freedom.
Joyfully
And Freely Following Our Sovereign God With You,
Tom
[1] One of the interesting realities
about libertarian freedom is this: for it to be true, a person must be able to
choose at the moment of decision that which is not his strongest preference. Aside from this kind of phenomenon not being able to
be demonstrated, it also introduces a strong possibility that such “free”
decisions must be haphazard and not even what is in accordance with what the
mind reasons to be best. It seems odd to me and not in accord with how we make choices.
No comments:
Post a Comment