Bible Survey - Colossians, Philemon
Randy Peterman · Nov 2, 2014
Bible Survey, No. 43
Holly Hills Bible Church
https://www.hollyhillsbiblechurch.org/teaching/messages/492644523639

Transcribed from the recording by SermonAudio, so expect the occasional misheard word.

Well, we're going to go through Colossians and Philemon this morning. And one of the things that's interesting is that Colossians is not right next to Philemon. And so you see these two books together and you might scratch your head and ask, why are we doing Colossians and Philemon together?

But hopefully the answer is very quick and obvious here. Philemon lived in Colossae. And it is more than likely that Philemon received his letter that we have, carried at the same time as the letter to Colossae, probably either by Tychicus, who is reported to have carried the letter to Colossae in Ephesians, but possibly by Onesimus, who was actually the subject predominantly of that letter. So we'll go into that.

We'll go into Philemon's second, but it's a short book. It's only got one chapter, which is always one of those things where if you feel like being cruel to somebody in a Sunday school class, you can ask them to turn to Philemon chapter two and then people flip over and they go, wait a minute. I'm not sure that that's walking by the spirit to torture people in the scripture, but you know, I had a few teachers that would do things like that or say, turn to Hezekiah. And of course, when you're a little kid in Sunday school, you're flipping through the Old Testament and you can't find anything. Philemon chapter 2, we don't have.

So Colossians and Philemon came together. They were written about the time of 60-61 AD. As far as we can tell, that's when Paul was in prison in Rome. And it appears that he was expecting to be able to get out based on his writing to Philemon. Colossae is actually, there's a valley that starts Ephesus. It's out on the coast of what is modern-day Turkey. And there's a valley that moves through that land mass, and Colossae is one of the fingers off of the long valley that is there. So the body that was there was geographically in a unique place, but it was in its fall, if you will, or its autumn as a city.

I put in the notes here, it was kind of like Detroit today, where it's declining. as far as we can tell historically at this point in time. And they were not that far away from Laodicea, and so at the end of chapter 4 of Colossae, or Colossians, we see that Paul says, hey, you know, have the letter that was sent to the Laodiceans read to you, and you give your letter for them to have that read. And the funny thing is that they were, in walking distance, they were 10 to 12 miles apart, depending on how the path goes. And we don't have the letter to the Laodiceans. So we don't really know. Somebody faked one. All right. Lucky for us. So yeah, the church there The city there was on decline.

In the 12th century, the Turks destroyed the city and it was never re-inhabited and has not been excavated yet. So if you go on Google Maps and you type in Colossae, which I have done, and you put on the satellite view, it looks like there's basically just a large drainage pit right where Google Maps, and there's a road and some farmland around it and that's it. So it's not been excavated and we don't have a lot of archaeology from that time. Turkey being a predominantly Muslim country, they're not super excited about lots of pro-Christian things being done, so there's probably a connection there.

But according to Colossians 1.4, it looked like Paul actually never visited Colossae prior to writing this letter, which I think is kind of cool. So when Paul says, we heard, or we have heard in the letter, It's because they hadn't seen.

They didn't know them directly. They had heard of these things. It's a good chance they heard of them from Epaphras, who is one of the people that this was sent with the letter, who is from Colossae, and then also Onesimus. They had a reputation, so that's cool, right? Nothing bad about having a godly reputation.

Alright, so there's Colossians and Philemon and why they're linked together. One of the things that I think is tremendous about Colossians is the Christology in Colossians. There's things that are said about Christ in Colossians that aren't said in other places. I've made a list here, and we'll kind of go through this together, of some of the things that are spoken of Christ. Some of them you will see as unique, and some of them you will identify from other epistles. When I was in seminary, I was studying Colossians just on my own, and I was trying to apply all of my hermeneutical things I was learning in school and going through the text, and I realized that as many times as I had read through Colossians prior to that, I'd never really identified the characteristics of Christ that were so blatantly scattered throughout the text. I had just always read it and tried to figure out what it meant, but I just hadn't I don't think I really had the tools to really dig into it, so it was an exciting thing to read through it and start to observe the patterns of what's in there.

So we can start there with Colossians 1.15 where we see that Christ is the image of the invisible God. So what's significant about Christ being the image of the invisible God.

Stan? Well, it doesn't say created, it just says he is the image of... The man is created, well, that's Hebrew and Greek, and I don't know what the Septuagint translation is in between. I don't know if you have any insights into that, Dan. But how does God the Father exist? Outside of the time-space continuum, of course. Does He have a physical body? No, it says that He is spirit, or He is light. So Christ is the physical form of God, and that's a tremendous thing.

And then, in the same verse, he's firstborn of all creation. And I looked at that and I thought, man, that has got to get some people off on a rabbit trail. Because, you know, if Christ was born, that puts them in a different relationship to God the Father than Christ being always and eternal with God the Father in the Trinity.

So Paul writes that he's firstborn. I think he's presenting the concept that he is preeminent and he is before all of creation, not that he had a birthday. The Mormons hold important doctrines that Christ was a son of Jehovah God and he was born and then he was righteous enough on his own planet that he got his own planet, the earth. So that is not what Paul is talking about.

I guess I was thinking, I've also, I've heard, I've agreed with it being like a statement of Christ's preeminence. I've also heard people say that it was first born of all creation as in like all the new believers. Well, and that will be true, but that will be true in a different way, and we're going to look at that in a few verses. So that is a true statement. He is firstborn of all believers. Yeah.

All things were created through him. All things were created for him in 116. And that's really cool that God had a plan that involved a son. and it involved relationship, and God was not surprised by the fall, and God was not surprised that His Son was going to have to go die. So there's foreknowledge that is sprinkled as well in this concept. He is before all things, which is a similar restatement to the firstborn of all creation. In Him all things hold together, and I think that this one Section of 117 is probably one of the most critical principles for believers when we think about dealing with science today and dealing with our understanding of the world around us.

If Christ sustains the universe and keeps things held together, that means a lot. How many of you have seen in the news about the Higgs-Boson particle, sometimes called the God particle? The Higgs-Boson particle, in CERN over there in Switzerland, they'd smashed atoms together, or electrons together, you'll forgive me, I'm not a physicist, but they smashed things together and they found what they think is the remnant of this Higgs-Boson particle which holds things together. And they were very excited because, and they called it the God particle because of this verse right here, that Christ holds things together, only they didn't find Jesus in It is the authority and power of Christ that holds those things together. But let me ask this important question, since we've looked at that concept that Christ holds things together. If Christ holds things together, does that make everything that is natural supernatural?

I would argue that it does. Because it means that God is actively involved with everything. That God is sovereignly involved. When we see something that seems abnormal, that we call it miraculous, it means that life around us is truly miraculous. That the Lord is supernaturally involved and engaged in keeping the universe the way that it is. That's a bit of a theological rabbit trail, but I think it's important to recognize that if God is sustaining the universe, that he's actively involved with all parts of it. For us, that sounds like we'd have an overload. Our minds would be overwhelmed from a human standpoint, but God is not bound in that same way. So in him, all things are held together. In 118, he's the head of the body. We also see that in Paul's letters to the Corinthians. and also in Ephesians, and then firstborn from the dead in 118. Now, how many of you really think about Christ being firstborn from the dead very often? I love that Paul uses that phrase.

You'll notice it's in a couple of the songs that we've sung on Sunday mornings. Maybe it doesn't stand out, but it's one of the things where when I'm writing songs on occasion, I'll think, okay, who is this Christ that we serve? Who are we singing to? And when I saw that, I was like, that is not in any of the hymns that I know. That is not in any of the worship songs that I know. So I decided I was going to intertwine that somewhere in some lyrics. But what does it mean to have Christ be firstborn from the dead? He's the first one resurrected.

Yeah, thanks, Stan. And that's a really big deal. He's the first one that's resurrected, and if we are made in His image, then He's the firstborn, and that makes us of that same type, after that type of first resurrected. So in Romans 5, when we see the first Adam and the second Adam, the first Adam fell, and so all mankind was wrapped up in the Adam type, the Adam forefather, Adam, the federal head, whatever term is most familiar to you. And then Christ came as a new federal head. He came as a new type, which was the first born from the dead, the first resurrected.

So, a very powerful image despite its infrequent use in Christianity. Yeah. We are born from the dead. We're just not first born from the dead. Because we're resurrected with him. That's identification. So in him all the fullness of deity dwells and that's 119 and 29. Paul repeats himself there. How many of you have heard of the term the hypostatic union? Is that familiar?

The Hypostatic Union, for those of you who don't know the Hypostatic Union, is a doctrine that Christ was 100% man and 100% God. If He wasn't 100% God, then He wasn't who He said He was, which made Him a sinner, which made Him inadequate as a sacrifice. But if He wasn't 100% man, then He couldn't be representative of us on the cross. So when you talk to Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses, They don't have a doctrine of the hypostatic union. They don't have Christ as defined in scripture as 100% God and 100% man.

Paul right here says that the fullness of the deity dwelled in him. That's pretty substantial. Do you ever think about Christ walking on the earth and you think that he might have been less than the fullness of the deity? I don't know how often we think about that, but imagine the fullness of the deity of God walking on the earth, and that's pretty substantial. That would also be why it wouldn't be a big deal for him to calm the waves. Splitting loaves and fish? The fullness of the deity has no problem splitting loaves and fish, right?

Al? Some people like to pick up on the fact that he referred to himself as son of man. We have plenty of scriptures that show that he and I and the Father are one, and I pray that we may be one, etc. etc. All kinds of places. John 17. Plenty of places where his position as fullness of deity shows up. But it's interesting that he identified himself as son of man, which wasn't to say that he was 100% man but he was son of man as was understood by the Jews from the Old Testament son of man had a special it was a special meaning didn't mean like I would say I'm the son of William yeah well he was born of the Virgin Mary which means he was actually son of the woman who was of the type of mankind As a doctrine, there's actually lots of nuance that's really cool in there. But he was the fullness of deity. 120 and 122 says that he was the reconciler of all things unto God.

Now we've got to ask a really important question. What does having all things reconciled to God mean? Does it mean that all things are saved? I think it had something to do with a comment about all things will be put under his feet, right? Like in the Revelation comment?

Well, if sin entered the world and the world was corrupt, then the world was separated from God. And so Christ paid for all of the sin in the world and was able to reconcile God the Father through his righteousness, through his substitution, to the world, but that doesn't mean that nobody has to worry about what they believe, we're all saved because everybody's reconciled to God, therefore everybody's saved.

That's not the purpose of this statement. She provided what the law could not. The law could not save anybody because nobody could live up to it. We needed someone who could satisfy God's holiness and righteousness. So he offers the means for us to be reconciled and have peace with God.

The reconciliation is, to use the illustration, it's where the universe is legally reconciled, but there's still salvation by faith. We have to respond to the gospel message. It's not negating that. Paul writes to Romans and says the whole universe is groaning because of the curse of sin.

So this reconciliation, as Stan alluded, is not just something for humankind, it's something that affects all of God's creation, just as sin affected all of creation, so this reconciliation and its final outcome will be Christ as the head of all things under his feet. So we see in that same verse 120 that not only is Christ the reconciler, but He's also the peacemaker. The list is long here, and I don't want to belabor any one of the individual points necessarily, but Christ also presents the believer before the Father as holy and blameless, and I think that's really fantastic. Who better could introduce us to the Father than Christ, and how does He do it?

He says, This is my son, this is my daughter, and they're holy and blameless in me. Here. That's not too bad an introduction. I think when we have our eternal bodies and we're introduced to the Father, that's going to be really cool. Stan? And like you alluded to, he does it as a man and also as a high priest. Yeah. I mean, how else would it be better done? Yeah, we are of his type now, so we're introduced as the born from the dead new creation by the firstborn from the dead to the Heavenly Father as blameless and just. Yeah. Yes. Yes.

I actually went back and listened to when my dad taught through this. I listened to the MP3 when he taught through 123, and the language in here is a hypothetical language to emphasize the fact that it is out of our hands. Much of the language is passive, that God is the one that is sustaining us. It's not presenting a logical problem for us, so that now we go, if we're established in Christ. Well, are you established in Christ? Did you believe? I mean, if you believed, you're established in Christ. It's not if in the sense of like, but watch out. It's if as in the logical statement of this is a sure thing.

But that doesn't come out in the English translation. And that's one of the things that is problematic about going from Greek to English, is there's places where, that's an accurate translation, but it doesn't carry the weight and the structure that the Greek would have carried. In a lot of places where we have translated it, it's more like since, since this has happened. Yeah, and it is conditional into the structure of the grammar, it's not something that is Every time you see if, you should translate it as since. In fact, when I started the Greek class that I'm in, One of the things Craig did was he goes, let's translate if as sense everywhere in the New Testament and just see what happens.

And there's places where if you did that, you'd get all kinds of crazy theology and really bad stuff. So every time you see an if, that's not saying you should just go, ta-da, it means sense. But in this case, this is not levying you're on the teeter-totter and you could fail. That's not...

It's four different kinds of if. Yeah. This is the first class. Yeah. And even still with the first class, there's other context in the language that lets you know about that. So you want to be aware of that. But that's how this if is in this context. What is first class? First class conditional is a linguistic structure that often, for the sake of argument, is positioned as, this is true. I'm learning so much about the English language again as I take this Greek class. It's killing my brain. It's sometimes overwhelming. But that's going to go on the internet. I'm really proud of that.

But it's one of those things where in this case here, Paul is putting forth a logical argument to to show that things are established in Christ, not of our own strength and accord. It doesn't come out very clearly in the English, which is unfortunate. I praise the Lord that there's not a lot of places where that happens, but this is one of them. The New American Standard, I don't know which translation you're using, but the New American Standard tries really hard to match word-for-word translation. Like this Greek word could be translated this in English, and it matches it.

And in doing so, it often cuts out nuance. And this is one of those places where that happens. Because the faith firmly established is passive. It's not something that we're doing in this case. So, continuing on this, we're almost done with this list here. We'll keep going. Christ is in the believer as our hope for glory.

In Him, all wisdom and knowledge are hidden. So, if Christ dwells in us, and we have relationship with Him, And James tells us in James 1-2 that we can ask and he will give wisdom. There's a principle here that that wisdom doesn't just come from God when we ask real nice and it's otherwise separate from us. There's a principle that God's wisdom and knowledge is present in Christ and he dwells in us. So as we're walking in fellowship, when you read Romans 12, and he talks about renewing our minds, for example, is he renewing our minds in an earthly way, or is he having the mind of Christ impact us? And so the wisdom and knowledge come from him. In him, we have been made complete. So Christ is the one that is the agent that brings about that completion. He's the one in whom we are circumcised spiritually.

That's a good thing because circumcision is a very physical act for Israel, and it is only for the men. But Paul writes about us having this spiritual circumcision. And as it turns out, the issue of circumcision is an outward sign reflecting an inward belief, right? That would be for Israel, but for us as believers, it's a spiritual circumcision that happens. Paul's using that as an illustration to reflect that our salvation is there.

Now, I don't want to spend a lot of time on circumcision, because that's maybe not everybody's favorite topic, right? But can you undo a circumcision? I mean, today with modern plastic surgery, maybe they can, right? But the pattern historically is that circumcision was a rather permanent surgical procedure. There are a number of cases where people, when they participate in those games that your dad talked about, the naked wrestling, and some people actually went through a very painful extensive surgery back in those days to undo circumcision. Wow. But as a principle, it was a permanent thing. And I think that there's some way that this circumcision is one way, and it may be yet another argument for eternal salvation and security.

The substance of things to come belongs to Him. Everything is going to be summed up in Christ, and that is a powerful thing. Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Now that's one that we get, you know, Colossians 3, 1 through 3 are probably my favorite verses to be able to teach just because it talks about our identification in the heavenlies and our position being there. But that also tells us that Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Colossians 3, 4, that Christ is our life.

Colossians 3, 11, Christ is the one in whom we are all summed up no matter our diversity. So Paul writes about there's no Gentile or Greek or Jew nor slave nor free man and he goes through and he lists different divisions and how does he negate those divisions? He says, because we're all in Christ.

Anytime we talk about cultural or political divisions, it's very easy for people to latch on to things. How many of you are tired of political phone calls right now, for example? And there are people who are actively working on creating division in the country based on political party. And as it happens, political party is an invalid division in the church. I'm registered undecided, so I'm even more outcast than somebody who might be registered in a very small niche political party.

But that's not a Paul says all Christians are united in Christ as one, period. And those divisions of race, those divisions of social status and class and political party, all those things don't add up in the church. They're not part of the equation.

And last three here, Christ is the name in which we do things. We work or do things in the name of Christ. And he's the reason why we work for a living. Paul tells us there in 3, 23 and 24, he says, Whatever you do, do your work heartily as for the Lord rather than for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. It is the Lord Christ whom you serve. So as it turns out, when I get on the light rail and I go all the way down to 1899 Wynkoop every day during the week, and I'm right next to the Rocky Stadium there, and I go there, there's a really nice CEO in San Jose that I don't work for. Instead, my work is for Jesus Christ. He's the one I serve. He's the one who should be empowering me through the Spirit to work unto His glory.

And as that verse also says, He's the one in whom we have our inheritance. And our inheritance, as we see For example, in Ephesians chapter 1, we've been blessed with every spiritual blessing, and we have an inheritance in Christ that's full and eternal. Stan? I think it's kind of clear when you think about this one, the name in which we do things, and then if you look at this other one, that's in Him all things hold together.

Yeah. I mean, we're kind of, what would you call it, almost synergistic. Yeah. I mean, what other power, what greater power do you have to do things then, other than something or someone who holds all things together? Yeah. The God of the universe is intimately involved with your life in a way that empowers you and directs you in your work. That's not a bad way to be living.

So, that is my, it's probably not complete, but that is my list of Christology that's there. I have a question about 25, the last verse. You will receive the inheritance of the Lord, but you have done wrong. I'm just wondering, are we being repaid for our wrong? Well, okay, so that's not by itself. He's actually talking about starting 22, which is May. Let's actually step back further than that. Let's look at 18.

So as he's following through in the sequence of the verses here, he says, Wives, be subject to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them. Children, be obedient to your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing to the Lord. And then fathers, do not exasperate your children so that they will not lose heart. That's always hard for me because apparently when I talk to my children after they do goofy things, I need to be careful how I respond. I'm sure my children are just batty sometimes because my response is not always the best. So I try not to exasperate my children.

But already, what I'm doing right now when I tell you that is I'm already committing myself to being the bad guy when we get to the 25. 22. Slaves in all things obey those who are your masters on earth, not with external service as those who merely please men, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.

Now, he's got wives, and he's got husbands, and he's got fathers, and he's got slaves, and children who need to be obedient, that have all been listed here. And then he says in 23, So justice on the earth in a conditional sense is not tied to that inheritance. So if you as a husband do something that is not a godly thing, and your wife responds to the non-godly thing, you're not shocked, right? That 25 is carrying on in light of this wives, husbands, children, fathers, slaves. In light of all that, expect that there's retribution.

Now, since you brought that up, I'm going to tie this slavery issue in. Philemon, the book that we're going to look at here in a few minutes, Philemon is a book written to Philemon about a slave who ran away and stole, as far as we can tell, some kind of possessions or valuables. Because Paul says, listen, whatever Onesimus owes you, charge it to my account. So Onesimus is this slave who's run away, more than likely has stolen things or Philemon could feel wronged.

And now, in 25, Paul says that we shouldn't be surprised if there's retribution. So this is not an eternal wrath or eternal punishment thing. This is a retribution thing of an earthly sense. And then in 4, he says, Masters, grant your slaves justice and fairness, knowing that you too have a master in heaven.

And that, of course, would also strike right in the topic that Philemon was dealing with, with Onesimus. So, these letters probably came as sibling letters. Yeah. Yes. We'll receive the consequences of the wrong. This is New American Standard. Yeah. So we're going to keep looking at a few more things here. Actually, what's the time? I do have a clock. I've got 20 of them, so I'm running out of time here.

Colossians also hits on philosophy, and we'll just do a quick point on this. Colossians hits on the issue of worldly philosophy. In 2.8, he says, See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. When we engage with the world in apologetics, apologetics is the defense of the faith or argument for why we believe what we believe, the world often comes back with a philosophy and they come back with a philosophy that's empty. and they come back with a philosophy that's of a totally different worldview that is godless.

Or maybe a pagan god. Maybe Hinduism or Islam or something like that. What is very often attempted in these arguments or these discussions is that they want you to set aside some piece of who we are in Christ and set aside some piece of our worldview as Christians and take a piece of their worldview and substitute it in.

They want you to replace that in and draw you in with that. Because once they've got a foothold there, well then now the argument has shifted. The ground has shifted and your worldview is broken. It's not consistent and it's not part of the full message of the gospel and the Christian worldview. It's now a blend. And that blend is, well, it's impure. And then they can start finding the chinks in the armor, so to speak, because you took in a piece. You took in a piece of their worldview, and you took a piece of their thinking, and you made it your own.

Al? I like the comparison you made here in your comments about philosophy about an empty thought. Well, that's actually when it says empty deception. It works to tell us something of value, but it's got nothing in it. Whereas Paul writes, we have this treasure in earthen vessels. We've got a clay pot that isn't very impressive, but we've got a treasure in it that's worth everything. The others dress up the pot so the pot looks good. Yeah, it reminds me of the bag of potato chips. It's when you open up the bag of potato chips and it looks like it's this big package and then inside there's like only the bottom quarter has chips in it. It's this empty promise. Stan?

What you talked about earlier, isn't that the same as the political ads that you get on TV? Sure. I mean, what a perfect example. They give you this truth, supposedly, that's supposed to be absolute. It turns out to be nothing but some kind of empty deception. And you listen to it all the time.

We're trying to change the way you think. Words slipped out of context. So we have traditions of man, we have these empty pots, or empty deceptions that are there. And if Christ is not the center of the worldview, and you start to take in other things, and you make a jumbled collection of various things, there is no consistency in the worldview. And that is when their philosophy, that is when their arguments and their discussions suddenly gain weight. Because you've taken in the false things. So Paul warns against that in 2.3, 2.4, and 2.8.

And philosophy is one of those things, and thinking is one of those things that we probably, as the church across the world, not necessarily Holly Hills, have done a poor job of instilling in believers. Instead we say, oh we all walk by faith, and we talk about faith, and we pretend that faith isn't tied to facts. So we need to think logically and factually. willing to hear a message about the God of love and about Christ the Redeemer, but they were taking it as just another pot to put on their collection of pots.

Fire insurance. They had a policy with all sorts of different gods and religions, and Christianity was just another insurance policy, rather than having any It wasn't the singular one truth. It was one of many good ideas. Grace plus law equals law every time. Alright, so philosophy is a key thing. The other thing is that Colossians chapter 3 emphasizes unity, and so does Colossians 2, 2-3. Unity and love and intimacy within the body. This doesn't leave room for cliques or separatists. You know, the rogue believer that's out there, out on their own. is not part of the body. What are they missing in that?

Ephesians, which obviously isn't the book we're focusing on now, Ephesians tells us that we learn about God's love through one another, from one another, and in engaging one another in chapter 3. Paul emphasizes the same pattern of love and intimacy here. When you look at your brother and sister in Christ and their position in Christ, what's the impact?

If I see Al and I say, oh, Al's a different age than me, there must be some division. Or I see Al and I think, well, Al wears different clothes than me, or Al watches different TV shows than me, or all weird things that are cultural divisors, right? That's not how the Scriptures call me to look at Al. The Scriptures ask me to look at Al as my brother in Christ, who's identified with Christ, with me, seated in the heavenlies, with me, Well, suddenly we've got a lot of things in common. And so the things that the culture and the world tells us, oh, you have these divisions, are actually irrelevant entirely.

And as your elder brother, I straighten it out sometimes. I've got to ask you, you never did say, why did you call it Knitting Clock? Ah, it's knitted because in Colossians 2, and actually I just mentioned the verse, but I didn't read it. Yeah, so we've been knit together in love and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding resulting in a true knowledge of God's mystery that is Christ himself. So Colossians is the Homek book. So there's intimacy that's there.

We should take just a minute to look at Philemon because we've got five minutes to look at Philemon. Philemon, when I was a younger believer, and I have to be honest, that was all of my history, I was a younger believer, right? So, in Philemon, it reads really different from most of Paul's epistles. The closest one it kind of is sort of like is Galatians, because it's kind of just terse and to the point and blunt.

But that's more to how the translation carries across than it is by intent. Paul was just trying to send a quick note with this slave Onesimus to say, Hey, Onesimus, you really damaged your relationship with your master. You ran away and you stole stuff. That's usually not a great way to end a relationship, right? But you weren't a believer.

But we know that Philemon was, and we know that I'm the Apostle Paul. Let me write this letter for you to give him a biblical context to receive you back. And so Paul writes this letter, and in doing so, there are some interesting ways that he delivers this content that If he had wanted to, you'll see that he had the authority to do all kinds of things and make some bold commands and statements, but several times in the letter he says, but I want you to make the right choice. He doesn't say it in those words, but his language indicates that he wants Philemon to make the right choice.

In one fourth, I thank my God always making mention of you in my prayers because I hear of your love and of the faith which you have toward the Lord Jesus and toward all the saints. And I pray that the fellowship of your faith may become effective through the knowledge of every good thing which is in you for Christ's sake. For I have come to have much joy and comfort in your love because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you, brother. Therefore, though, I have enough confidence in Christ to order you to do what is proper. Yet for love's sake, I rather appeal to you, since I am such a person as Paul, the aged and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus.

In verse 10, I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment. So here's this one that says, I could command you, but I'm appealing to you instead. I'm asking you to make the right decision. I've sent you back, in verse 12, I've sent him back to you in person.

That is sending from my very heart, whom I wish to keep with me, so that on your behalf he might minister to me in my imprisonment for the gospel." So Paul says, listen, he's still your slave, but I wish he was here with me, because he's helping me minister from in prison, and he's helping me with the gospel message. But Paul says, I'm sending him to you because he's yours. I'm sending to you because you were the one who he ran away from, and you need to receive him back.

Now, verse 11 has something I think is really important. Pat, you asked about the variations in the translations. The English doesn't do it justice. Verse 11, he says, "...who formerly was useless to you, but now is useful both to you and to me." Now, anisimus means useful, okay?

So Paul is doing a little play on words in the language of the letter, and that is actually really important. Because if you're writing this letter, and you're writing a personal letter, and you're trying to engage, and you're trying to address Philemon, doing so with a play on words is actually humor. It's letting him know that you're not writing this gruff letter. It's letting him know that you're writing in a friendly style. And so that's an interesting nuance of the letter here.

So Paul appeals that Philemon would forgive and receive Onesimus as a brother. He asks in verse 18, but if he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to my account. And I love that Paul just assumes he has an account. Charge that to my account. Okay, in verse 22, at the same time also prepare me a lodging, for I hope that through your prayer I'll be I will be given to you."

So Paul is expecting to come. So when he says, to my account, he's doing so in the context of, I'll be there. And Paul's like, if there's a financial issue, I'll resolve it when I get there. We'll make sure things are meet, our ends are met. But then he says, but make sure you set up lodging for me, get lodging ready, because I'm coming.

So this church hadn't met Paul before, but it sounds like they're going to hopefully have the chance to meet Paul. And Paul is going to come and stay with Philemon if he can. And so there is a friendliness in this letter and there's an intimacy in this letter that is on the surface you see, wow, there's a slave issue, but that's not the full focus of Paul's writing. And he's intimate and he is familiar as he addresses Philemon.

That was the second bell, so I think we're supposed to stop. Any thoughts, questions, things I could have said differently? Alright, let's close in prayer. Heavenly Father, we ask that you would just draw our hearts and minds to things above this week as we continue to walk in your spirit and gather together and worship you. We ask that As we look at the various topics that are there in the letters we looked at this morning that we would Have your spirit open our eyes to the heavenly perspective on who you are the heavenly perspective on Philosophy and the heavenly perspective on who we are and you together as a body Lord we thank you that Paul wrote this private letter and that we have it in our epistle that there's a a familiarity and a love there and a desire for things to be above board and done rightly because of you, that you're the motive. And we just thank you and we praise you in Jesus' name. Amen.