Does Philemon still have meaning for Christians today?
Het Filemon vandag nog iets vir ons te sê?
Departement Nuwe Testament. Universiteit van Suid-Afrika. Pretoria. E-pos: jhrob@telkomsa.net
Hierdie artikel wil aantoon dat dit in Filemon ten diepste gaan om ortopraksis, by name die onderlinge gemeenskap van gelowiges in die kerk, met as onderbou die aspekte van onderlinge liefde en respek, gasvryheid en missionêre betrokkenheid. Die brief is uitsluitlik 'n menslike dokument. Dit handel oor die menslike vraagstuk van hoe 'n Christen sy ontloopte slaaf wat ondertussen ook 'n Christen geword het, behoort te behandel. Eienaar en slaaf het immers broers in Christus geword. Paulus rig daarom 'n versoek dat Filemon aan die slaaf, Onesimus, wat nou na sy baas teruggestuur word, dieselfde gasvryheid sal betoon as wat hy aan Paulus sou betoon indien dit hy was wat Filemon kom besoek het. Die versoek word gerig in die liggaam van die brief wat formeel as 'n antieke versoekskrif gekonsipieer is met die gepaardgaande formele eienskappe daarvan.
Wat die betekenis van die brief vir die kerk in die moderne samelewing betref, is die uitdaging dat nie gepoog moet word om etiese kwessies deur 'n stryery oor die interpretasie van losstaande tekste op te los nie, maar dat eerder op die boodskap van 'n boek as 'n geheel gekonsentreer sal word. Dit geld ook vir elke ander Bybelboek.
The article purports to show that the main thrust of Philemon lies with orthopraxis, in casu the mutual fellowship of believers in the church, underscored by mutual love and respect, hospitality and missionary enterprise. The letter to Philemon is a very human document, dealing with the very human question of how a Christian should treat his runaway slave who has recently converted to Christianity. Owner and slave have become brothers in Christ. Paul, therefore, makes a request that Philemon should show the same hospitality to Onesimus, who is being sent back to his master, that he would show to Paul himself should he come to visit. The request is made in the body of the letter which is formally framed as an ancient petition, showing the typical features of the form.
As to the contextual meaning of the text in a modern church situation, the challenge of this letter (but also that of every book of the Bible), is to stop trying to solve ethical questions by bickering over the interpretation of proof texts and rather concentrate on the message of the book as a whole. This should result in completely new answers to old and seemingly insoluble questions.
ABBOTT-SMITH, G. 1973. A manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament. Edinburgh: Clark. [ Links ]
ATKINS, R. 2010. Contextual interpretation of the letter to Philemon in the United States. (In Tolmie, D.F., ed. Philemon in perspective: interpreting a Pauline letter. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 205-221. [ Links ])
DE VILLIERS, P.G.R. 2010. Love in the letter to Philemon. (In Tolmie, D.F., ed. Philemon in perspective: interpreting a Pauline letter. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 181-203. [ Links ])
DEISSMANN, A. 1923. Licht vom Osten: Das Neue Testament und die neuentdeckten Texte der hellenistisch-römischen Welt. Tübingen: Mohr. [ Links ]
DU PLESSIS, I.J. 2006. How Christians can survive in a hostile social-economic environment: Paul's mind concerning difficult social conditions in the letter to Philemon. (In Van der Watt, J.G., ed. Identity, ethics and ethos in the New Testament. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 387-413. [ Links ])
DU TOIT, A.B. 2009a. New Testament exegesis in theory and practice. (In Du Toit, A.B., ed. Focusing on the message: New Testament hermeneutics, exegesis and methods. Pretoria: Protea Book House. p. 107-152. [ Links ])
DU TOIT, A.B. 2009b. Exploring textual structure: discourse analysis. (In Du Toit, A.B., ed. Focusing on the message: New Testament hermeneutics, exegesis and methods. Pretoria: Protea Book House. p. 217-265. [ Links ])
DUNN, J.D.G. 1996. The epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: a commentary on the Greek text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [ Links ]
GNILKA, J. 1982. Der Philemonbrief. Freiburg: Herder. [ Links ]
GRÄBE, P.J. 1991. Ontvang jou slaaf soos 'n broer! Die etiese reikwydte en ekklesiologiese implikasies van die verbondenheid aan Jesus Christus. (In Roberts, J.H., Vorster, W.S., Vorster, J.N. & Van der Watt, J.G., reds. Teologie in konteks. Halfway House: Orion. p. 427-439. [ Links ])
KIM, C-H. 1972. Form and function of the familiar Greek letter of recommendation. Missoula: Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). [ Links ]
MULLINS, T.Y. 1962. Petition as a literary form. Novum Testamentum, 5:46-54. [ Links ]
RIDDERBOS, H.N. 1999. Jan Ridderbos - mens. Kampen: Vereniging van Oud-Studenten van de THUK. (Kamper miniaturen 4. [ Links ])
ROBERTS, J.H. 1983. Struktuur en betekenis van Filemon. Theologia evangelica, 16(3):58-69. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 1986a. Transitional techniques to the letter body in the corpus Paulinum. (In Petzer, J.H. & Hartin, P.J., eds. A South African perspective on the New Testament: essays by South African New Testament scholars presented to Bruce Manning Metzger during his visit to South Africa in 1985. Leiden: Brill. p. 187-201. [ Links ])
ROBERTS, J.H. 1986b. Pauline transitions to the letter body. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 73:93-99 (= BEThL). [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 1986c. The eschatological transitions to the Pauline letter body. Neotestamentica, 20:29-35. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 1987. Filemon in diskussie: enkele hoogtepunte in die stand van sake. Scriptura, 21:24-50. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 1992a. Die brief aan Filemon. Kaapstad: Lux Verbi.BM. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 1992b. Vryheid, gelykheid en broederskap in die brief aan Filemon: die evangelie as maatskappy-omvormende krag. Scriptura, 9A:241-258. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 2009a. Skrifbeskouing en Skrifgebruik. Dl. 1. http://teo.co.za Datum van gebruik: 13 Feb. 2009. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 2009b. Skrifbeskouing en Skrifgebruik. Dl. 2. http://teo.co.za Datum van gebruik: 20 Feb. 2009. [ Links ]
ROBERTS, J.H. 2009c. Skrifbeskouing en Skrifgebruik. Dl. 3. http://teo.co.za Datum van gebruik: 26 Feb. 2009. [ Links ]
SNYMAN, A.H. 1991. Discourse analysis: a semantic discourse analysis of the letter to Philemon. (In Hartin, P.J. & Petzer, J.H., eds. Text and interpretation: new approaches in critisism of the New Testament. Leiden: Brill. p. 83-99. [ Links ])
TOLMIE, D.F. 2009. Onesimus - 'n wegloopslaaf? Oor die ontstaansituasie van die Filemonbrief. Verbum et ecclesia, 30(1):279-301. [ Links ]
TOLMIE, D.F. 2010. Tendencies in the research on the letter to Philemon since 1980. (In Tolmie, D.F., ed. Philemon in perspective: interpreting a Pauline letter. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 1-27. [ Links ])
VORSTER, J.N. 2009. Rhetorical criticism. (In Du Toit, A.B., ed. Focusing on the message: New Testament hermeneutics, exegesis and methods. Pretoria: Protea Book House. p. 505-578. [ Links ])
WEIMA, J.A.D. 2010. Paul's persuasive prose: an epistolary analysis of Philemon. (In Tolmie, D.F., ed. Philemon in perspective: interpreting a Pauline letter. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 29-60. [ Links ])
WOLTER, M. 2010. The letter to Philemon as ethical counterpart of Paul's doctrine of justification. (In Tolmie, D.F., ed. Philemon in perspective: interpreting a Pauline letter. Berlin: De Gruyter. p. 169-179. [ Links ])