9 Yet for love's sake I rather beseech thee, being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ. 10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds: 11 Which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me: 12 Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels: 13 Whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have ministered unto me in the bonds of the gospel: 14 But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly. 15 For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; 16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord? [for Onesimus. 17 If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself. 18 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account; 19 I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it: albeit I do not say to thee, how thou owest unto me even thine own self besides. 20 Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord: refresh my bowels in the Lord. 21 Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say. 22 But withal prepare me also a lodging for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you. 23 There salute thee Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus; 24 Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellow-labourers. 25 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen. (A) Written from Rome to Philemon, by Onesimus, a servant. EXPOSITION. (A) Ver. 1-25. Paul intercedes with Philemon on the behalf of his slave Onesimus.-Philemon appears to have been a converted Gentile, living at Colosse, who became a member, and perhaps a minister, of the Christian church there, of which a branch, at least, met in his house. Onesimus was one of his slaves, who, having taken disgust (as is supposed) from some unknown cause, ran away from his master, and fled to Rome, where St. Paul was then a prisoner. Being providentially brought under his ministry, he was thereby con verted to Christianity, and in consequence became known to Paul, with whom he seems to have remained a short time, till he was fully satisfied of his conversion. He then sent him back with this conciliatory epistle to his master, in which he affectionately entreats Philemon to receive him as his (Paul's) own son. In introducing his request to Philemon, NOTES. Ver. 9. Paul the aged.-Mackn. calculates, that at this time he was sixty years old, and perhaps, through his many sufferings, appeared much older. And now also a prisoner.-See Note on ver. 1. Ver. 10. Onesimus, whom, &c.-Mackn. translates this more literally, "My son, whom I begat in my bonds (even) Onesimus:" and he remarks, that placing Onesimus' name in the end of this sentence [as in the original] has a fine effect, by keeping the reader in suspense." Ver. 12. Sent again-i. e. sent back again.Mine own bowels-i. e. the fruit of his body; speaking of him as his own son. Compare Isa. xlviii. 19; xlix. 1. PHILEMON. EXPOSITION-Continued. the apostle significantly calls himself the prisoner of Jesus Christ, exciting thereby all his sympathetic feelings towards him, both as a prisoner and a martyr; uniting with his own name that of the amiable young Timothy, as it were to second his request. He then addresses the "beloved Apphia," probably Philemon's consort, and "Archippus," whom he calls "our fellowsoldier," as engaged also in the Christian warfare, and perhaps (as Dr. Lightfoot suggests) Philemon's son; Paul thereby wishing to unite their mediation with his own, on the behalf of the unhappy fugitive, who was bearer of the epistle. The apostle then mentions the interest he had taken in Philemon's welfare, making mention of him continually in his prayers to God, and rejoicing, at the same time, in what he heard of his friend's benevolence and compassion. All these circumstances are ingeniously wrought into the introduction to his request; yet he gives him to understand, that he might have spoken in stronger language-that, as an apostle, he might have enjoined on him what he now only solicited. And who was the petitioner? "Paul the aged, a prisoner of Jesus Christ." And for whom did he petition? His "son Onesimus "-his own bowels," as he afterwards expresses it. And what had he done? He had ab. sconded, and doubtless with some of his master's property, for else he could hardly have reached Rome. And how does Paul meet this charge? "If he (Onesimus) have wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account: I Paul have written it with mine own hand; I will repay it." "In this beautiful passage (says Dr. Macknight) there is a group of the most affecting arguments closely crowded together. On the one hand, we have Philemon's own reputation for goodness; his friendship to the apostle; his respect for his character; reverence for his age; compassion for his bonds; and, at the same time, an insinuation of that obe dience which Philemon owed to him as an apostle. On the other hand, we have Onesimus's repentance and return to virtue; his profession of the Christian religion, notwithstanding the evils to which it exposed him; and his being the object of his spiritual father's tender affection. In short, every word contains an argument." Finally, the apostle delicately hints, that as he had been the honoured instrument of the conversion of Philemon, as well as of his slave Onesimus, he had some claim upon him on the score of gratitude; for it certainly becomes us to love and respect those whom God honours by making them the medium of his benefits, though all must, ultimately, be referred to him. It is on this principle the apostle adds, "Howbeit I do not say, how thou owest me also thine own self besides." As our parents have unquestionable claims upon our gratitude as the instruments of our first birth, so ministers, who have been employed by Providence as the means of our new birth, or regeneration, have doubtless large demands upon us of respect and love. In the close of this epistle the apostle intimates a confident persuasion of being released, and being enabled to visit Colosse, which shows that it must have been written before his second epistle to Timothy, when he was waiting for death and martyrdom. It is generally dated in A.D. 63, about a year before his first to Timothy, and two years before his martyrdom. This epistle has been much admired as a specimen of friendly correspondence. Comparing it to one of Pliny's, on an occasion somewhat similar (ib. ix. epis. 21), Dr. Doddridge says, "though penned by one who was reckoned to excel in the epistolary style, and though it has many beauties, it will be found, by persons of taste, much inferior to this animated composition of the apostle Paul;" the chief excellency, however, of this (as of all Paul's Epistles) lies in the vein of Christian sympathy and piety which runs throughout the whole. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL the Apostle to the HEBREWS. INTRODUCTION. THOUGH St. Paul's name is not prefixed to this Epistle,* there are many and cogent reasons for ascribing it to him as the author, under the guidance of the Spirit of inspi ration. Of these we shall give a very brief outline from the summary of Mr. M‘Lean, and refer to fuller statements in the margin below.† 1. It can admit of no doubt, that those to whom the Epistle was more immediately directed must have known the writer of it, as himself plainly intimates, when he says, they had "compassion on him in his bonds," and begs an interest in their prayers. (Chap. x. 34; xiii. 18, 19.) He also speaks of his brother Timothy, and proposes to visit them with him, on his enlargement (chap. xiii. 23), which certainly implies that he was a person to them well known. 2. From the author's style and manner of reasoning, and the method of handling his subject; such as his overflowing of sentiment, briefly expressed-abrupt transitions and returns to his subject-elliptical expressions-reasonings addressed to the thoughts and latent objections of his readers-his practical exhortations, &c. all which are perfectly in Paul's manner of writing. 3. From similar sentiments and expressions in this to those of Paul's other writings, several of which we shall notice as we proceed; and from the interpretation of certain passages of the Old Testament which correspond with the interpretations given by him in his other Epistles, and in the Acts, but are not noticed by any other writer of the New Testament. Also from the use of some terms and expressions peculiar to himself, which we shall mention in our Exposition and Notes, as we proceed. 4. The apostle Peter, who wrote to the believing Hebrews, scattered throughout the world (1 Epis. i. 1), speaks of Paul as having also written to them, which could only be * Though St. Paul's name is prefixed by our translators, it is certainly without authority, and therefore omitted by Dr. John Owen, Dr. Doddridge, and others, who call it, more properly, "The Epistle to the Hebrews." + See M'Lean's preface to his Paraphrase, &c. on the Hebrews-Dr. Macknight's ditto-Dr. Joha Owen's Exercitations, as abridged by Dr. E. Williams, Nos. 1 to 3-and Mr. Horne's Introd. to a Crit. Study of the Scriptures, vol. iv. part 2, chap. iii. ¿ xvi. INTRODUCTION in this Epistle, in which, as well as in some other of his Epistles, is found the sentiment here mentioned, that "the long suffering of our Lord is salvation”—for "to them that look for him shall he appear the second time, without sin unto salvation.” (Ch. ix. 28.) And whereas he mentions, that in Paul's Epistles were "some things hard to be understood;" Paul himself mentions, in this very Epistle (chap. v. 11), that he had " many things to say to them hard to be uttered," or, as Doddridge translates it, "hard to be understood," on account of the "dulness" of their apprehensions. 5. The current of antiquity is on the same side, though not without some exceptions, for Tertullian ascribed it to Barnabas, and others to Luke, or to Clement of Rome. The last writer, however (who was a fellow-labourer with Paul), has, according to Eusebius, several expressions and sentences apparently taken from it, though it must be confessed he does not mention Paul's name. St. Jerom, in the fourth century, states that the Epistle to the Hebrews was received as the apostle Paul's, "not only by the eastern, but by all the ancient churches." It is true, indeed, that, at the period here referred to, the Church of Rome (such is her infallibility!) had rejected it from the Canon Jerom, however," adhered to the authority of the ancient writers, who (says he) frequently cite it as a canonical and sacred epistle." Lardner says, “It is evident that this Epistle was generally received, in ancient times, by those Christians who used the Greek language, and lived in the eastern parts of the Roman Empire. In particular, Clement of Alexandria, before the end of the second century, received this Epistle as Paul's, and quoted it as his frequently, without any doubt or hesitation :"-and so did Origen. Justice requires us to name the reasons of this Epistle being partially rejected, and the answers usually returned to them. They are chiefly three. 1. The want of the author's name: but this is not decisive, for the apostle John has not prefixed his name to either of his three Epistles; and there is, in Paul's case, this reason to be given-that being avowedly the apostle of the Gentiles, his name might prejudice the Epistle among the Jews, particularly in Palestine, to whom it seems more immediately addressed.-2. It is said to be written in too pure and classical Greek for St. Paul, comparing it with his other writings; it has, therefore, been supposed that he wrote in Hebrew, and employed Luke or Clement to translate it. There is, however, no trace nor probability of a Hebrew original; and, as Paul commonly employed an amanuensis (2 Thess. iii. 17, Note), might we not account for any variation of style by supposing, that he dictated in Hebrew to some person of superior classical taste, who used his own words under the inspection and revision of the inspired-Apostle? After all that has been said, however, of the style of this Epistle, Dr. Mucknight, who was no mean judge, challenges any one to prove, that he who wrote the Epistles to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and to Philemon, especially the former, was not quite equal to the composition of this also. A third objection to this Epistle being St. Paul's has been made from some of the sentiments being thought not quite consistent with the apostolic character; but if we are to judge the Scriptures instead of being judged by them, what becomes of their inspiration? and of what use are they to us? Much has been said on the question, to what Hebrews was this Epistle addressedthose in Judea, or those who were (as Peter expresses it) strangers in all the surrounding countries? From what is stated under our first head, we have no doubt but that it was addressed primarily to the first class, but certainly not to the exclusion of the latter, nor, indeed, of any persons, Jews or Gentiles, who might be willing to receive INTRODUCTION. instruction from it: for the Holy Scriptures are of general concernment, "and worthy of all acceptation." As to the date of this Epistle, we have, in our Table (page 469), placed it in A.D. 62 or 63 that is, near the end of one, or the beginning of the other; when, as appears by chap. xiii. 23, Paul was expecting to be set at liberty, and projecting a journey to Judea. The general argument and design of the Epistle is the next inquiry which comes before us. We do not mean to analyse it systematically, for Paul was by no means cool, systematical writer: his heart went into every thing he wrote; and he never checked himself when he found that an erratic thought led him to Christ, and to advance his glory. But what we mean here to attempt is, a general sketch of the principles on which the book is written, with a rationale, or sketch of the Mosaic ritual, which we shall extract and condense from the pious and ingenious Mr. Lowman. "The general argument of the Epistle to the Hebrews (says that able writer) ist show the excellency of the Christian above former Revelations; in particular above the law given by Moses to the seed of Abraham. The Apostle therefore shows, first, the superior dignity and high pre-eminence of the Messiah's person above all persons by whom God had ever before spoken-neither Moses, nor angels excepted: for, when God brought in his first begotten into the world, he saith, Let all the angels of God worship him!...... "The Apostle next proceeds to show the superior authority of the Messiah in his office, in particular above Moses, by whom the law was given: a reverence for which law was a principal prejudice of the Jews against receiving the Gospel. the Messiah was counted worthy of more glory than Moses. .... (Chap. iii. 3.) .... He shows "Our Apostle carries on his argument, and says, that Christ has revealed a much better covenant, containing greater promises and blessings. The revelation by Moses promised the rest of Canaan, and intimated another rest [that] remained for the people of God. This rest, and the promise of entering into it, are clearly revealed by the Messiah, [in whom] we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God. "Having mentioned this office of the Messiah, as a High Priest, he takes occasion to treat this part of his subject more at large...... He therefore carefully lays down the true notion of a priest, that he is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices :-that every one called to this office must be called of God, as was Aaron; that the Messiah was thus called, as God said unto him, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec-an higher order than that of Aaron-in which the same person was both priest and king. Catholic, not confined to one family, but fitly represented a priesthood, in which all the nations of the earth should be blessed' by so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant. .... ...... This order was [in which he "In pursuing this argument, the Apostle gives a short but judicious account of the sanctuary and temple, and the manner of the worship there; traces] an analogy and conformity between the ritual of the law and the person [and office] of the Messiah; that the temple, sanctuary, Shechinah, priesthood, offer ings, sacrifices, and the whole [ritual] were figures for the time then present of the future good things which were to come in the after-days of Messiah; these were all to be fulfilled in that time of reformation, but all to be answered in much greater perfection, (See chap. viii. to x.) |