Our Duty To The Passive Slave Analysis

The Reverend Kazlitt Arvine summarized this line of argument in his discourse, Our Duty to the Fugitive Slave. Arvine asserted the following: “Under what circumstances he left Philemon, we do not know, nor do we know the precise character of the relation between them. It appears that they dealt with each other in the way of debt and credit; and that Onesimus had left Philemon with his accounts unsettled, and so perhaps was his debtor.” Arvine’s reason for suggesting Onesimus was Philemon’s debtor is not explicitly stated at any point in his argument. However, his reason for suggesting this scenario was undoubtedly rooted in the fact that verse eighteen of Philemon suggests Onesimus owed Philemon a debt. In verse eighteen it states, “If he

None at all.” Contemporary biblical scholarship on Philemon generally accepts that Onesimus was not Philemon’s debtor, thereby debunking the second half of Arvine’s argument. Most biblical commentators speak of Onesimus as being Philemon’s slave. For example, Morna D. Hooker writes that, “he [Onesimus] was or had once been a slave.” Frank Thielman points out that, “In his letter to Philemon, Paul urges the reconciliation of a master to his slave.” John MacArthur notes that, “Philemon also owned at least one slave, a man named Onesimus.” Even though contemporary biblical scholars appear to agree that Onesimus was a slave, this does not mean that the exact

Paul, being a friend of Philemon, would have been in a prime position to help Onesimus. In this case, under Roman law Onesimus would not have been a fugitive slave since his intention was to seek help from a friend of his master and not to escape from his master never to return. The first piece of evidence that favors this scenario is found in verse eighteen of Philemon which states, “If he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to my account.” Scholar Marianne Meye Thompson notes that Paul’s willingness to repay Philemon for any wrong Onesimus had done suggests that this verse refers, “to something other than actually running away, which implies that running away was not Onesmius’s primary offense.” Scholar Frank Thielman notes, based on verse eighteen, that Onesimus had “probably made a mistake, whether, intentional or not, that cost Philemon some money.” If Onesimus had in fact committed a wrong, such as mishandling Philemon’s finances in some way as suggested by the language of verse eighteen, then he would certainly have had reason to seek out a friend of his master, such as Paul, to mediate between himself and Philemon. In Roman society, fugitive slaves could be beat, put in chains, branded, and even executed. In fact, even if a slave was a not a fugitive he was still