Talk:Epistle to Philemon

Untitled
I've re-written this. I didn't think an entry based on a 1890's encylopedia really did it justice. I notice some of the other New Testament entries have a simmilar problem. --Doc Glasgow 18:46, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is it possible to clarify the phrasing?

 * "There is no way of knowing what happened to Onesimus after the letter. Ignatius of Antioch mentions an Onesimus as Bishop of Ephesus in the early second century; as Onesimus was not an uncommon slave name, some commentators have suggested a connection between the slave mentioned by Paul and this Bishop of Ephesus."

Is the import here meant to be that there is a likely connection because the name is not common (or in other words "is uncommon" rather than "was not an uncommon" name for a slave)? Or are we to understand that only _some_ commentators have suggested this connection, and there is no accepted consensus on this point, because the name is so common, and thus the matter far from conclusive? -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 14:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Apostolic authority
I'm wondering about the sentence, in the lede, which states in part; "Paul does not identify himself as an apostle with authority..." I'm looking at Philemon 1:8 where Paul says he could command Philemon to do what he requires but chooses not to. This seems similar to 1 Thessalonians 2:6 where his apostleship is made clearer. Philemon 1:14 suggests Paul could compel him. I wonder if we should tweak that statement a bit while still maintaining the emphasis on the brotherly relationship. Just a thought. JodyBtalk 14:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Epistle to the Romans which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)