I’ve been through the little book of Philemon a few times in the past and I’ve heard different teachers draw different principles from it. Fellowship. A Biblical perspective on slavery. Things such as those. This morning when I read it something different caught my attention. It has to do with the nature of the New Covenant.

Philemon is a short, personal letter from Paul to a man named Philemon on behalf of an apparent runaway slave of his named Onesimus who has become a Christian under Paul’s ministry. Paul feels compelled to send Onesimus back to Philemon to right the wrong done. What stood out to me this time through was how Paul does that and what his expectations are. He tells Philemon “though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do what is required, yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you.” (9) Paul has this expectation that Philemon will choose to do what is right and just “of your own free will.” (14) ¹Interesting that my print version of the ESV says “free will” but the on line version says “of your own accord”. Paul doesn’t seem to think that he needs to wield his Apostolic authority to get Philemon to do the right thing. ²Some take Paul’s mention if his authority in verse 9 as a kind of veiled threat. I used to read it that way. I suppose it could be, but I’m kind of doubtful. Threats don’t seem to fit with Paul’s attitude in this letter.  Paul is trusting that Philemon’s heart is such that he will not act as a Roman slaveholder who has been wronged, but as a Christian toward a brother. In short, Paul doesn’t rely on law but on grace.

The nature of the New Covenant is not that there are some, many or most members who are full of the Holy Spirit, but all. (Rom 5:5; 8:14-16) We have all been sealed with the Holy Spirit. (2Co 1:22; Eph 1:13, 4:30) Our hearts have been circumcised. (Rom 2:29, Phil 3:3, Col 2:11) Because of this there is a rather different approach to how wrongs are dealt with than we see in the Old Covenant. Yes, there were cases where grace was exhibited. Joseph and his brothers comes to mind. But there were times when tribes would war over a wrong. I think of how Israel nearly attacked the tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manesseh when they erected an altar of remembrance just after the conquest of the Promised Land in Joshua 22. Or the horrible story of how Israel waged war on the tribe of Benjamin for the atrocity that took place at Gibeah in Judges 19-20.

There are those who prefer to flat line redemptive history so that there really isn’t any difference between the Old and New Covenants. They will stress more of the positive examples from the Old Testament and remind us that there are those in the New Covenant who are covenant breakers likewise. Admittedly, the church was not a state in the New Covenant as Israel was before the Babylonian captivity. That may be but the attitude, approach and method of conflict resolution seem to operate out of very different expectations in the New Covenant.