A Deeper Reading of Paul's Epistle to Philemon

          This article is a follow-up to an earlier one in which I argued for an allegorical reading of Philemon, which you can find HERE. In this piece I evaluate my earlier claim, and also consider alternate readings of Paul's Epistle.

Evaluating An Allegorical reading of Philemon

Several years ago, I applied my own allegorical reading to Paul’s Epistle to Philemon.  I did this without any real understanding that allegory is just one “sense” in which scripture can be read, and moreover that there are different types of allegory within the overall “spiritual” sense.  In order to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of my allegorical reading of Philemon, I will employ the four senses of scripture as outlined in classical (medieval) exegetical thought.  In the process, I will strive to answer the following three questions:  What other meanings have been (or can be) gleaned from the text? Do the other senses or readings of scripture play a meaningful role in the text? Finally, does my allegorical reading of Philemon lead me to neglect certain dimensions of the text?  In answer to these questions, I assert the following: First, that the most common meaning that has been gleaned from the text generally relies on a literal sense of the text.  Philemon is most often held to be exactly what it appears to be on the surface: a letter from an apostle to a Christian slaveholder, designed to persuade him to be reconciled to a runaway slave.  However, more recent interpretations point out that Paul may have intended a moral reading concerning the equality of Christian brotherhood.  Second, while the literal sense of the text has been accepted in the past, newer commentators have posited that the moral sense ought to be applied to the text instead (or at least as well) (as in the case mentioned above).  Third, an exclusively allegorical interpretation of Philemon has some drawbacks, including the fact that it may lead one to neglect or overlook the valuable moral sense of the text.

How Gospel Legalism is Holding Latter-day Saints Back

WARNING:  This post contains several mentions of a word and subject which is probably unsuitable for children.

I spend a great deal of time writing, speaking, and answering questions about religion, so I tend to encounter the whole spectrum of doubts and problems (as well as the best that we have to offer) as I get to know people across the world and the church.  As I have interacted with other Latter-day Saints on questions of religion, I have noticed a certain tendency that I find especially disturbing.  Specifically, I have noticed that some Latter-day Saints like to ask some variation of the “Is [blank] a sin?” question, which is usually accompanied by phrases like “It isn’t expressly forbidden by the general authorities,” or, “it isn’t spelled out in the scriptures (or the policy or manuals of the Church),” with the implication that unless it is spelled out explicitly as a sin, then it must be OK to do.  I have also noticed that the same people often also ask about what the minimum requirements are for any given commandment in order to get into heaven, or avoid hell. These individuals tend to be preoccupied with what exactly constitutes a sin in the eyes of God and the church. This attitude can only be called legalism, and it can be very dangerous.

“Legalism:  Noun.  usage: strict conformity to the letter of the law rather than its spirit.”  (http://thesaurus.infoplease.com/legalism, n. d.)

Case in point, the following question was posted in a Facebook discussion group for Latter-day Saints in order to solicit responses for a podcast:

“I got into a downright weird conversation with someone on whether or not the LDS Church teaches masturbation as breaking the Law of Chastity.

His defense was that there isn't a section in the Aaronic Priesthood Manual or some such work (you know - the Fifth Standard Work) about masturbation and so it isn't a sin” (Joe Rawlins, Facebook post, April 9, 2015).

In response, one person stated that she has never viewed a proscription against masturbation to be part of the law growing up, and that she still doesn’t, and then she posted a link to the Wikipedia definition of the Law of Chastity (as taught by the LDS church).

Another person posted a talk from President Spencer W. Kimball which specifically stated that the law of chastity forbids “all sexual relations outside marriage,” including masturbation, to which the first person replied that she did not see anything expressly forbidding the practice in the youth booklet.

Several individuals argued back and forth about whether or not pornography addiction is an actual or fictional condition, and others made statements criticizing the church’s stance on the subject as being a relic of Victorian era hang-ups about sex, and/or misconceptions about the sin of Onan (as it is often referred to) in the Bible, even going so far as to post a link to an article from Wiktionary defining onanism (see Genesis chapter 38 if you really care to know more).  There was also a protracted argument among several individuals concerning the severity of the sin, and its ranking in comparison to the severity of certain other sins.  Of course the crux of the entire argument had to do with the fact that teachings forbidding the practice of masturbation are not clearly spelled out in scripture.

This whole argument is an example of the irritating legalism that has crept into the attitude of many church members:  "If it isn't specifically spelled out, then I don't have to do it, and if it isn't expressly forbidden then I can do as I please."  Or, more subtly, ranking or defining sins so that some seem less severe than others, or finding ways to fulfill the bare letter of the law without concern for the spirit of the law.  Legalism is a problem for members of the church because it can cause us to miss the whole point of the gospel (and commandment keeping) and the atonement of Jesus Christ, and cause us to become lost in a maze of petty bickering over tiny points of the law. Worse, "by looking beyond the mark" (see Jacob 4:14) we may cause ourselves (and others) to "stumble" and "fall" because of confusion over what is and isn't sin.

Why Gethsemane is as Important as Calvary

Q:  Do you really think Jesus bled from every pore, or do you think it’s symbolic?

A:  I believe that Christ DID, in fact, literally bleed from every pore. The reality of this event has been confirmed by the Book of Mormon and other Latter-day scriptures, and modern prophets have also borne witness to the truth of Christ’s bleeding from every pore in the Garden of Gethsemane.

Mosiah 3:7  And lo, he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people.

Even Christ himself is recorded bearing witness to the reality of His suffering in the garden:

D&C 19:17-19  For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;  Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink—Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.

It has also been demonstrated scientifically that the human body can indeed bleed from the pores when subjected to enough stress, as evidenced by these medical references:

"Those who assert that it is impossible for a body to sweat blood are not acquainted with the facts. The possibility of this phenomenon was known to the ancients...And if one will take the trouble to consult a modern medical dictionary under hemathidrosis or hematidrosis, reference will be found to the phenomenon. Thus in The American Illustrated Medical Dictionary (1947, Phila.) we find this entry:  'Hematidrosis—The sweating of blood or of fluid mixed with blood. In Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary (1955, Phila.) occurs this reference:  Hemathidrosis, hematidrosis—Condition of sweating blood.'  In a much older medical work we find this interesting note: 'Haematidrosis is a functional disturbance of the sweat apparatus whereby blood, through diapedesis into the coils and ducts from their surrounding vascular plexus, becomes mingled with the sweat and appears with it upon the normal skin, producing the phenomenon of so-called "bloody sweat." It is an exceedingly rare occurrence, ....' (C. T. Dade in Reference Handbook of the Medical Sciences, IV, 466. 1902.)  Thus it is clear that the sweating of blood can occur, even if rarely" (Dr. Sydney B. Sperry, Answers to Book of Mormon Questions, 139-140).

However, physical suffering was only part of what the Savior experienced during His sojourn in Gethsemane.

“It was not physical pain, nor mental anguish alone, that caused Him to suffer such torture as to produce an extrusion of blood from every pore; but a spiritual agony of soul such as only God was capable of experiencing. No other man, however great his powers of physical or mental endurance, could have suffered so; for his human organism would have succumbed, [producing] unconsciousness and welcome oblivion. In that hour of anguish Christ met and overcame all the horrors that Satan, ‘the prince of this world’ could inflict…In some manner, actual and terribly real though to man incomprehensible, the Savior took upon Himself the burden of the sins of mankind from Adam to the end of the world” (James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, 3rd ed. [1916], 613).

The Hidden Atonement Allegory in Philemon

A Verse-by-Verse Break-down of the Atonement Symbolism in Paul's Epistle to Philemon

al·le·go·ry/ˈaləˌgôrē/
Noun:  1) A story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.
            2)  The genre to which such works belong.

The epistle of Paul to Philemon contains an incredibly rich allegory concerning the power of Christ to reconcile man to God through his atonement.  I feel that applying an allegorical interpretation to this letter reveals a particularly significant insight into the apostle Paul’s fully developed understanding of and teachings about the gospel (and the atonement) of Jesus Christ.

I present here a breakdown of Paul’s epistle to Philemon, with all 25 verses broken down verse-by-verse and presented in bold type.  Many (but not all) of these verses are also accompanied by scriptures that support and expound on the principle being taught in Philemon as well as by my own commentary (in italics).  I have provided all of this in order to make plain the allegorical meaning behind the text.

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO

PHILEMON

1  PAUL, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer,

The Zondervan NIV study bible has this to say in its introduction to the epistle to Philemon:

    “Paul wrote this letter to Philemon, a believer in Colosse who, along with others, was a slave owner...One of his slaves, Onesimus, had apparently stolen from him (cf. v. 18) and then run away, which under Roman law was punishable by death.  But Onesimus met Paul [apparently during Paul’s incarceration in Rome] and through his ministry became a Christian (see v. 10).  Now he was willing to return to his master, and Paul writes this appeal to ask that he [Onesimus] be accepted as a Christian brother ( v.17).”

2  And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:

2 Corinthians 5:20  Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

Understand that from this point on Paul is speaking in the person of Christ-that is, he represents Christ-both in the sense that as an apostle Paul is an actual representative of Christ, and more particularly that Paul figuratively represents Christ for the purposes of this allegory.  Philemon in turn represents God, the injured party who has the right (according to justice) to seek redress for Onesimus’ transgressions, which in this case (and for the sake of the allegory) means death.  Onesimus represents fallen man, or in other words, you and I.  He (and we) has become estranged from the Master through transgression, and without intervention (to wit: mediation) from another Onesimus (and we) have no hope of reconciliation with his (our) estranged master and therefore must face death as the rightful penalty for his (our) crimes.  Fortunately for Onesimus (and us), Paul does intercede and (in his role as Christ) pleads for mercy on behalf of Onesimus and beseeches Philemon to accept him back into his household once again on the condition that Paul will pay Onesimus’ debt.  Paul cites the debt which he merits from Philemon in order to incite him to have mercy on Onesimus.  Rome represents the fallen world, and Philemon’s home represents heaven (specifically God’s throne).

Remember:

Paul: Christ
Philemon: God
Onesimus: You and I
Rome: The fallen world
Philemon’s household: Heaven/God’s household and throne
Death: Hell/consequences of sin

Is it a sin if I don’t go to church? Am I a bad person if I do not attend church regularly?

We have been commanded to attend church and to worship God on the Lord’s day in many places throughout the scriptures. One of the Big Ten is to keep the Sabbath day holy. The author of Hebrews (v. Hebrews 10:23-25) enjoins us as Christians to:

...Hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Paul goes on to exhort us to: Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. (Colossians 3:16)

A more specific set of instructions is contained in Doctrine and Covenants section 59:7-12 where the Lord commands:

Thou shalt thank the Lord thy God in all things. Thou shalt offer a sacrifice unto the Lord thy God in righteousness, even that of a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And that thou mayest more fully keep thyself unspotted from the world, thou shalt go to the house of prayer and offer up thy sacraments upon my holy day; For verily this is a day appointed unto you to rest from your labors, and to pay thy devotions unto the Most High; Nevertheless thy vows shall be offered up in righteousness on all days and at all times; But remember that on this, the Lord’s day, thou shalt offer thine oblations and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins unto thy brethren, and before the Lord.

Just because we have been commanded to attend church doesn’t mean that you should attend church just because you are afraid that you will be punished for skipping church. Compulsory church attendance defeats the purpose of going to church in the first place. I have found that there is a tendency among members of the LDS church to equate regular attendance with righteousness. This is often accompanied by the implicit conclusion that those who do not attend church regularly must therefore be wicked in some way. While it is assuredly true that those who are truly converted (and who therefore are striving to be as righteous as a flawed mortal can be) tend to attend church as regularly as is within their power (out of a sincere love and devotion to God), it does not necessarily follow that those who attend church regularly are, by default association, righteous by virtue of their regular attendance alone.

"Some have come to think of activity in the Church as the ultimate goal. Therein lies a danger. It is possible to be active in the Church and less active in the gospel. Let me stress: activity in the Church is a highly desirable goal; however, it is insufficient. Activity in the Church is an outward indication of our spiritual desire. If we attend our meetings, hold and fulfill Church responsibilities, and serve others, it is publicly observed. By contrast, the things of the gospel are usually less visible and more difficult to measure, but they are of greater eternal importance. For example, how much faith do we really have? How repentant are we? How meaningful are the ordinances in our lives? How focused are we on our covenants?" (Donald L. Hallstrom, "Converted to His Gospel through His Church", Ensign May 2012)

What happens to us after we die? Part I: Death

A friend of mine sent me a question concerning life after death, and I gave him more answer than I think he wanted. With his permission, I am publishing my response in installments, as it is quite long.

In order to fully address your question, it becomes necessary to make a distinction between what happens to us when we die, and what happens to us when we are resurrected, which as you’ll see, are actually two separate and distinct aspects of life after death.