Brood des levens

Site tot bemoediging, lering en bevestiging in de waarheid, die in Christus Jezus is.

The return of a runaway slave.

A unique address.
The epistle of Paul to Philemon is the fourth epistle of the apostle in the New Testament, that has been written to one person. The other three are the two epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus But the epistle to Philemon has a characteristic which the other three have not. In his greeting Paul did not direct himself to Philemon only, but he included the sister Apphia, the fellow soldier Archippus and the church in the house of Philemon. In that respect this epistle is unique.

But the church to which the apostle and Timothy direct themselves in this epistle, is not mentioned as the church at Colosse, but as the church in the house of Philemon. There is no other epistle, that is also directed to a church in the house of some believer.

A unique character.
In the epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus Paul directed himself as an apostle (and servant of God) to fellow labourers with directions and encouragements with regard to their service in the kingdom of God.

In the epistle to Philemon he only presented himself as a prisoner of Jesus Christ. That he has not done in any other epistle. He did not write himself only, but involved the brother Timothy.

The epistle does not contain directions for the service in the kingdom of God, but a request to show love and a forgiving mind to one who had wronged Philemon, Paul giving himself the pattern by declaring his willingness to take the damage to his own account and to pay for it. Thus the epistle lets us see, that our being Christians is normative for our behaviour in the relations and circumstances on earth, and is an illustration of doing ourselves what we tell someone he ought to do.

Finally, the epistle has been written on behalf of one man, Onesimus, and has the additional character of a letter of recommendation of a believer. It therefore was of importance that not Paul only should write the epistle, but that a second, Timothy, would be with him responsible for it. We have no second epistle with that character.

A unique subject. The subject was the return to his master of a deserted servant, who had wronged his master who was living in Colosse.

Together with this epistle to Philemon Paul and Timothy had written another one in addition for the church in Colosse, which they had entrusted to the same persons, Tychicus and Onesimus, who consequently had to deliver two epistles. It is remarkable, that the authors in the epistle to Colosse pointed particularly to the calling and responsibility of servants with the words: "Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye service, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God. And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons". (Colossians 3:22-25).

Because they wrote so in their epistle to the Colossians Paul and Timothy could not be suspected or accused of making always a stand for servants, right or wrong, and of justifying servants whatever wrong they did. Still more so because they wrote for masters who had servants in Colossians 4:1 nothing more than: "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven".

No respect of persons.
Paul wrote that in Colossians 3:25. Not servants only should accept it, but a believing patron or master as well.

In a commentary on the epistle to Philemon we surely ought to keep in mind the exhortations for servants and masters in Colossians 3 and 4, because we can be sure, that the writers of that epistle have written their epistle to Philemon immediately before or after it. The matter of Onesimus has no doubt been in their mind when writing the epistle to the Colossians.

The fact that in the epistle to the Colossians has been written extensively about the responsibility of believing servants, whereas about masters they wrote one verse only, does not mean, that servants are more inclined to do wrong or that masters have less responsibility. It is my strong impression that the matter of Onesimus has been the motive to emphasize the responsibility of servants in the Epistle to the Colossians.

True, in the epistle to the Ephesians has been written much about servants as well and less about masters (6:5-10). But there we read: "ye masters, do the same things unto them", implying that the extensive exhortations for servants are directed to masters as well. In that epistle therefore is balance between what has been said to servants and what has been said to masters.

The essence of what has been written for servants is, that they should do their work, fearing God, serving the Lord with it, awaiting the reward of the inheritance they would receive from the Lord.

A very precious word has been written for servants: "Ye serve the Lord Christ" (3:24). It is precious for us as well. Not many of my readers will not have a master above them. And a Christian who is someone's employee can easily be of opinion, that he, being forced to earn his money as an employee, has neither time nor occasion to serve the Lord. Someone having his own business may have the same thoughts, for in that situation time and attention can be absorbed by the necessary work as well. And what shall we say of mothers, who have to care for the family and are working for it till late in the evening? Perhaps many of them too are convinced that they cannot serve the Lord. For all those the words in Colossians 3 are very important: "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him" (17) and "And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men"(23).

Those words had been written for servants. If they apply for servants, much more for us, who perhaps are no servants of men. Servants had to obey there masters in all things. They will have got orders of which they the servant could not see the use, not worthy to exert oneself, a useless whim of the master. But Colossians 3 does not say only "obey in al things your masters", but adds in verse 24 "you serve the Lord Christ".

How and when did they serve the Lord Christ?
In their obedience to their masters, even in matters of no importance or in obviously useless orders, in obedience "in all things".

What an encouragement for a Christian, who possibly with regret supposed that missionaries and evangelists could serve the Lord, but believers like he unfortunately not. The thought is a mistake. A believing farmer behind his plough, a driver in his lorry, an official at his desk in the town hall and all others working truthfully and conscientiously, as an employee, at home or in their own business, they serve their Lord Christ.

We talk about servants of the Lord. Nothing wrong with it and we understand who are meant. But it does no harm to realize that the expression can get a much wider scope according to the words in Colossians 3 "Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men….. ye serve the Lord Christ".

That is one side.
The other side is, that in all things we do, we have a Lord whom we serve in it. That means, that we ought to do his will and are indebted to be obedient to Him who sees us always, even when nobody is seeing or supervising us.

The wrong we could do as an employee, would not only make us guilty towards our employer but in the first place towards our great Master, Christ. He will not say that an employee is allowed to do some wrong because he is in the inferior position of an employee. With Him there is no respect of persons.

'Give unto your servants that which is just and equal' is the word for masters. A servant is due to work for his master. But a master was due to give what was just. Many masters probably gave what was necessary to keep their servants healthy and no more. It was in their own interest, because a slave cost money. But the apostle told them to give which was just and equal.

Just? Did a slave have rights? Hardly so. But by God they had and not believing slaves only. The expression 'just and equal' makes clear, that people generally knew very well what was just and equal. The apostle did not need to detail it further.

He added that masters (believing masters) for their part also had a Master in heaven. They ought to be aware of the care and goodness of that heavenly Master. He is Lord over us and has a right to give us his commands.

That is one side. We know the other side, that He has been among his own as one that served (Luke 22:27). He is still serving his own. And his being a serving Master is the model for anyone being a master of others upon earth.

Does that mean 'away with respect and obedience, never accept any one above you'? Surely not. We know very well how the Lord judges such an attitude towards Him and what He in due course will say to a wicked servant. That however does not run counter to his goodness and his justice.

But let us not complete what Paul did not complete. He put the Lord before our eyes as a Master and if we seek to follow Him, we certainly chose the way He wants us to go.

This may suffice as a background for the subject in the epistle to Philemon. In that epistle the subject is a slave and his master. They could both read the epistle to the Colossians and then both would know exactly what was their due one to another.

In that epistle to the Colossians however the slave Onesimus is presented in one and the same breath as a faithful and beloved brother with Tychicus, the beloved brother and faithful minister and fellowservant in the Lord, and no doubt he has been received by the church in Colosse as such. That must have been sufficient indication for Philemon to know how to receive his servant Onesimus and what ought to be his answer to the epistle of Paul to him.

'What is just and equal' the apostle has written to the Colossians in 4:1.
But in 1 Corinthians 12;31 he had written 'I show unto you a more excellent way'. So there is a way more excellent than the one characterized by 'just and equal'. That way we find in the epistle to Philemon.

In Colossians 3:25 Paul had written: 'He that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong that he hath done'.
In Philemon verse 18 however he wrote: 'If he has wronged thee or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account…. I will repay'. But with this remark we run ahead of our commentary on the epistle.

Someone has written about this epistle: 'The writer made undone with his epistle what he did: sending back a servant to his master'.

Opening words, address and greeting. 1 Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer,
2 And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:
3 Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1) In this epistle Paul called himself a prisoner. What we find elsewhere, servant of God, an apostle or a called apostle, we do not find here. A 'prisoner' only. In that way he took a humble position and presented himself as one who had no right to command, but as one who could hope only for some goodness or compassion. A prisoner had no rights and was left to the mercies of the one that kept him as a prisoner. In stead of commanding a prisoner could beg only. The apostle had full right to order believers, as he wrote in verse 8. But presenting himself as a prisoner, he approached Philemon and the other believers in a different character from that of an apostle. He so avoided to give Philemon the impression, that he acted in an authoritarian manner by which Philemon could be provoked (irritated).

Sometimes it happens that in a local church something has to be set right or someone has to be corrected. A Christian with some authority who is generally appreciated and respected may in such a case approach his brother as a man with authority, qualified to give directions. In this epistle Paul pointed to the authority he had as an apostle, but did not present himself as an apostle in the opening words of the epistle, but called himself a prisoner of Jesus Christ only.

It is well if we follow the apostle in this. He himself was a follower of our Lord Jesus, who told his disciples to do as He had done, remembering that a servant is not greater than his lord, but did so after He had washed their feet himself.

Someone said that he name of the apostle was Saul (Hebrew) the name of the tall king of Israel. Afterwards he was called Paul which means the small one. Let us try to be great in being small or nothing.

Paul presented himself as a special prisoner. He was a prisoner of the Roman government, but called himself a prisoner of Jesus Christ.
It surely means that he was a prisoner for Jesus sake. But there is more in it. It means that behind the Romans who kept him in a prison according to their will, he saw his Master, who wanted him to go that way. So he could say "thy will be done".
We understand why the Lord wanted him to be in that prison.
The Lord intended to give us several epistles of Paul. He would not have written them, if he had not been a prisoner. Whether Paul ever understood that, we do not know.

I addition, it was the way to give the apostle most precious and lovely experiences of the help and presence of the Lord, like Daniel and his friends.

We can praise the Lord for his wisdom. But it is not because we understand the ways of the Lord with us, that we say "thy will be done", but because we trust and love Him, even if we do not understand. Unless we would not be sure of his love for us. But that is impossible. We know indeed that nothing, nor many questions we might have, shall separate us from the love of Christ (Romans 8:35).Thus seen the expression "prisoner of Jesus Christ" in this epistle means "Prisoner according to the will of Jesus Christ". How then could the apostle be rebellious? Let us think about that secret of his peace during his imprisonment and partake of it.

In the epistle something was asked from Philemon.
Was it too much? Could it not be complied with?
From Paul something was asked as well: Te be in prison, to see the hand of the Lord in it and to say "yes Lord". So the way the apostle addressed Philemon contained a lesson, a meek one.

Paul wrote the epistle together with Timothy. Who has written literally does not matter of course. But Paul and Timothy together applied to the addressees and therefore nobody could say, that Paul wrote on the ground of prejudice or in his own interest. It is a wise lesson for us.

Moreover the epistle contained a recommending testimony concerning a certain believer and a testimony is valid only when two agree in that testimony. Because Timothy was responsible with the apostle for this epistle, the testimony in it must be recognised as reliable.

2) The epistle is first of all directed to Philemon, but then to Appia, Archippus and the church in the house of Philemon as well.

Philemon lived in Colosse. So he would not only read the epistle that was addressed to him, but also the epistle that had been sent to the believers in Colosse. He therefore would read what the apostle had written about servants and masters as well. In that way Philemon could not get a feeling, that Paul had an eye only for the duties of a Christian master, but for those of a Christian servant as well. Owing to the combination of the two epistles there is in this respect the necessary balance.
Philemon is called "the dearly beloved". That is about the meaning of his name too, rendered sometimes with "The kissing one".

A welcome visitor in that time was received with a kiss. In the epistle Philemon is applied to, to receive his run away servant with a kiss, that is as a brother
But then Philemon is called a fellowlabourer of Paul and Timothy as well. In what respect and in what measure he worked the work of the Lord as Paul and Timothy did, is not known, except that he showed love to all saints and refreshed the bowels of the saints (verses 5 and 7). It is possible that he also ministered the word of God to them but that we do not know.

How that may be, both writers put him, by calling him their fellowlabourer on their own footing and consequently approached him as an equal. In doing so, thy acted as they had written in Philippians 2:4: "Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others".

It is to be regretted that not seldom there is jealousy among them that do the work of the Lord. And James warned us, that "confusion and every evil work" will be the result (James 3:16).

Jealousy is a big evil. In Proverbs 27:4 we read: "who is able to stand before envy?" It made the chief priests and the Jewish council to deliver the innocent Lord Jesus. Our inclination to envy has for the grater part as background our seeking our own glory, a bad thing we ought to judge in the light of God.

Then the epistle has been directed to the sister Apphia. Though not sure it seems to be probable that she has been the housewife of Philemon.

The third one to whom the epistle has been directed was Archippus. His name means "equerry". Was he a son of Philemon, another relative or an appreciated member of the household only? It is not known. We know however that he had a ministry in the Lord (Colossians 4:17). He probably therefore is called a fellowsoldier. At any rate we may suppose that he was more involved in the question whether Onesimus could be received as a brother, because he is mentioned with his name.

Finally the epistle is directed to the church in the house of Philemon.

The address in the Epistle tot the Colossians is: "to the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are in Colosse". Are they the same Christians that belonged to the church in the house of Philemon?

A second question in this respect is, whether the church in the house of Nymphas (Colossians 4:15) has been in Colosse or in Laodicea: "Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas and the church which is in his house. If Nymphas lived in Colosse, there have been two places in Colosse where Christians gathered, with Nymphas and with Philemon.

Have the believers that are mentioned in Colossians 1:2 been believers of both assemblies? It might be. It is sure that they belonged to the church in Colosse. Some think there has been a second gathering in Colosse. I cannot deny nor confirm it. For a commentary on the epistle it seems unimportant.

There are several in our days, who would be happy to see arise "house churches" to the left and to the right. They are convinced, that Scripture points to such churches as what the Lord meant.

Now there is nothing against a church in someone's house, but
they obviously forget, that Paul separated the disciples in Ephesus and disputed daily in the school of one Tyrannus. People refer to Acts 2:46, where is written, that the Christians continued daily 'with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart'. It only means, that the breaking of the bread is no public meeting, but typically a meeting of believers as such, not with the aim to reach others, but to be with the Lord and to worship. Where could those early Christians have done that elsewhere if not in the house of a brother or sister?. For preaching the gospel however they went out and continued in the temple, where many could hear them.

(Whether it is desirable to build a great hall for an assembly, or whether it is wiser to gather with restricted numbers, is worth while to be considered, but is no subject for this article.)

The fact, that Philemon could receive the church in his house makes it obvious, that Philemon lived in a spacious house. He probably was a man of means, of which the fact that he had servants witnesses as well.

Because the epistle relates to a Christian coming back to Philemon, the church in his house would be involved. What Paul and Timothy had to write about that believer affected therefore no less the church and that is why the epistle is addressed to that church as well.

3) The greeting of the writers is not different from that in the epistle to the Colossians and some other epistles and needs no special remarks.

Acknowledgement of the good things with Philemon (4-7).
4 'I thank my God, making mention of thee always in my prayers,
5 Hearing of thy love and faith, which thou hast toward the Lord Jesus and toward al saints;
6 that the communication of thy faith become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in us towards Christ Jesus.
7 For we have great joy and consolation in thy love, because the bowels of the saints are refreshed by thee, brother'.
1) Though Paul involved Timothy in writing this epistle, he nevertheless wrote 'I thank' and not 'we thank'. And his first remark has been, that he was grateful about all he had heard of Philemon and that he expressed his thankfulness in his prayers to God.

Happily the apostle had heard good things. It means that hose who had spoken about Philemon, had been able to tell good things. It often is different. We sometimes resemble a daily. The newspapermen seem to prey on anything that is regrettable, scandalous, dishonest or shocking. Much is happening in this world and many things are embarrassing. But there are better things: a young lady, spending some days of every week in driving an old lady with a wheelchair through a park, a child accepting being hurt by protecting someone suffering from Down's Syndrome against teasing boys, a director of an house of the aged working till 22.30, knowing that many guests are yearning for some attention.

Those things however do not seem to be interesting. Murder, robbery and destruction obviously are of more importance to write or speak about. It sometimes seems to be the same among Christians. Things negative and the disagreeable sides and shortcomings of people seem to be more interesting and worth while to speak about than their positive sides and good works.

It should not be so. Love rejoices not in iniquity did Paul write in 1 Corinthians 13:6, even not if it seems to be interesting to dwell on the shortcoming of a Christian. Let us humble ourselves about it and try to see the good in a believer and mention that with gladness.

2) In his prayers the apostle remembered Philemon also and of course the church in his house. He had not met the believers in Colossus, which is evident from Col. 2:1 'I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you and for them at Laodicea and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh that their hearts might be comforted'.

So Philemon probably had not seen the apostle though it is possible that he had seen and heard him in the years in which Paul had worked in Ephesus. How that may be, we know that Paul prayed for the believers and the churches, which I fear cannot be said of us all. He knew what would happen: 'For I know this that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them'. (Acts 20:29-30).

As to the churches in Asia the result of that development did show itself when Paul wrote his second epistle to Timothy: 'This thou knowest that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes' (2 Tim. 1:15). It is still stronger in the epistles in the Revelation, which all of them have been written to churches in Asia. Of the church in Laodicea, mentioned in Colossians 2:1 and 4:16, the Lord said in Revelation 3:16 'So then, because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth'. Because the apostle knew these things would come he had reason to call his prayer a great conflict.

3) However praying for Philemon and his company he could give thanks as well. He had heard of the love and faith that Philemon had towards the Lord and all saints. Love and faith are not tangible. We cannot see both of them. But we can see the manifestations and proofs of love and faith in tangible and visible things, such as care for poor brethren and the willingness to receive the church, though it asks much trouble and prepara-tion.

If Paul had heard about the faith and love of Philemon, it must have been visible in the practical life of Philemon and be experienced by his fellow believers. Practical Christianity witnesses of living faith and true love. That does not only impress Christians, but them that are in the world as well.

It is good and necessary that we spread the word of God and preach it. But now and again we forget that words and works should go together. With our Lord there was perfect balance and full harmony between both. With us often the works fall behind, and sometimes contradict our good words and make them powerless. We should realise some more, that God 'created us in Christ Jesus unto good works which God haith before ordained that we should walk in them' (Ephesians 2:10). It is neither correct nor necessary to banish the notion of 'good works' out of our minds as a reaction upon Romanism. Good works are not wrong, on the contrary, they belong to the new life and we can show our faith by our works as James argued.

4) The apostle wrote about love toward 'all saints'. Those saints certainly had not been saints before their conversion. In 1 Corinthians 6:10 and 11 Paul wrote: 'Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of our God'.

The saints Philemon knew and showed his love will not have been better than those in Corinth. There will have been such, for whom Philemon would have been ashamed before. But they had been washed and sanctified and Philemon loved them as brethren in the Lord.

Is it possible that here have been exceptions, brethren he loved not?

No, he knew no exceptions. He did show his love to all of them. Beautiful is that. And the apostle sent him a man, the one who handed him the epistle, whom he could henceforth show his love as well, because he was a saint, washed and sanctified by the blood of Christ. 'All saints' knows no exceptions!

5) Paul prayed that the communication (or participation) of the faith of Philemon would become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing being in him and in Timothy towards Christ Jesus.

From the beginning of the church, the day of Pentecost, it had been a remarkable feature of the believers, their fellowship. In acts 2:42 we read that those who had received the word of Peter and had been baptised, 'continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers'. That meanwhile was several years back. But by Philemon practised that fellowship likewise. And Paul prayed that it might become effectual, together with the acknowledging of all the good things which were in Paul and Timothy towards the Lord.

Those additions may seem to be remarkable. What were they good for? I have the impression that the apostle wrote that way because he was going to ask something from Philemon in his epistle, that possibly would call for some resistance.

Philemon had been wronged and a request to receive him who had done it with friendly open arms was something more than a request to forgive him. When reading the epistle Philemon could get a feeling that Paul was a busybody, someone who knows well what other people have to do, or someone who explained mistakes away.

That would no doubt be contrary to everything Philemon knew of Paul. It may be that he never had seen Paul indeed, but he had surely heard of him, and even the believers in Colosse had heard the gospel through Paul, for 'all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks' owing to the fact that the apostle preached daily in the school of Tyrannus (Acts 19:10).

Therefore Philemon had no need to ask what Paul meant with the words 'every good thing in us towards Christ Jesus'. We may perhaps say that the apostle by writing thus remembered Philemon of who Paul was, for Philemon also, and of what importance he and Timothy were for the work of the Lord, in order to prevent that Philemon resentfully would throw the epistle away.

Writing about his own importance or merits was no pleasure for the apostle, on the contrary. In 2 Corinthians 11:17 he wrote about it: 'That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly in this confidence of boasting'. And in 12:11 he wrote: 'I am become a fool in glorying, ye have compelled me'.

Some Jewish teachers were doing a damaging work, attacking the gospel Paul preached according to the commission God had given to him. Those preachers tried to get their teaching accepted by discrediting Paul and his work. Therefore Paul felt more or less necessitated to defend himself, not for his own sake or honour, but for the truth he preached. The same thing happened in Asia, for Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 1:3 'As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus..... that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine'....particularly them, that 'desired to be teachers of the law' (verse 7).

The work of those wrong teachers produced wrong fruit, for in 2 Timothy 1:15 the apostle had to write, 'that all they which were in Asia had turned away from him'. The dangerous result was, that they also turned more or less away from the sound teaching of the apostle. That will have been the background of the decline in the churches in Asia, what is confirmed in the epistles in the Revelation. The cause of 'leaving the first love' as has been written to Ephesus (Rev. 2:4) may have been the teachings of those teachers of the law. The result of teaching the law is lovelessness which we learn from two passages in the epistle to the Galatians, to whom he had written 'Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?'.... The passages are: 'But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another' (5:15) en 'Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another' (5:26).

Though in the days in which this epistle has been written things had not yet developed as far as when Paul wrote his second epistle to Timothy, it is possible that meanwhile in Colosse some influence could be felt of those Jewish teachers. That would be an explanation for writing the second half of verse 6.

6) The foregoing in which he brought to remembrance his dedication to the Lord and his work, Paul left alone hastily to go on with quite another subject. He assured Philemon, that they rejoiced in the good in Philemon. In Philippians 2:4 Paul wrote: 'Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others'. Paul and Timothy put it into practice. They looked for the good for the believers according to the words in 1 Thessalonians 2:7-8: 'But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherishes her (own) children. So being affectionately desirous of you, we were willing to have imparted unto you, not the gospel of God only, but also our own souls, because ye were dear unto us'.

Where such an unselfish love is in operation, there will also be gratefulness and joy in the behaviour of others furthering the well being of the subjects of that love.

Jealousy of blessed work or influence of others will betray that the own ministry is not unselfish and the sole aim is not the good of others, but that partly at least own interest is playing a role. It happens more often than is visible, for clearly one tries to hide it.

The Lord said to the Jews: 'How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?' (John 5:44). In John 12:42-43 we read: 'Never-theless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should not be put out of the synagogue, for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God'.

Let us not suppose that in us better inclinations are working. Paul had a thorn in the flesh, 'lest he should be exalted above measure' (2 Corinthians 12:7). Perhaps the Lord has to give us more than one thorn, for the flesh is working in this respect sooner than we suppose.

Houdt ons maar klein.
Wij zijn geneigd eenzijdig slechts te noemen,
wat naar wij menen grond is om te roemen.
Houdt ons dus klein

Lord, keep us down.
We are inclined to mention most
What we think is a ground to boast
So keep us down.

Houdt ons maar klein,
en wil ons hart met uwe liefde vullen,
dat wij het heil van and'ren zoeken zullen.
Houdt ons dus klein.

Lord, keep us down.
Fill us with love, with love for others
to seek the good and welfare of brothers
So keep us down.

Houdt ons maar klein.
Want U hebt een gedaante aangenomen,
waarin U als een knecht op aard kon komen.
Houdt ons dus klein.

Lord, keep us down.
Thou hast made thyself of no reputation,
Been obedient to death for our salvation,
So, keep us down.

page 2 » » »