Talk:Epistle to Philemon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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)
[edit] 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)

