These arguments, however, when narrowly examined, are not so convincing as they appear at first sight to be. A runaway slave would in reality be more likely to escape discovery in the thick masses of the population of the world’s metropolis than in Czsarea. Our ignorance of the circumstances of the flight of Onesimus and the supposition that the Epistle is an Encyclical make the argument from the lack of any such mention of Onesimus as we find in Colos- sians uncertain. The ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς does not necessarily imply what Meyer infers from it, and the same may be said of the reference to the lodging in Philemon.
On the other hand there are weighty objections to referring this Epistle to the Czesarean imprisonment. Thus, the circumstances of the captivity seem to suit Rome better than Czsarea. For when we compare Acts xxiv. 23 with Acts xxviii. 16, etc., we gather that the Apostle had less liberty in Czesarea than in Rome, and this accords ill with such passages as Eph. vi. 19, 20. The number of friends mentioned in these Epistles of the Captivity as companions of Paul—Aristarchus, Marcus, Jesus Justus, Lucas, Demas, Epaphras,
- Tychicus, Onesimus—is considerable, so considerable as to make it
probable, as Alford, e.g., contends, that he was in Rome; for it was there rather than in Czesarea that so many might have been with him. Then there is the argument drawn from the relations between the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians. If these letters belong to much the same period in Paul’s career (and there is much to favour that), then the mention of “ Czsar’s household” in Phil. iv. 22 points much more to Rome than to Czsarea as the place of the Apostle’s residence when he wrote these kindred communications; and the same holds good of the statement of his progress in Phil. i. 21, etc. In neither case can Czesarea be fairly said to suit the circumstances, or to be of the importance implied. The expectation also which the Apostle appears to entertain when he wrote Philippians was that of speedy release and a visit to Macedonia (i. 26, ii. 24, Phil. 22); but what he looked to when he was in Cesarea was rather that he might go to Rome. These arguments will become all the stronger if it is made out that Philippians was written before Ephesians. There is the greater reason then for taking the latter to have been written at Rome. This is a question which need not be discussed at length here. It is enough to say that the arguments against the priority of Philippians in the line of these four letters of the Captivity are neither very certain nor very weighty, while there are various internal considerations which favour the priority. Of these the