La autenticidad de Filemón

los problemas y supuestos en la posición de consenso


  • Christopher M. Hansen University of Nebraska-Kearney (USA)


Palabras clave:

Filemon, Autenticidad paulina, Escritura de cartas, Autenticidad


La autenticidad de Filemón se da por sentada por la gran mayoría de
los académicos de hoy, sin casi ningún intento de justificar su inclusión entre
las siete epístolas tradicionalmente aceptadas. El presente artículo busca poner
en duda ese supuesto. Y concluye que no hay suficientes evidencias para concluir
que Filemón es auténtico con base a los argumentos actuales que se han


Aune, D. E., “The Problem of Equality in the Church and Society”, en P. Walters (ed.), From Judaism to Christianity: Tradition and Transition,

Leiden 2011, 153-184.

Barclay, J. M. G., Colossians and Philemon, London 2004.

Barr, G. Scalometry and the Pauline Epistles, London 2004.

Barthe, M. – Blanke, H., The Letter to Philemon, Grand Rapids 2000.

Bauer, B., Kritik der paulinischen Briefe (3 vols.), Berlin 1850-1852.

Baum, A. D., “Authorship and Pseudepigraphy in Early Christian Literature: A Translation of the Most Important Source Texts and an Annotated Bibliography”, en S. E. Porter – G. P. Fewster (eds.), Paul and Pseudepigraphy, Leiden 2013, 11-63.

Baur, F. C., Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ, Eugene 2021.

Beale, G. K., Colossians and Philemon, Grand Rapids 2019.

Berardi, R. – Filosa, M. – Massimo, D. (eds.), Defining Authorship, Debating Authenticity, Berlin 2021.

Bilby, M. G., “Pliny’s Correspondence and the Acts of the Apostles: An Intertextual Relationship?”, en J. Verheyden – J. S. Kloppenborg, Luke on Jesus, Paul and Christianity: What Did He Really Know?, Leuven 2017, 147-170.

Bird, M. F., Colossians & Philemon: A New Covenant Commentary, Cambridge 2009.

Boer, R. – Petterson, C., “Hand of the Master: Of Slaveholders and the Slave-Relation”, en R. J. Myles (ed.), Class Struggle in the New Testament, London, 2019, 139-153.

Brodie, T. L., The Birthing of the New Testament: The Intertextual Development of the New Testament Writings, Sheffield 2004.

–, Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus: Memoir of a Discovery, Sheffield 2012.

Bruce, F. F., The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, Grand Rapids 1984.

Brückner, W., Die chronologische Reihenfolge, in welcher die Briefe des Neuen Testaments verfasst sind, Haarlem 1890.

Callahan, A. D., Embassy of Onesimus: The Letter of Paul to Philemon, Valley Forge 1997.

Campbell, D. A., Framing Paul: An Epistolary Biography, Grand Rapids 2014.

Carrier, R., On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, Sheffield 2014.

Carter, J. W., The Pastoral Epistles 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, & Philemon: Principles of Biblical Servant Leadership, Hayesville 2022.

Crüsemann, M., The Pseudepigraphical Letters to the Thessalonians, London 2010.

Decock, P. B., “The Reception of the Letter to Philemon in the Early Church: Origen, Jerome, Chrysostom and Augustine”, en D. F. Tolmie (ed.), Philemon in Perspective: Interpreting a Pauline Letter, Berlin 2010, 273-288.

Detering, H., Paulusbriefe ohne Paulus? Des Paulusbriefe in der holländischen Radikalkritik, Frankfurt am Main 1992.

–, The Fabricated Paul: Early Christianity in the Twilight, Independently Published 2018.

Dunn, J. D. G., The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text, Grand Rapids 1996.

Ebner, M., Der Brief an Philemon, Göttingen 2017.

Ehorn, S. M., Philemon (Digital Edition), Bellingham 2011.

Ehrman, B. D., Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics, Oxford 2013.

Elmer, I. J., “I, Tertius: Secretary or Co-Author of Romans”, Australian Biblical Review 56 (2008) 45-60.

Epictetus, Discourses Books 1-2 (Loeb Classical Library 131), Cambridge 1925.

Evanson, E., The Dissonance of the Four Generally Received Evangelists and the Evidence of Their Respective Authenticity, Examined, Gloucester 1805.

Fitzmyer, J. A., The Letter to Philemon: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, New York 2000.

Gallagher, E. L. – Meade, J. D., The Biblical Canon Lists from Early Christianity, Oxford 2017.

Gorday, P. (ed.), Colossians, 1–2 Thessalonians, 1–2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Downers Grove 2000.

Green, C. A., “Paul’s Letter to Philemon: Manumission... or What?”, Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 18 (2022) 92-112.

Hansen, C. M., “An Evaluation of the Neo-Dutch Radical School of New Testament Criticism”, Journal of Biblical Theology 4 (2021) 240-264.

Hart, P., A Prolegomenon to the Study of Paul, Leiden 2020.

Hausrath, A., A History of the New Testament Times (4 vols.), London 1895.

Heine, R. E., “In Search of Origen’s Commentary on Philemon”, Harvard Theological Review 93 (2000) 117-133.

Herzer, J., “Narration, Genre, and Pseudonymity: Reconsidering the Individuality and the Literary Relationship of the Pastoral Epistles”, Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 9 (2019) 30-51.

Holtzmann, H. J., “Der Brief an den Philemon”, ZWT 16 (1873) 428-441.

Keegan, T. J., First and Second Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Collegeville 2005.

Kenny, A., A Stylometric Study of the New Testament, Oxford 1986.

Knox, J., Philemon Among the Letters of Paul, London 1960.

Kreitzer, L. J., Philemon, Sheffield 2008.

Laird, B. P., The Pauline Corpus in Early Christianity: Its Formation, Publication, and Circulation, Peabody 2022.

Lim, K. Y., “‘Remain in the Calling in Which You Were Called’ (1 Cor 7:20): A Post Supersessionist Reading of 1 Corinthians”, Religions 14 (2023) 183.

Lohse, E., Colossians and Philemon, Philadelphia 1971.

Lookadoo, J., “The Date and Authenticity of the Ignatian Letters: An Outline of Recent Discussions”, CBR 19 (2020) 88-114.

McDonald, H. D., Commentary on Colossians & Philemon, Waco 1980.

McKnight, S., The Letter to Philemon, Grand Rapids 2017.

Mealand, D. L., “The Extent of the Pauline Corpus: A Multivariate Approach”, JSNT 59 (1995) 61-92.

Melick, R. R., Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Nashville 1991.

Moo, D. J., The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, Grand Rapids 2008.

Moss, C., “The Secretary: Enslaved Workers, Stenography, and the Production of Early Christian Literature”, Journal of Theology 74 (2023) 20-56.

Müller, P., Der Brief an Philemon, Göttingen 2011.

Neumann, K. J., The Authenticity of the Pauline Epistles in the Light of Stylostatistical Analysis, Atlanta 1990.

Neutel, K. B. – Smit, P.-B., “Paul, Imprisonment and Crisis: Crisis and its Negotiation as a Lens for Reading Philippians”, JSNT 44 (2021) 31-55.

Nongbri, B., God’s Library: The Archaeology of the Earliest Christian Manuscripts, New Haven 2018.

O’Brien, P. T., Colossians, Philemon, Waco 1982.

O’Donnell, M. B., “Linguistic Fingerprints or Style by Numbers? The Use of Statistics in the Discussion of Authorship of New Testament Documents”, en S. E. Porter – D. A. Carson (eds.), Linguistics and the New Testament, Sheffield 1999, 206-260.

O’Neill, J. C., “Paul Wrote Some of All, But Not All of Any”, en S. E. Porter (ed.), The Pauline Canon, Leiden 2004, 169-188.

Paley, J., “Questioning the Pauline Authorship of Philemon: Crackpot Theory or Plausible Alternative?”, Expository Times 134 (2022) 11-20.

–, “Pauline Pseudepigrapha and Early Christian Literacy: Are the Clues Hidden Right in Front of Us?”, Religions 14 (2023) 503.

Pao, D. W., Colossians & Ephesians, Grand Rapids 2012.

Patzia, A. G., Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Grand Rapids 2011.

Porter, S. E. (ed.), The Pauline Canon, Leiden 2004.

Porter, S. E. – Fewster, G. P. (eds.), Paul and Pseudepigraphy, Leiden 2013.

Price, R. M., The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-four Formative Texts, Salt Lake City, 2006.

–, The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul, Salt Lake City 2012.

Savoy, J., “Authorship of Pauline Epistles Revisited”, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70 (2019) 1089-1097.

Schwab, G., Echtheitskritische Untersuchungen zu den vier kleinen Paulusbriefen (Band I: Halbband A), Norderstedt 2011.

Seesengood, R., Philemon: An Introduction and Study Guide, London 2017.

Seneca., Epistles 1–65 (Loeb Classical Library 75), Cambridge 1917.

Standhartinger, A., “Letter from Prison as Hidden Transcript: What it Tells Us about the People at Philippi”, en J. A. Marchal (ed.), The People beside Paul: The Philippian Assembly and History from Below, Atlanta 2015, 107-140.

Steck, R., “Plinius im Neuen Testament”, Jahrbücher für protestantische Theologie 17 (1891) 545-584.

Stuhlmacher, P., Der Brief an Philemon, Zürich 1975.

Tamez, E., et al, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Collegeville 2017.

Tarazi, P. N., Colossians & Philemon, St. Paul 2010.

Thompson, A. J., Colossians and Philemon, Downers Grove 2022.

Thompson, J. W. – Longenecker, B. W., Philippians and Philemon, Grand Rapids 2016.

Thompson, M. M., Colossians and Philemon, Grand Rapids 2005.

Trobisch, D., Paul’s Letter Collection: Tracing the Origins, Bolivar 2001.

Van den Bergh van Eysinga, G. A., De Oudste christelijke Geschriften, Hague 1946.

–, La litte?rature chre?tienne primitive, Paris 1926.

–, “Paulus’ Brief aan Philemon”, Nieuw Theologisch Tijdschrift 29 (1940) 1-18.

Van Manen, W. C., Handleiding voor de Oudchristelijke Letterkunde, Leiden 1900.

–, A Wave of Hypercriticism: The English Writings of W. C. van Manen, R. M. Price (ed.), Valley, 2014.

Van Nes, J., Pauline Language and the Pastoral Epistles: A Study of Linguistic Variation in the Corpus Paulinum, Leiden 2017.

Verhoef, E., Filippenzen, Filemon: Een Praktische Bijbelverklaring, Kampen 1998.

–, “Determining the Authenticity of the Paulines”, Journal of Higher Criticism 11 (2005) 83-95.

–, “The Authenticity of the Paulines Should Not be Assumed”, Protokolle zur Bibel 19 (2010) 129-151.

Walker, W. O., Interpolations in the Pauline Letters, Sheffield 2002.

Williams, T. B., “The Amanuensis Hypothesis in New Testament Scholarship: Its Origin, Evidential Basis, and Application”, CBR 22 (2023) 7-82.

Wilson, R. M., Colossians and Philemon, London 2005.

Wright, N. T., Colossians and Philemon: An Introduction and Commentary, Downers Grove 1986.



Cómo citar

Hansen, Christopher M. 2024. «La Autenticidad De Filemón: Los Problemas Y Supuestos En La posición De Consenso». Revista Bíblica 86 (1-2):129-54.




Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a