Paul and His Fellow Workers—Chapter 4

By Bard M. Pillette [1]

Paul’s Less-Than-Modern-Approach to Motivation and Influence

Motivational Technique within Our Culture

One of my summer jobs when I was a college student was in the receiving department of a big company where I spent most of my time driving a forklift. One day the supervisor said, half to himself, “For this job I need a really proficient forklift driver. Oh, hey Bard, you are just the man I need for this job.” Did that motivate me to work harder? Of course it did. I thought to myself, “They are recognizing my contribution to this job.” A few days later, I heard the same supervisor say the same thing to another worker. What a fool I was to be so easily flattered. It was just a gimmick to make people feel good about themselves and to motivate them to work harder.

In all the books on leadership in the business world, there is always a section on motivation. How can we empower employees and make them feel like they are a significant part of the team? How can we make them take ownership for their jobs and capture the company’s vision? Many times their suggestions are universal, proverbial insights into motivating people. Still, these books always leave me with the uneasy feeling that the bottom line is manipulation hidden behind upbeat slogans: “Celebrate the victories.” “Publicly recognize achievement.” “Teach people to say ‘yes, and’ rather than ‘yes, but’.” “Nothing is impossible.” “Reach your full potential.” A sense of team is to be fomented in creative ways. For example, Levi Strauss has its executives work every so often on the plant floor packing pants and shipping them off. [2] This allows leadership to understand the workers’ world and the workers to feel valued. As a result, everyone works better and more contentedly.

Basically, business motivation techniques can be learned at a seminar or by reading a book. It dismays me to see the same approach being taken up by Christian leadership books. After finding out that one has been motivated, even within Christian organizations, by empowerment techniques learned at business seminars, it is difficult not to feel just a little duped.

Contrariwise, Paul’s method of motivation was not based on something learned at seminars. Paul’s “technique” required many years to develop, and it cost him dearly, much more than the usual two-hundred-dollar seminar fee. Furthermore, it was not developed by taking surveys of successful leaders. [3]

Paul’s Motivational Method in Philemon

Public Repercussions

Some of the most intriguing insights into Paul’s powerful influence as a motivator are captured in his letter to Philemon. First, Paul sets the stage by making his request public. [4] The letter is addressed both to Philemon and the church (Philm. 1–2, 25). Everything is out in the open. This public letter forces Philemon to face the fact that his decision will affect the work in Colossae, though it may seem to him to be a personal business matter. There are public repercussions for a leader’s decisions. [5] The church is observing his conduct as a pattern to be followed. The Colossian letter has just been read to the church. In it Paul has said, “Masters, grant to your slaves justice and fairness, knowing that you too have a Master in heaven” (Col. 4:1). Philemon feels the weight of the example he will be giving as a believing master. Leaders cannot separate their private matters from their public role. They are to be motivated by thinking of the precedent or example they are setting.

Reputation of the One Motivating

Second, Paul reminds Philemon just who it is that is making this request (Philm. 8–9). The request comes from an old man who is a prisoner of Christ. [6] With regard to his being the prisoner of Christ, Paul, in so many words, says, “I am no armchair general, no untried, impractical idealist. I make no superfluous requests based on a scholar’s ‘theological reflection’ or self-aggrandizement.” Ultimately, he is not a prisoner of Rome but rather of Christ. He is suffering because of obedience to Christ. It is Christ’s sovereign will that he be in prison. This is proof that he is genuine. He has God’s approval rather than man’s. Philemon is to be motivated by realizing that the request comes from a man not given to trivial matters nor to thinking of his own welfare. In other words, Philemon is being motivated by the purity of Paul’s motives. Can this be learned at a seminar? Can this be translated into a catchy slogan?

Paul never alludes to his great accomplishments as reason to trust him as God’s spokesman. His successes are never used to motivate others. He always points to his hardships as proof of being a worthy spokesman for Christ. [7] It is the lack of popularity and prosperity that, ironically enough, gives him powerful influence with Philemon. Christ Himself taught that popularity was not a good sign: “Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for in the same way their fathers used to treat the false prophets” (Luke 6:26). Paul uses his imprisonment as proof that he has not chosen to be popular. In so many words, he is saying, “I am genuine, Philemon. My request, like most of what I do, may not be popular, but it is sincere and serves Christ’s interests.”

Paul also refers to his age. It is true that old age makes every hard circumstance worse, but it is not so much that he is an old, decrepit man deserving of special coddling. The point is that he has been hard at work a long time, and even in his older age he has not removed himself from the fray. He has not softened or toned down his message or weakened his resolve over the years. He has not changed his message to make life a little easier.

Can the same claim be made today by gifted Bible teachers as they age? The present trend seems to be headed in a different direction. Many highly visible scholars and church leaders no longer defend their earlier convictions with the same fervency. [8] In order to extend their realm of influence, they have taken a broader, more popular stance within Christian circles. Their approach to doctrinal issues is now more friendly to the culture and provokes less opposition. [9] Paul had not adjusted his message one iota as he grew older. He did not, for the sake of unity, narrow his beliefs to a core of inviolable convictions and leave the rest up for debate. [10] Even secular writers on leadership recognize the value of constancy and reliability. In the book Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge, [11] the authors say that people prefer a leader with whom they disagree but is always the same, rather than a leader with whom they may politically agree but who periodically changes his position on certain issues. And so Paul motivates Philemon by reminding him of his constancy over the years. He does not take the easy way out.

Appeals Based on Long-term Friendship

The third approach Paul uses to motivate Philemon is to remind him of their relationship over the years. They are brothers (Philm. 20), fellow workers (Philm. 1), partners (Philm. 17), and like father and son (Philm. 19, since Philemon’s spiritual birth came through Paul). Philemon is indirectly made to calculate the investment Paul has made in his life. As he considers the great debt he owes Paul, he cannot help but feel the tremendous tug on his sense of loyalty. This approach to motivation requires years of cultivating a faithful friendship. [12]

It has been shown that Paul’s motivation depended on a long-term loyal friendship. It also depended upon genuineness and sincerity, proven by long-term hardship for Christ. There were no gimmicks, no power of positive thinking, no flattery, no inspirational homilies, no pretended friendship, no offers of reward or promotion.

Power of Ethical Convictions

A fourth element in Paul’s motivation of Philemon is to remind him that Paul’s requests are based on an ethically pure foundation. In particular, Paul never benefits financially from his dealings with others (Philm. 13–14). To have kept Onesimus would have been expecting Philemon to pay, because he would have been losing income in Onesimus’ absence. Furthermore, Paul would pay any financial loss (Philm. 18) even though Philemon owed Paul (Philm. 19). Paul goes beyond what are normal or conventional ethics. This became a powerful motivator because everyone owed Paul, and they knew his motives were pure.

When I look at Paul’s desire to go above and beyond conventionally accepted ethics, I wonder what we are to make of modern Christian leadership. In a secular news magazine there was an article about a popular Christian movement among men. [13] The report was quite favorable, but one little detail was disconcerting. It was said that millions were made on the T-shirts and coffee mugs sold at their meetings. Now there is nothing inherently wrong in that. But compared to Paul’s practice, it seems to lack dignity. It does not build the same level of trust and loyalty. It is amazing how the inclusion of one small detail can leave a little bit of doubt about a good organization’s motives.

Appeals Made without Manipulation

The curious element in all this, of course, is that Paul has the authority to demand obedience, but he refuses to resort to pulling rank on Philemon (Philm. 8–9). The reason for not using his position to demand acquiescence is given in Philemon 14 (which parallels his argument in 2 Corinthians 9:7). [14] Forced obedience does not allow the person to demonstrate the genuineness of his actions. His motives are suspect if he has been obligated. There is no value attributed to an action carried out under compulsion. Paul knows that God looks at the intentions of men’s hearts (Phil 1:15–17). Therefore, he believes that his work will be in vain if his fellow workers are moved to obedience for the wrong reasons. [15]

Paul makes his appeal with logical reasons but leaves the final impetus to God. God, not human manipulation or pressure, must convince a man to respond to the appeal. Only in this way can personal conviction grow and deepen. Otherwise, when Paul is no longer present, the person will return to taking the easy road. [16]

It is not too unlike a parent dealing with his children. The child may be obedient, but the reason given to friends for not doing something is, “My dad will not let me.” That is praiseworthy, but a parent wants his child to get to the point of saying, “I will not do it because I am convinced that it is wrong for these reasons.” The child has then internalized his parent’s conviction and understands why such conduct is unacceptable.

Visionary Skills Versus Biblical Convictions

Vision Determined by Culture

Today there is a growing inclination to make the leader’s visionary powers the key to motivating and enthusing people to take hold of a certain task. There is a premium upon being positive, making people feel good, being forward looking, and making things fun. A true leader visualizes the future. The visionary leader gets people excited about setting goals and making a strategy to accomplish great things. [17] He has a sense of where trends are headed and plans to meet the needs of tomorrow.

One Christian writer has said: “The real issue is how the church and the parachurch in the nineties and the next century will handle the torrent of change. Those who handle it poorly will, most likely, not survive the nineties, but those who handle it well will make significant advances for the Savior.” [18] He goes on to say that such a leader must be a voracious reader, keeping himself on the cutting edge of culture, trends, and changes. He must be intuitive to meet the changing needs of people. He should read books by marketplace visionaries like Lee Iacocca, Ross Perot, Mary Kay, and Steven Jobs. He says that “the visionary leader possesses an uncanny sense of being on to something big for God, believing that God is planning something special and that the leader is a vital part of that plan.” [19] People love to align themselves with someone popular, someone who is going somewhere.

Vision Determined by Eternity

As usual, there is a lot of good to be said about the concept of the visionary. But is this really a biblical quality that is key to leadership? [20] How would Paul have measured up to the modern visionary model, especially in his last letter to Timothy?

Timothy, “You are aware of the fact that all who are in Asia turned away from me.” “Demas, having loved this present world, has deserted me.” “Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm.” “At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me” (2 Tim. 1:15; 4:10, 14, 16). Does this sound like a winner who motivates people to accomplish significant things for the Savior?

Timothy, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth.” “Retain the standard of sound words which you have heard from me” and “entrust them to faithful men” (2 Tim. 1:13; 2:2, 15). Does this sound like an appeal to gather information on future trends and to be culturally astute? After all, information is power. Does this sound like advice to look for visionaries and innovators to carry the message into the future? Even a secular writer with a measure of discernment can see through the vanity of being an information collector. Bennis says, “We worship this information and are dazzled by it more than we use it, and it is often more impressive for its sheer bulk than for its real value. We have more information now than we can use.... The true measure of any society is not what it knows but what it does with what it knows.” [21]

Timothy, “Do not be ashamed, suffer hardship with me” (2 Tim. 1:8; 2:3). Is this a very positive or fun approach for motivating men in ministry?

The pull to acculturate is so strong that Paul motivates Timothy by pointing off into eternity (2 Tim. 1:8–9). “Timothy, do not bend to cultural influences that are fleeting. God had you in mind, Timothy, before there was any society. And he purposed by His grace to rescue you from this world and to make you a leader. Do not be distracted, Timothy, by what is so popular in this short-lived culture. Your treasure is eternal.” Paul is certainly less than modern in his last letter to Timothy.

Conclusion

For Paul, influence and motivational power come from years of being principled rather than pragmatic. He motivates others by setting the example. He has no hidden agenda; it is all out in the open; he has proven his unbending conviction under hardship over a long time; he has invested faithfully in long-term friendships and thus people are indebted to him; he goes higher than the normally accepted level of ethics; he avoids manipulation in order to allow God to be the final or ultimate cause in bringing conviction. In so many words, he motivates others by being a man with his eyes fixed on eternity, not on the cultural conventions of the day.

There I was, a college dropout, fired from my job at the grocery store. I was on the reefs of Guam, sitting on my surfing board, feeling the warm water around my legs, concerned about the shape of the next wave coming in, worried about the knobs on my knees. “Was I starting to look like a genuine surfer? I wonder what the tide will be like in an hour.” My eyes blink and there I am on the high desert of Mexico in a dusty cemetery standing on a mound of dirt, holding up a Bible, speaking a foreign language, concerned that Rodrigo’s family and friends hear about his belief in Christ. God, through many difficult circumstances, had sovereignly and purposefully changed my concerns and my eyesight. This new vision with its focus on eternity now determines my character and my conduct.

What motivates those who work with us? Quite simply, it is depth of character. It can be seen in the eyes-a dogged determination to live with eternity in mind. Do we have forever eyes? “Forever eyes, they never tell lies. Forever eyes. You never have to compromise when you have forever eyes.” [22]

Notes

1. Bard Pillette was for many years a missionary in central Mexico. He is presently involved in an assembly in Medford, Oregon in a ministry of evangelism and Bible teaching to Hispanics. This is the fourth in a series of four articles on Paul and his companions.
2. James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner, Credibility: How Leaders Gain and Lose It, Why People Demand It (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993), 116.
3. Ironically, the majority of books written on leadership in the business world are written by college professors who have no business experience or by motivational experts who have interviewed numerous successful CEOs.
4. F. Forrester Church, “Rhetorical Structure and Design in Paul’s Letter to Philemon,” Harvard Theological Review 71 (January-April 1978): 32-33. Church believes that Paul made the letter public because he wanted to teach the church something of his attitude toward relationships in the body of Christ. J. D. M. Derrett, “The Functions of the Epistle of Philemon,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 79 (January-February 1988): 72-73. Derrett sees Paul’s letter as a manifesto directed to the pagan and Jewish critics. As such Paul set out to deny that the church was becoming a sanctuary to runaway slaves. The churches would side with slave owners in order to be in harmony with the government. In keeping with Deuteronomy 23, the slave would be returned to his believing owner. These reasons for the public nature of Paul’s letter fall short of explaining Paul’s true intentions.
5. Percival Neale Harrison, “Onesimus and Philemon,” Anglican Theological Review 32 (October 1950): 280. Harrison notes the implications for other slave holders in the church if this letter were made public.
6. F. Forrester Church, “Rhetorical Structure in Philemon,” 26. Rather than command, Paul offers an “appeal filled with ethos and pathos that cannot help but affect his hearer.”
7. C. Forbes, “Comparison, Self-Praise and Irony: Paul’s Boasting and the Conventions of Hellenistic Rhetoric,” New Testament Studies 32 (January 1986): 1-30. J. T. Fitzgerald, “Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of the Catalogues of Hardship in the Corinthian Correspondence,” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1984). R. Hodgson, “Paul the Apostle and First Century Tribulation Lists,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 74 (January-February 1983), 59–80.
8. Eta Linnemann, Historical Criticism of the Bible: Methodology or Ideology?, trans. Robert W. Yarbrough (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), 104. Linnemann, a former German liberal scholar who has become a believer, is appalled by the naiveté of evangelicals who think that they personally will be left untouched by prolonged study in schools where historical critical views are dominant. She describes the pressures in the academic world to be broader in one’s thinking. For example, in order to please academia, “the act of thinking is detached from how it personally affects the thinker. Those questions which move the heart and occupy the mind, which bother a person and demand answers, are spurned in favor of ‘scientific questions.’” As a result evangelicals unwittingly are intimidated by culture into being intellectually more “sophisticated.”
9. D. A. Carson, The Cross and Christian Ministry: An Exposition of Passages from 1 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993), 34, 38–39. Carson, noting this trend in the area of cultural contextualization, reminds the reader of how different Paul was as he took his stand against cultural pressures in 1 Corinthian 2:2. “He ‘resolved’ (2:2) to adopt a more restrictive course, even though he was cutting across the stream of cultural expectations.” As he surveys the so-called successful churches, Carson asks, “Has the smoothness of the performance become more important to us than the fear of the Lord? Has polish, one of the modern equivalents of ancient rhetoric, displaced substance? Have professional competence and smooth showmanship become more valuable than sober reckoning over what it means to focus on Christ crucified?”
10. Rex A. Koivisto, One Lord, One Faith: A Theology for Cross-Denominational Renewal (Wheaton, Illinois: Victor Books, 1993), 181–211. Koivisto, in his pursuit of unity, has promoted the concept of agreeing on a core of doctrines that are non-negotiable while all other doctrines are considered matters of personal differences in interpretation.
11. Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus, Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1985), 43–54.
12. Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 136. “The relationship between writer and readers is fundamental to the attempt to persuade.”
13. Richard N. Ostling, “Full of Promise,” Time 146:19 (November 6, 1995): 62-63.
14. Keith Nickle, The Collection: A Study of Paul’s Strategy (Naperville, Illinois: Alec R. Allenson, 1966), 126. Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community. The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 177.
15. John F. Kilner, “A Pauline Approach to Ethical Decision-Making,” Interpretation 43 (October 1989): 375. Paul is reluctant to deprive his friend Philemon of freely exercising his will in choosing to do what is proper. F. Forrester Church, “Rhetorical Structure in Philemon,” 27. “Paul is literally forcing a point of honor. While ostensibly avoiding even the appearance of constraint, his argument is designed to do just that, yet without robbing Philemon of the opportunity to act on his own in a truly honorable fashion.”
16. For further discussion on Paul’s motivational approach, see the following works: R. J. Austgen, Natural Motivation in the Pauline Epistles (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969); Prosper Grech, “Christological Motives in Pauline Ethics,” in Paul de Tarse: Apôtre du Notre Temps, (Festschrift for Pope Paul VI), ed. Lorenzo De Lorenzi (Rome: Abboye de S. Paul, 1979), 541–58; Kazimierz Romaniuk, “Les Motifs Parénétiques dans les écrits Pauliniens,” Novum Testamentum 10 (April-July 1968): 191-207; M. H. Grumm, “Motivation in Paul’s Epistles,” Concordia Theological Monthly 35 (April 1964): 210-18; Albert Sundberg, “Enabling Language in Paul,” Harvard Theological Review 79 (January/April/July 1986): 270-77.
17. Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus, Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge, 89.
18. Aubrey Malphurs, Vision for Ministry in the 21st Century (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 24.
19. Aubrey Malphurs, Vision for Ministry in the 21st Century, 36–37.
20. D. A. Carson, The Cross and Christian Ministry, 26. After commenting on the growing dependence on ministry goals set by demographic studies, Carson says, “I am not for a moment suggesting that there is nothing to be learned from such studies. But after a while one may perhaps be excused for marveling how many churches were planted by Paul and Whitefield and Wesley and Stanway and Judson without enjoying these advantages.” He continues, “Ever so subtly, we start to think that success more critically depends on thoughtful sociological analysis than on the gospel; Barna becomes more important than the Bible. We depend on plans, programs, vision statements-but somewhere along the way we have succumbed to the temptation to displace the foolishness of the cross with the wisdom of strategic planning.”
21. Warren Bennis, Why Leaders Can’t Lead (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1989), 143
22. From the song “Forever Eyes” sung by Twila Paris.