Full text of "A critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon"

See other formats

eh SO

LZBEOELO LOLI ὃ

{11.1.11}

ΟΙΝΟΒΟ. 30 ALISHAAINN

Ee te teem

ΠΑΝ ΜΡ ΜΗΤΝ
ΜΝ oat lt

Jf nt ete i eenet Casale

Wei he ee be ae ern Γιὺ

The
dnternational Critical Commentary
on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and
ἀϊείυ Cestaments.

UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF

THE REV. SAMUEL ROLLES DRIVER, D.D.,
Regius Professor of Hebrew, Oxford;

THE Rev. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A, D.D.,
Master of University College, Durham;
AND

THE REV. CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS, D.D.,

Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical Theology,
Union Theological Seminary, New York.

ἘΠ EPS hes ΤΟ ΠΕ PHILIPPIANS
AND TO PHILEMON

Rev. MARVIN R. VINCENT, D.D.

PRINTED BY
ops 4 - tes
i ᾿ MORRISON AND GIBB LIMITED, ὶ

x ᾿ FOR : 5.
“ : ᾿ ADS δ᾽ ἐπε ΟἼΤΑ τς EDINBURGH.
LONDON : SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED.
NEW YORK ! CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, |

The Rights of Translation and of Reproduction are Reserved. od a

PhP:
Ν.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY

foie AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY

ON THE

EPISTLES TO THE PHILIPPIANS
AND TO PHILEMON

Rev. MARVIN’ KR. VINCENT, D.D.

BALDWIN PROFESSOR OF SACRED LITERATURE IN UNION THEOLOGICAL
SEMINARY, NEW YORK

«2.3

EDINBURGH:
Poa eeewnk..s¢ GHRORGE STREET.

First IMPRESSION . . September 1897.
SECOND IMPRESSION. . March 1902.

PREEPACE

Tue two epistles treated in this volume have always had a
peculiar attraction for both readers and expositors. On the
Epistle to the Philippians more than a hundred commentaries
have been produced, some of them by scholars of the first
rank. It would be strange, therefore, if this work did not
contain a great deal which has appeared elsewhere; and I am
sure that the call for its publication has not arisen from the
deficiencies of my predecessors.

I find, nevertheless, some satisfaction in the thought that
the knowledge of any subject is promoted, in however small a
degree, by the independent and honest treatment of each new
expositor, who, by approaching his work from a different direc-
tion, seeing his material at a different angle and in the light of
the most recent criticism, and shifting the points of emphasis,
may reawaken attention to what is already familiar, and thus
stimulate inquiry if he does not widen the sphere of knowledge.

The main object in this commentary has been to exhibit
St. Paul’s thought in these two letters which I am fully con-
vinced are from his pen. ‘To this end all comment — gram-
matical and lexical as well as exegetical—has been directed,
and special care has been given, to the paraphrases with which
the several sections are prefaced, and to the illustration of the
apostle’s nervous and picturesque diction upon which the marks
of his personality are so deeply set. The theological bearings
of certain passages it is manifestly impossible to overlook; and
the student is entitled to demand of the commentator such
notice and treatment of these as are consistent with the recog-

nised difference between a commentary and a theological trea-
Vv

vi PREFACE

tise. To such passages I trust that I have brought no dogmatic
bias to prevent or to modify the application of strict exegetical
principles.

I am conscious of the difficulties which attach, at certain
points, to all attempts to place the Philippian letter in its
complete and truthful historical setting. These difficulties are
inevitable in the present fragmentary and limited state of our
knowledge concerning some conditions of the Roman and Phi-
lippian churches which are presupposed in the epistle, so that
whatever conclusions may be reached by the most conscientious
study will awaken question and criticism.

I have had constantly in view the fact that these two letters
are familiar and informal productions, and have allowed that
fact due weight in the exegesis. Epistolary colloquialisms pre-
sent serious difficulties to an interpreter who refuses to recognise
them, and who insists upon the rigid application of rhetorical,
logical, and dogmatic canons to the unstudied and discursive
effusions of the writer’s heart.

In seeking to avoid the se/va selvaggia of technical discussion
which impairs the value of some most important works of this
class, I have not felt bound to go to the opposite extreme of
dogmatic conciseness. A brief discussion has sometimes seemed
necessary ; but, as a rule, I have given my own interpretation
with the reasons for it at the beginning of each note, appending
a simple statement of different views with the names of those
who hold them.

I avail myself of this opportunity to acknowledge gratefully
my obligations to previous workers in this field, and not least
to some of those from whom 1 have often had occasion to differ.

MARVIN R. VINCENT.

UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK.

4 ᾽ PAGE

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE PHILIPPIANS:

InrRopUuction renee “ρ΄ aK
ee 2 ies J : : - é 2 j 3 : XXXVIi
COMMENTARIES . : aie ots ; : : : d XXXixX

ABBREVIATIONS . ᾿ : Ὰ Ξ 3 4 : ᾿ ἘΠ ΧΙΠῚ
7 ;
aa To THE PHILIPPIANS ; : x ; a ; ἢ : I

| THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO PHILEMON:

’ INTRODUCTION . A ῇ ¢ : ὃ : ὃ : ete
Pee eee te ea 171
; COMMENTARIES . ὃ Ξ : : : 3 : ὙΠ 103

iy To PHILEMON . - . : : - : Ἶ < ANG is

_ INDEX or Supyecrs . . ee Gr os, ms. τος

Ν᾽ ἃς &
Mors OM τς WORDS .° . . . + ele 199

D3 ¥

ee en
f

EE ee

er ee

ee eee OF ST. PAUL TO
fei PHILIPPIANS

INTRODUCTION

MACEDONIA

In the earliest times, Macedonia was included in that vast
region called Thrace, which had no definite boundaries, but was
regarded as comprising all that part of Europe lying to the north
ὉΠ Greece.

The original seats of the Macedonians were bounded on the
west by the chain of Scardus, the northerly continuation of
Pindus; on the south by the Cambunian Mountains which
formed the northwestern boundary of Thessaly; on the east by
Mt. Bermius. The northern boundary cannot be determined.
The original Macedonia, therefore, did not reach the sea.

The country included within these boundaries is mountainous ;
but between the lateral ridges connecting with the main line of
Scardus were three wide alluvial basins, two of which were pos-
sessed by the original Macedonians. The territory was fertile,
affording abundant pasture and cornland. The inhabitants of the
mountains and of the plains acknowledged a common ethnical
name, though distinguished from each other by local titles.
Their language differed from those of the Illyrians, Thracians,
and Greeks. The different sections, at first distinct and inde-
pendent, were finally absorbed into one under the name of
Macedonia, having its centre at A®gze or Edessa, the modern
Vodhena, which, according to Phrygian legends, was the site of
the gardens of Midas. Edessa was always retained as the royal

ΙΧ

Χ INTRODUCTION

burying-place, and was regarded as the religious centre of the
nation.

Such was the position of the Macedonians in the seventh cen-
tury B.c. It was changed by a family of exiled Greeks of the
Herakleid or Temenid race of Argos (Hdt. 'viil. 137, 138).
According to Herodotus, Perdiccas was the founder of the new
Macedonian dynasty ; and he gives a list of five successive kings
from Perdiccas to Alexander, the son of Amyntas (B.C. 520-500).
During the reigns of Amyntas and Alexander, Macedonia became
implicated with the affairs of Greece. The ‘Temenid kings ex-
tended their dominions on all sides. Among their conquests was |
Pieria, between Mt. Bermius and the sea, which gave them the
command of a part of the coast of the Thermaic Gulf.

Philip, the father of Alexander the Great, ascended the Mace-
donian throne B.c. 360. . He subjugated the Pzeonians and Illy-
rians, recovered Amphipolis, and gained possession of Pydna,
Potideea, and Krenides, into which last-named place he intro-
duced colonists and named it, after himself, Philippi. By the
battle of Chzronea (B.c. 338), he became master of all Greece.
At his death Macedonia had become a compact empire. Its
boundaries had been extended as far as the Propontis, and from
the coast of the Propontis to the Ionian Sea, and the Ambracian,
Messenian, and Saronic gulfs.

His son Alexander succeeded him B.c. τ. The victory over
the Persians at the Granicus in Troas (B.c. 334) was followed
by the submission of nearly all Asia Minor. ‘The campaign
against the Persians ended in the battles of Issus (B.c. 333) and
Arbela (B.c. 331), which decided the fate of the Persian Empire
and were followed by the submission of Syria and Phcenicia. Pass-
ing into Egypt, he founded Alexandria, and carried his conquests
into the far East, where Babylon, Susa, Persepolis, and Pasargadz
fell into his hands. This wonderful campaign closed B.c. 327, by
which time his design had become manifest to combine Mace-
donia, Greece, and the East into one vast empire. The execution
of this plan was cut short by his death (B.c. 323). The ultimate
bearing of Alexander’s conquests upon the diffusion of Christianity
is familiar to every student.

After Alexander’s death the Macedonian empire fell into the
hands of his principal generals, and after a series of wars extend-

INTRODUCTION xi

ing over twenty-two years, it was broken into three great states,
— Macedonia, Egypt, and Syria.

Macedonia was first brought into contact with Rome through
the Carthaginian victories at Trasimene and Canne (B.c. 217,
216). Philip, the son of Demetrius, then king of Macedonia,
sent to Hannibal proffering his alliance; and a treaty was con-
cluded a year later. ‘The result of this treaty was the first Mace-
donian war with Rome, which was terminated by the treaty of
Dyrrhachium (B.c. 205). A second war followed, which ended
in the annihilation of the Macedonian army at Cynocephalee
(B.c. 197). A peace was concluded which destroyed the polit-
ical standing of the Macedonians, and by which all the states
which had previously been subject to Philip were declared free.

Philip was succeeded by his son Perseus, whose efforts against
Eumenes of Pergamus, the ally of the Romans, brought on a third
war (B.C. 171). The Macedonians experienced a crushing defeat
at Pydna (s.c. 168), by the Roman army under Lucius A‘milius
Paullus. The whole country was divided into four districts (Livy,
xlv. 29), each of which was to constitute a separate republic ; but
the citizens of each were forbidden to form any commercial or
connubial relations with those of any of the others. ‘Thus per-
ished the empire of Alexander the Great, a hundred and forty-four
years after his death. ‘The isolation of Macedonia was secured,
while the people were amused with a show of liberty.

Two claimants for the Macedonian throne, both professing to
be sons of Perseus, successively attempted to stir the Macedonians
to revolt. The Achzeans broke with Rome. L. Mummius was
sent to Greece B.C. 146, and burned the city of Corinth. By the
commission which arrived from Rome soon after, all Greece south
of Macedonia and Epirus was formed into a Roman province
under the name of Achaia, and Macedonia with Epirus into
another province.

Upon the succession of Augustus the provinces were divided
between the emperor and the senate (B.c. 27; see Suet. Augustus,
47). The provinces which enjoyed absolute peace were assigned
to the senate, while the frontier provinces, which required military
force, fell to the emperor. Augustus thus strengthened his own
military power, under pretence of relieving the senate of the cares
and dangers of the empire.

ΧΙ INTRODUCTION

The governors of the senatorial provinces were called procon-
suls. Their term of office was one year. They had no military
authority, and therefore no power of life or death over the soldiers
in their provinces. ‘The full title of governors of the imperial
provinces was “ Legatus Augusti pro Praetore.” ‘They were ap-
pointed by the emperor, and their term of office depended upon
his pleasure. Their long residence made them familiar with the
country and the people. ‘There were fewer temptations to pecu-
lation, and the imperial provinces were so much better governed
than the senatorial, that the people of the latter sometimes peti-
tioned to be transferred to imperial supervision ; especially as the
expenses of proconsular administration were paid by the provinces,
and the proconsuls were able to practise sundry abuses by which
the amounts were increased. Macedonia and Achaia, which orig-
inally fell to the senate, were, at their own request, made imperial
provinces by Tiberius (Tac. Azz. i. 76). By Claudius they were
again placed under the senate (Suet. Claud. 25).

LITERATURE
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE HISTORY OF ALEXANDER

C. MULLER: Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorumt, 1841.
A. SCHAFER u. H. NISSEN: Aédriss der Quellenkunde der griech. u. rom.
Geschichte, 1885-1889.

FABRICIUS: Bibliotheca Graeca.

J. G. Droysen: Die Matertalien zur Geschichte Alexanders.
A. FRANKEL: Die Quellen der Alexandergeschichte, 1883.
J. KAERsST: Forschungen zur Gesch. ad. Alex. d. Gr., 1887.

Fragments of lost writers collected by R. GEIER: Scriptores Historiarum
Alex. Mag. aetate suppares, 1844; and
C. MULLER: Scriptores Rerum Alex. Mag., 1846.

FOR THE ROMAN PERIOD

POLYBIUS: covering 220-144 B.C.
Dioporus SICULUS: Βιβλιοθήκη ‘Loropixy, B. xi.—xx., from the second Persian
war (B.C. 480) to B.C. 302.

Livy: B. xxxi.-xlv. (201-167 B.C.).

TEUFFEL: Gesch. ad. rom. Lit. 5 Aufl., 1890.

G. HERZBERG: σελ. Griechenlands unter der Herrschaft der Romer, 1886.
W. SCHOEN: Gesch. Griechenlands von der Entstehung des atolischen und

achaischen Bundes bis auf die Zerstérung Korinths, 1883.

ee eS αν

INTRODUCTION Xili

HISTORY OF ALEXANDER AND HIS SUCCESSORS

J. G. Droysen: Gesch. Alex. d. Gr., 1833; Gesch. des Hellenismus, 1836,
1843. Comes down to B.c. 220. The two works in a
2d ed. under the title Gesch. αἰ. Hellenismus, 1877, 1878.

B. NIESE: Gesch. d. griech. τε. maked. Staaten seit der Schlacht bet
Chaeronea, Pt. i. to B.C. 281. Good bibliography. 1893.

THIRLWALL: fiist. Greece, to B.C. 146. GROTE: to B.C. 301. CURTIUS:
to B.C. 338.

G. FINDLAY: Hist. Greece, 1877. B. G. NIEBUHR: Lectures on Anc.

fiist.; trans. by Schmitz; 1852.

E. A. FREEMAN: Alex. G. and Greece during the Maced. Period, review of
Niebuhr. Alex. G.; review of Grote. Historical Essays,
2d ser.

ROMAN PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION

J. MARQUARDT: Rémische Staatsverwaltung, 2 Aufl., 1881.

W. T. ARNOLD: Zhe Roman System of Provincial Administration to the
Accession of Constantine the Great, 1879.

TH. MOMMSEN: The Provinces of the Roman Empire; trans. by Dickson,
1886.

INSCRIPTIONS

“Corpus” of Gk. and Rom. Insc., Berlin Akad. ; supplemented by the Collec-
tion of LE BAs-WADDINGTON, Voyage Archéologique en
Gréce et en Asie Mineure, 1847.

Later and more complete Berlin Collection, 1877-1883.

A. J. LETRONNE: Recueil des Inscr. Grecques et Latines de l Egypte, 1842.

Collection of Ancient Greek Inscr. in Brit. Mus., 1874.

Bak Icks = A Manual of Greek Historical Inscr., 1882.

COINS
J. H. EcKHEL: Doctrina Numorum Veterum, 1792-1798.
MIONNET: Description de Médatlles Antiques Grecques et Romaines,
1806.

B. V. HEAD: ffistoria Numorum, 1887.

ΤΙ
PHILIPPI

The district occupied by Philippi was originally called Krenides,
‘Little Fountains’ (Strabo, 331 ; Appian, Bed/. Civ. iv. 105), from
the numerous springs which arose in the mountains on the north,

. and ran into the neighboring marsh.

XIV INTRODUCTION

According to Appian (Bei. Civ. iv. 105), Krenides was also
known as Datos or Daton. This statement has been too hastily
set down as an error, largely on the authority of Leake (V. Greece,
111. 223. See Lightf., Φλἤ2., p. 47; Rawlinson, Herodotus, on
ix. 75). It appears that Daton was a Thasian town near the
Strymonic Gulf, and was the centre of the continental possessions
of the Thasians. According to Strabo (vii. frag. 36), Neapolis
was a dependency of Daton. ‘The name of the town passed into
a proverb, as a place endowed with all good things. ‘The proba-
bility is that the first Thasian colony of Daton originally extended
up to the plain of Krenides, and included it in its territory, but
had fallen into the hands of the northern barbarians. About
360 B.c. the Thasians, aided by the banished Athenian orator
Callistratus, with some Athenian adventurers, founded a new
colony at Krenides under the old name. The year 360, which
followed the arrival of Callistratus at Thasos, is noted by Diod.
Sic. (xvi. 3) as the date of the occupation of the mines of Kre-
nides by the Thasians. It is an interesting fact that the coins
struck by the Thasians on the occasion of reviving the mines of
Krenides, and which bore the head of the Thasian Hercules,
the tripod (the symbol of foundation) and the legend ΘΑΣΙΩΝ
HIIEIPO, were preserved by the city of Philippi with only a
change of inscription (see Heuzey and Daumet, Mission Arche-
ologique de Macédoine, p. 60 ff. Comp. Curtius, Hist Greece,
ORCAS; τ ΞΙ 3)

The site was between the rivers Strymon and Nestus, and an-
swered, geographically, to the basin of the Angites (Hdt. vii. 113),
which issued from the right bank of the Strymon, and formed, two
leagues from the sea, the lake Kerkinitis. The basin might rather
be described as a plain, now known as the plain of Drama, and
framed on every side by mountains. The vast masses of Pangeeus
separated it from the sea; but at one point the range was de-
pressed, affording easy access to the gulf where now the Turkish
harbor of Kavala, the ancient Neapolis, opens, opposite to the
island of Thasos.

Thrace contained rich deposits of gold. Golden particles from
Hzemus were borne down by the waters of the Hebrus, and the
Peonian laborers, according to Strabo (vii. frag. 35), turned them
up with their ploughshares. But the treasures of Pangzeus and of

INTRODUCTION XV

the mountains adjoining Krenides surpassed all others in richness.
Gold-mining was the principal industry of the region for a long
series of years ; and from the time that the treasures of the moun-
tains were first brought to light by the Phoenicians, they played an
important part in the history of the northern kingdoms. The
feverish greed for gain did not promote the advance of civilisa-
tion ; agricultural and commercial interests suffered, and the rapa-
city of foreign invaders was stimulated.

The Thasians, at the instigation of Callistratus, in the year
before the accession of Philip of Macedon, penetrated into the
interior to the plain of the Angites, and revived Krenides as a
centre of mining operations. But the assaults of the Thracians
upon the new colony soon compelled it to seek the assistance
of Philip. He drove back the Thracians, annexed to Macedonia
all the country as far as the Nestus, and built a fortress which
became the centre of the mining district. He also gave the place
his own name, Philippi. The plural form of the name seems to
indicate that the new town, at the time when it fell into his hands,
was composed of several distinct groups of dwellings defended by
detached works for the protection of the miners, and not by a
common and continuous enceinte. A fort on the hill which com-
manded the defile was a necessity. Under the protection of this
work it was sufficient to bar the defile by a temporary wall in order
to allow an important group of dwellings to be erected at the foot
of the rocks. Philip improved the region, drying up the marshes
and laying out roads, and Theophrastus ( Cawsae Plantarum, v.14)
relates that by these works the climate was perceptibly modified.

The gold-mining industry yielded to Philip an annual revenue
of a thousand talents, —a treasure which furnished him with the
means of establishing and maintaining a navy, and which was quite
as potent as his army in securing the future triumphs of Macedonia.
“The gold of Krenides spread itself over Greece, preceding the
phalanx like an advance-guard, and opening more gates than the
battering-rams and catapults” (Heuzey).

On the mines, see Curtius, 2752, Greece, v.52; Appian, Bell. Civ., iv. 106;
Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens ; Heuzey and Daumet, Mission Archéolo-
gique. See especially their interesting description of the rock formations of
Philippi, and the comparison with the auriferous rocks of California (p. 55 ff.).
On mining under the Romans, Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung, Bd. ii.
245, 252-258.

ἐ

X1V INTRODUCTION

According to Appian (Bed. Civ. iv. 105), Krenides was also
known as Datos or Daton. This statement has been too hastily
set down as an error, largely on the authority of Leake (V. Greece,
iii, 223. See Lightf, Φλ112., p. 47; Rawlinson, Herodotus, on
ix. 75). It appears that Daton was a Thasian town near the
Strymonic Gulf, and was the centre of the continental possessions
of the Thasians. According to Strabo (vii. frag. 36), Neapolis
was a dependency of Daton. The name of the town passed into
a proverb, as a place endowed with all good things. ‘The proba-
bility is that the first Thasian colony of Daton originally extended
up to the plain of Krenides, and included it in its territory, but
had fallen into the hands of the northern barbarians. About
360 B.c. the Thasians, aided by the banished Athenian orator
Callistratus, with some Athenian adventurers, founded a new
colony at Krenides under the old name. ‘The year 360, which
followed the arrival of Callistratus at Thasos, is noted by Diod.
Sic. (xvi. 3) as the date of the occupation of the mines of Kre-
nides by the Thasians. It is an interesting fact that the coins
struck by the Thasians on the occasion of reviving the mines of
Krenides, and which bore the head of the Thasian Hercules,
the tripod (the symbol of foundation) and the legend @ASIQN
HIIEIPO, were preserved by the city of Philippi with only a
change of inscription (see Heuzey and Daumet, JZzsszon Arche-
ologigue de Macédoine, p. 60 ff. Comp. Curtius, 4751. Greece,
Trans. v. 53)-

The site was between the rivers Strymon and Nestus, and an-
swered, geographically, to the basin of the Angites (Hdt. vii. 113),
which issued from the right bank of the Strymon, and formed, two
leagues from the sea, the lake Kerkinitis. The basin might rather
be described as a plain, now known as the plain of Drama, and
framed on every side by mountains. The vast masses of Pangzeus
separated it from the sea; but at one point the range was de-
pressed, affording easy access to the gulf where now the Turkish
harbor of Kavala, the ancient Neapolis, opens, opposite to the
island of Thasos.

Thrace contained rich deposits of gold. Golden particles from
Heemus were borne down by the waters of the Hebrus, and the
Pzeonian laborers, according to Strabo (vii. frag. 35), turned them
up with their ploughshares. But the treasures of Pangzeus and of

INTRODUCTION XV

the mountains adjoining Krenides surpassed all others in richness.
Gold-mining was the principal industry of the region for a long
series of years ; and from the time that the treasures of the moun-
tains were first brought to light by the Phcenicians, they played an
important part in the history of the northern kingdoms. The
feverish greed for gain did not promote the advance of civilisa-
tion ; agricultural and commercial interests suffered, and the rapa-
city of foreign invaders was stimulated.

“The gold of Krenides spread itself over Greece, preceding the
phalanx like an advance-guard, and opening more gates than the
battering-rams and catapults ” (Heuzey).

On the mines, see Curtius, W7s¢. Greece, v.52; Appian, Bell. Civ., iv. 106;
Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens ; Heuzey and Daumet, A/ission Archéolo-
gique. See especially their interesting description of the rock formations of
Philippi, and the comparison with the auriferous rocks of California (p. 55 ff.).
On mining under the Romans, Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung, Ba. ii.
245, 252-258.

xvl INTRODUCTION

The Romans became masters of this region upon the defeat of
the Republican forces under Brutus and Cassius by Octavianus
and Antony (B.c. 42). Philippi was the scene of the final conflict.
The Republicans occupied two hills facing the town to the south-
east, while the triumviral army was posted in the open plain. Two
battles were fought: the first indecisive, resulting in the death of
Cassius ; the second, twenty days later, which decided the fate of
the republic.

The sojourn of Octavianus at Philippi revealed to him its im-
portance both as a military position and as a source of revenue.
After his victory, and in commemoration of it, he made Philippi a
military colony, and bestowed upon it the jus Sfalicum. ‘The
inscription COHOR. PRAE. PHIL. found on little copper coins
of Philippi goes to show that this colony was originally composed
of a division of veterans belonging to the preetorian cohorts of the
triumvirate. It bore the name COLONIA JULIA AUGUSTA
VICTRIX PHILIPPENSIUM. ‘The colony was not a mere
town with its outskirts, but a great department, with boroughs
and secondary towns, of which Philippi was the administrative
centre. ‘The Romans succeeded the Macedonians in the working
of the mines, but never made them as profitable as the Mace-
donians had done.

Communities in the Roman provinces were either municipia
(free towns) or coloniae (colonies). The colony represented trans-
planted citizenship, while the sznzc7pium was engrafted upon the
state. A provincial town became a meznicipium when its inhabi-
tants received the Roman franchise, and a constitution from a
Roman governor or commissioner. At the time of the Republic,
and among the Italian cities, the mwmncifia were the more import-
ant; but in the imperial period the colonies outranked them.
Extraordinary privileges were mostly, if not exclusively, confined
to the colonies. ‘The principal of these privileges was the jus
Ltalicum, which was a grant to the community, not to individuals,
and consisted in the right of proprietorship according to the
Roman civil status. ‘This right involved the acquisition of owner-
ship by long use or prescription (wswcapio) ; the right of trans-
ferring ownership by a fictitious suit (221 jure cessio) ; the right of
the purchase or transfer of property (#ancipatio), and the right
of civil action or lawsuit (wndicatio). As, according to Roman

INTRODUCTION XVil

law, landed property in Italy was exempt from taxation, the jus
Ltalicum conferred the same immunity upon provincial land. The
right was never given except to a colony ; but all colonies did not
possess it, and when they did not, the colonists were subjected to
both a poll-tax and a land-tax.

A colony was a miniature Rome. The colonists proceeded to
their destination under their standards, and marked out with the
plough the limits of the new city. The land was divided into
sections of two hundred acres, which were subdivided into lots
(sor¢es), and in military colonies these were apportioned accord-
ing to rank. Even in the form and appearance of the city the
mother-city was imitated. The coinage bore Roman inscriptions.
The colonies were free from any intrusion by the governor of the
province. ‘Their affairs were regulated by their own magistrates
called Duumviri, who delighted to style themselves Praetores
(στρατηγοί). The officers of Philippi are referred to by Luke
under this title (Acts xvi. 20-38).

On colonies see Marquardt, Adm. Staatsverwaltung, Bd. i. 360 ff.;

Savigny, Gesch. des rim. Rechts; ‘Coloni,’ in Philological Museum, ii.

117; Walther, Gesch. des rém. Rechts; Arnold, Roman Provincial Aa-

ministration. Good summaries in Conybeare and Howson’s Life and
Epistles of St. Paul, ch. ix., and Lewin, Life and 225. of St. P., ch. xi.

The name Philippi was long preserved in the village of Fili-
bedjik or Filibat, but has now disappeared. ‘The only inhabited
place near the enceinte of Philippi is the village of Ratchka, half
hidden in a ravine of the mountain a little on one side of the
ancient acropolis. In the higher town, which represents the an-
cient Macedonian city, an enclosure of rough stones preserves
traces of the Hellenic wall. The whole plain at the foot of the
mountains is covered with ruins. ‘The circular outline of the
theatre on the steep slope of the acropolis facing Pangzeus may
still be seen. The neighboring rocks are covered with numerous
pious inscriptions, and with images of the deities venerated by the
colonists, together with the names of their worshippers. At the
foot of these rocks are vestiges of a temple of Silvanus, one of
the deities most revered by the Romans of the imperial period, as
the guardian of plantations, as one of the household gods, and
as the protector of the empire and of the emperor. His worship
extended everywhere over the provinces. Two large statues of

XVill INTRODUCTION

this deity have been discovered, one of which appears to have
been the image worshipped in the sanctuary of the temple; also
tablets containing lists of offerings for the construction and deco-
ration of the temple, and of the names of the members of the
sacred college. Among these names are some which are familiar
to the readers of the Acts and Pauline epistles; as Crescens,
Secundus, Trophimus, Pudens, etc. In the lower town is found a
ruin known by the Turks as Dérékder or ‘the columns,’ consisting
of a portion of a wall and four massive columns, and which cannot
be identified. It is supposed to have been a public bath. Lewin
(Life and Eps. etc.,i. 211) says, without any authority for the state-
ment, that this was the forum where the apostles were scourged.

See the Afisston Archéologigue de Macédoine by Heuzey and Daumet,
one of the most interesting and important of modern contributions to the
study of the history and antiquities of Macedonia. The expedition was
undertaken in 1861 under the auspices of Napoleon III.

BBE
PAUL IN MACEDONIA

Philip and Alexander, A‘milius, Mummius, and Octavianus had
thus prepared the way for Paul. According to the account in
Acts xvi., Paul, at Alexandria Troas, saw in a vision a Macedonian
man who said to him, “ Come over to Macedonia and help us.”

Professor Ramsay (S4. Paul, the Traveller and the Roman Citizen,
p- 201) says that Paul did not infer the Macedonian origin of the man
in the dream from his words, but recognised him as a Macedonian by sight;
and since the Macedonians dressed like Greeks, it follows that the man in
the vision was personally known to him. Professor R. also holds with Renan
(8. Paul, ch. v.) that Luke was a Macedonian. I do not know the grounds
of his statement that it has been generally recognised that Luke must have
had some connection with Philippi. In our ignorance of Luke’s antecedents
the possibility of his having been a Macedonian cannot be denied.

Paul, therefore, embarked at Troas with Luke, Timothy, and
Silvanus (Acts xv. 49, xvi. 1,3. Comp. Acts xvi. 8, 10), and land-
ing at Neapolis, proceeded over Mt. Pangzeus, about eight miles,
to Philippi, by a branch of the great Via Egnata.

See Renan’s beautiful description of the route (.5Δ Paz, ch. vi.). Cou-
sinéry ( Voyage dans la Macédoine) and Tafel (De Via Militari Romanorum

INTRODUCTION ΧΙΧ

Φρηπαΐα) have endeavored unsuccessfully to identify the site of Neapolis
with Eski Kavala, fifteen miles S.W. of Kavala.

With the arrival of Paul at Neapolis the gospel first entered
Europe. Yet the apostle was not consciously entering a new
continent. The distinction between Europe and Asia did not
exist for him. Asia, in the New Testament, denotes the Roman
province of that name, and the word Europe does not occur. ‘To
St. Paul these later divisions represented only sections of the one
Roman world.

In Acts xvi. 12, Philippi is described as ἥτις ἐστὶν πρώτη τῆς
μερίδος Μακεδονίας πόλις KoAwvia. ‘There is probably an error in
the text. To the epithet πρώτη explained as denoting the political
rank of Philippi, it is objected that ‘Thessalonica was the general
capital, and that πρώτη, though common as an honorary title of
cities in Asia, was not so used in Greece or Macedonia. Again,
if μερὶς be explained as denoting one of the four districts into
which Macedonia was divided by A‘milius, it may be replied
that that division was made more than two hundred years before
Paul’s arrival, and continued for only twenty-two years to the time
when the country was formed into a single province ; so that the
fourfold division had long been abandoned and was perhaps for-
gotten. Moreover, if this division had survived, the centre of this
district would have been Amphipolis and not Philippi.

Even stronger are the objections against taking πρώτη to mean
the first city which Paul reached in his Macedonian tour (so
Erasm., Beng., Olsh., Lightf., and others). Philippi was not the
first city of Macedonia at which Paul arrived. It cannot be
shown that Neapolis was at this time regarded as a Thracian town
(Viehtt 7727, p. 30: See contr. Hort, 2. 7. ores on Select
Readings, ad loc.). Mepidos, on this interpretation, is apparently
superfluous ; for Philippi was, in that case, regarded not as the
first city of that district, but of all Macedonia. Neither ἥτις nor
ἐστὶν suit this meaning, since both are used for characterising, and
nv would probably have been chosen to mark a mere stage of the
apostle’s journey. Moreover, πρῶτος by itself never has the local
sense. If there is no error in the text, πρώτη, I think, must
denote rank; though, even if it were proved that Luke was a
Macedonian, I should not be disposed to accept Professor Ram-
say’s view that Luke exaggerated the dignity of Philippi from

XX INTRODUCTION

pride in his own city (52 Paul the Traveller, etc., p. 206). Mepis,
which does not mean ‘province’ (ἐπαρχία), may indicate some
subdivision, not recognised in the formal political arrangement, of
which Philippi was the centre ; and πρώτῃ may mark-an emphasis
on its colonial rank as possessing the jus Jtalicum (note the
emphatic position of κολωνία) ; so that Philippi is designated as
the most considerable colonial city of this part of Macedonia,
πόλις KkoAwvia being taken together. In this designation lies the
motive expressed by ἥτις ἐστὶν, ‘seeing it is,’— that the promi-
nence of the city led Paul to choose it as the starting-point of his
missionary work.

See Wendt’s AZeyer on Acts xvi.12; Ramsay, 7he Church in the Roman
Empire, p.156f.; O. Holtzmann, WMeztestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, p. 104;
Lightf., Prz2/., p. 50.

The events of St. Paul’s Macedonian ministry are related in
Acts xvi., xvii. Imprisoned at Philippi, and then expelled by the
magistrates, he went to Thessalonica, and thence to Bercea, from
both which places he was driven by the fanatical opposition of the
Jews. From Bercea he went to Athens.

The narrative in Acts is sketchy and full of movement, dwelling
only upon salient points, and furnishing no definite information as
to the length of the apostle’s stay in Philippi. Slight hints like
ἡμέρας τινάς (xvi. 12), and ἐπὶ πολλὰς ἡμέρας (xvi. 18), and the
fact that some time must have been required to form a circle of
“brethren ” (xvi. 40), and to develop those strong and affectionate
relations which appear in the Philippian letter, seem to indicate a
longer stay than might be inferred from the surface of the narrative.

See Clemen, Die Chronologie der paulinischen Briefe, 5. 192; Klopper,
Komm. Einlett., Ὁ. 3.

From the dropping of the first person plural at Acts xvi. 40, it
has been inferred that Luke remained behind in Philippi. About
five years later the apostle again visited Macedonia, and having
gone thence to Corinth, was about to return to Syria by sea, when
a plot against his life determined him to return to Macedonia
(Acts xix: 21; Xx..1=3;; 5 Cora a5; ay) τ. ess ye τὴ ee Bach
meeting with his Philippian converts is noted (Acts xx. 6), after
which he departed for Troas. ‘This is our last notice of the
Philippians until the time of the Roman imprisonment.

INTRODUCTION ὟΣ]

IV
PAUL AT ROME

After the shipwreck at Malta, Paul arrived at Rome in the spring
of 56 a.p., during the reign of Nero (54-68). Burrhus, the preeto-
rian prefect, a rough but kindly disposed soldier, extended to him
every liberty which the law allowed ; permitting him to occupy a
lodging of his own under the charge of a preetorian soldier (Acts
xxvill. 16), and allowing his friends and other visitors free access
to him (Acts xxviii. 30).

I follow the chronology of Harnack, Die Chronol. ὦ, altchr. Lit. bis Euse-
bius, Bd. i. S. 233. See also O. Holtzmann, Meucest. Zeitgesch. S. 132; and

Prof. A. McGiffert, Amer. Journ. Theol. Jan. 1897, p.147. Against these

see Schiirer, Gesch. d. jiid. Volkes, 2 Aufl. i. S. 483 ff. (Clarks’ Trans. Divis. i.
Vol. ii. p. 182), and Professor Ramsay, Exfositor, May, 1896, p. 338, and

April, 1897, p. 245 ff.

The church at Rome had been for some time in existence before
the apostle’s arrival, although we are ignorant of the circumstances
of its foundation. In Acts xxviii. 15 its existence is assumed, and
the company which meets Paul at Appii Forum has the character
of a deputation. Nor is it likely that the church was insignificant
either in numbers or influence, since the important letter to it,
with its numerous salutations, was composed three or four years
before his arrival at Rome.

His influence quickly made itself felt in the pretorian guard,
and among his visitors from the city; and the brethren of the
Roman church were stimulated to greater boldness and zeal in
the proclamation of the gospel (Phil. i. 12-14). His presence
and activity also stirred up certain hostile elements in the church
itself; men who made the preaching of the gospel a means of
promoting their own partisan interests, and of venting their envy
and spite against the apostle. See on ch. i. 15, 16.

Paul’s long detention before his trial was nothing unusual, as is
shown by Josephus’ account of some Jewish priests sent by Felix
to Rome, who were not released for three years (Jos. Vita, 3).
The delay may have been caused by the non-arrival of his prose-
cutors, and possibly by the loss in the shipwreck of the official
record of the proceedings forwarded by Festus; although there

XXII INTRODUCTION

was a law of Claudius which permitted the discharge of a prisoner
if the prosecutors did not appear within a certain time (Di. Cass.
Ix. 28). The pressure of judicial business also was enormous: a
long time might have been required for bringing witnesses from
Syria and Proconsular Asia after the arrival of the prosecutors ; and
a vacation occurred during the winter months when judicial pro-
ceedings were suspended (Suet. Aug. 32; Claud. 23; Galba, 14).

See Wieseler, Ciroz., and Geib, Gesch. d. romischen Criminalprocess.

ν
EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS: WHERE AND WHEN COMPOSED

That the Philippian letter was written from Rome is now gener-
ally conceded. The view of Paulus (1799), Bottger (1837),
Rilliet (1841), Thiersch (1879), placing its composition at Czesa-
rea, has been mostly abandoned, and even those who assign
Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon to Ceesarea, hold that Philip-
pians was written at Rome. The environment of the apostle as
indicated by the letter itself, the different groups of persons which
it includes, the number and complexity of the relations, and the
different and influential party tendencies do not suit the narrow
limits of a provincial city; while the preetorian guard and the
saints of Ceesar’s household clearly point to Rome. Paul’s expec-
tation of a speedy decision of his case (11. 23) agrees better with
Rome. Ini. 25, 27, ii. 24, he expresses the hope of returning to
Philippi in the event of his liberation, while in Czesarea he would
still have been directing his thought to Rome.

The date of composition as related to that of the three Asiatic
letters cannot be determined with certainty. The majority of
critics assign the epistle to the later period of Paul’s imprison-
ment, and place it last of the four (Mey., Weiss, Alf., Ellic., Kl.,
Godet, Lips., Holtzn;, Jul.)

The reasons assigned for this opinion are the following: 1. The
evidence assumed to be furnished by the epistle that along period -
of imprisonment has elapsed (i. 12 ff.). 2. The abandonment of
the apostle by his more intimate companions (ii. 20), and the
absence of salutations from Luke and Aristarchus. 3. The time
required for journeys in the communications between Rome and

INTRODUCTION XXiil

Philippi implied in the letter. 4. A spirit of depression assumed
to be manifest in the epistle, indicating a later stage of confine-
ment and increased severity of treatment. 5. The expectation
expressed of a speedy release.

Lightfoot’s ingenious discussion (Comm. p. 30 ff.) does little
more than to show the futility of these reasons.. No decisive evi-
dence of a long imprisonment is furnished by 1. 12 ff. All the
results detailed in i. 13-17 might easily have come to pass in a
few months after the apostle’s arrival, especially since he was in
constant contact with the preetorian soldiers, the residents of the
city had free access to him, and the church in Rome had been
founded some years before. Our ignorance of the movements of
his companions forbids any positive conclusions from the allusions
in the letter. The statement in il. 20, 21, is quite inexplicable
(see note). The names of Luke and Aristarchus, which occur in
Colossians and Philemon, are wanting in Ephesians, together with
that of Timothy, and an argument from silence is in any case
precarious. ‘The tone of depression ascribed to the epistle is a
pure fancy. The letter is preeminently joyful and hopeful. If the
date assigned to St. Paul’s arrival in Rome is correct, the events
which are assumed to have increased the rigor of the apostle’s
treatment and thus to have depressed his spirits —the death of
Burrhus, the accession of ‘Tigellinus as preetorian prefect, and
Nero’s marriage to Poppzea—are too late. Poppzea’s influence
over Nero did not begin until 58 (Tac. Amm. xiii. 45, 46), and the
marriage was not celebrated until 62 (Tac. Av. xiv.60). Burrhus
died and was succeeded by Tigellinus in 62 (Tac. Avmn. xiv. 51).
The expectation of a speedy release is also expressed in the letter
to Philemon.

As to the time necessary for sending a message to Philippi
announcing Paul’s imprisonment, for Epaphroditus’ journey to
Rome with the contribution, for the message to Philippi con-
cerning Epaphroditus’ sickness, and for the message to Rome
announcing that the Philippians had received this report, — the
distance between Rome and Philippi was only seven hundred
miles, and even with the imperfect means of travelling, all the four
journeys could have been accomplished in four months. Light-
foot’s attempt to reduce the four journeys to two is founded on

the assumption that Aristarchus left Paul at Myra and proceeded
εἰ

XXiV INTRODUCTION

to Thessalonica, thus carrying the news of the apostle’s removal
to Rome. But for this there.is not a particle of evidence.

On the other hand, Lightfoot’s constructive argument for the
earlier date οἵ the letter is anything but conclusive, and is, I
venture to think, illogical in method, although it has the weighty
indorsement of Dr. Hort. Lightfoot urges that in style and tone
this epistle more resembles the earlier letters than do the epistles
to the Ephesians and Colossians ; that it represents the transition
from the conflict with Pharisaic Judaism to that with the new type
of error which was emerging in the Asiatic churches. But grant-
ing the striking parallels between Romans and Philippians, and
granting that Ephesians and Colossians exhibit an advanced stage
of development in the churches both on the side of heresy and
of Christian knowledge, surely it by no means follows that the
order of composition corresponds with the stages of development.
The special circumstances in the case of each church must be
taken into the account. I cannot see the force of Farrar’s state-
ment (/aw/, ii. p. 419) that the Philippian epistle, if it had been
written later than the Asiatic epistles, must have borne traces of
the controversy with the incipient gnosticism of the Colossian
church. Why?—“The incipient gnosticism of the Colossian
church”? had not reached Philippi. As Professor Ramsay ob-
serves, “‘ It was not in Paul’s way to send to Philippi an elaborate
treatise against a subtle, speculative heresy which had never af-
fected that church.” And, in any case, it is not easy to construct,
on the data furnished by these epistles, a scale of church develop-
ment so accurately graded as to furnish a satisfactory basis of
reasoning in a case like this. Philippians, it is true, presents
some striking parallels with Romans; but parallels with Romans

may be pointed out in both Ephesians and Colossians (see v. ‘

Soden, Hand-Comm. Koloss., Einl. iv.) ; and it would not be dif-
ficult to make out a case for a development in the Philippian
church quite as advanced as that represented in Ephesians, though
possibly on different lines.

Nothing in the epistle compels us to place it later than the
others, and nothing prevents our placing it earlier; but it must
be admitted that positive evidence for the earlier date is lacking.
It may be remarked that the Philippians would follow the apostle’s
movements as closely as possible. It is not impossible that the news

INTRODUCTION XXV

of his departure for Rome might have reached them from Asia be-
fore his arrival, especially as the voyage was so long. In that case
their gift would probably have reached him comparatively early.
The tone of the letter, so far as it relates to himself, seems to indi-
cate fresh impressions rather than those received after a long and
tedious confinement.

VI
OCCASION OF THE EPISTLE

The immediate occasion of the epistle was a contribution of
money brought by Epaphroditus from the members of the Philip-
pian church (ii. 25, iv. 18). ‘They had sent him similar tokens of
their affection on former occasions (iv. 15, 16 ; comp. Ὁ Or. x1, ΟΝ;
but an opportunity of repeating their gifts had been long wanting
(iv. το). Whether from the hardships of the journey, or from
over-exertion in forwarding Paul’s work in Rome, Epaphroditus
became dangerously sick (ii. 27, 30). On his recovery he was
troubled lest the Philippians should be anxious about him, and
was eager to return in order to relieve their fears, besides suffer-
ing, no doubt, from the homesickness peculiar to an invalid in a
foreign land (ii. 26). Paul therefore sent him back, and sent by
him this letter (ii. 25, 28), containing not only thanks for the gift
(iv. 10-18), but also information about his own condition, his
success in preaching the gospel, and other matters of special
interest to the Philippians ; besides such exhortations and admon-
itions as the condition of the church as reported by Epaphroditus
seemed to demand.

VII
CRITICAL QUESTIONS

The external evidence for the authenticity and genuineness of
the epistle is substantially the same as for the principal epistles.
It appeared in Marcion’s Canon, and Hippolytus (/f/aeves. v. 143,
X. 318) says that the Sethians, an Ophite sect of the second cen-
tury, interpreted Phil. ii. 6, 7, to explain their doctrines. ‘The
excerpts from the Valentinian Theodotus preserved by Clement
of Alexandria contain two references to Phil. ii. 7 (35, 43). The
letter of Polycarp to the Philippians appeals to the epistle or

XXV1 INTRODUCTION

epistles of Paul to the Philippian church (c. ili. See note on
Phil. iii. 1). A few passages which have the appearance of
reminiscences of the Philippian letter occur in Clement (Ad
Cor. xvi., xlvii.) ; Ignatius (Rom. ii.; Philad. vii.) ; The Epistle
to Diognetus, 5, and Theophilus of Antioch (Ad Aufolycum).
The Muratorian Canon places it among the letters of Paul. It is
included in the Syriac (Peshitto) and Old-Latin versions. At the
close of the second century it is in use by Irenzeus, Tertullian, and
Clement of Alexandria. |

See Iren. iv. 18, 4; Clem. Alex. Paedag. i. 524; Strom. iv. 12, 19, 94;
Tert. De Resur. 23; Cont. Marc. ν. 20; De Praescr. 26.

It is cited in the letter from the churches of Lyons and Vienne
to the brethren in Asia and Phrygia (a.D.177, Euseb. H. 2. v. τ,
2). Origen and Eusebius admit and use it as a work of Paul.
From the time of Irenzeus and Clement of Alexandria its authen-
ticity and genuineness were generally recognised.

The epistle was first assailed by Baur (Paulus, 1845; Zh. /.,
1849, 1852), followed by several representatives of the Tiibingen
school, — Schwegler (Wachap. Zeital., 1846), Planck ( Zh. /., 1847),
K6stlin (Zh. 7, 1850), Volkmar (7x. /., 1856, 1857), Bruno Bauer
(Christus und die Cisaren, 1877). The grounds of attack were :
lack of originality and imitation of other epistles ; traces of gnostic
ideas ; the antedating of the offices of Bishop and Deacon; and
the disagreement of the statements concerning justification by
faith with Paul’s statements elsewhere. The epistle was a product
of the second century, intended to reconcile the two parties then
struggling in the church. These parties were symbolically repre-
sented by Euodia and Syntyche (iv. 2). Clement of Rome was a
myth, founded upon the conversion of Flavius Clemens, the kins-
man of Domitian. The writer of the Clementine Homilies, in
order to represent Clement as the disciple of Peter, represents
him as the kinsman of Tiberius. The Pauline writer of Philip-
pians, accepting this fiction, and anxious to conciliate the Petrine
faction, represents this fictitious disciple of Peter as the fellow-
laborer of Paul (iv. 3).

These objections are mainly imaginary. On the antedating of
the episcopate see Excursus on i. 1. The identification of Cle-
ment with Flavius Clemens is absurd. The assumed imitation

INTRODUCTION ΧΧΥΠ

of other epistles amounts only to an occasional relationship in
expression, the absence of which would be remarkable, and which
does not imply dependence. Baur asserted that in ii. 5-8 the
writer had in view the gnostic Sophia, the last of the zeons, which,
in the attempt to grasp the knowledge of the absolute One, fell
from the πλήρωμα into κένωμα or emptiness. ‘The ambition of the
eeon was contrasted with the self-emptying of the eternal Christ.
Volkmar explained Euodia (‘right path’) as a synonym for ortho-
doxy, and Syntyche (‘ partner’) as designating the Gentile church.
Such vagaries are their own refutation.

The assault was renewed after an interval by Hitzig (Zur
Krit. paulin. Br., 1870) ; Kneucker (Die Anfange ὦ. rim. Chris-
tenthums, 1881) ; Hinsch (Zw. Zh., 1873) ; Hoekstra (Z2./,
1875) ; Biedermann ( Christ/. Dogmatik, 11. 1885) ; and especially
by Holsten, in a vigorous and searching critique ( 22. Z%., 1875,
1876).

The objections of this group of critics turned mainly on alleged
divergencies in style and matter from the acknowledged Pauline
epistles. ‘The principal points are the following :

1. The sharp contrast between the divine and the human form
of existence (ii. 6-11) is unpauline. In 1 Cor. xv. 47-49, Paul
conceives Christ in his preéxistence as ἄνθρωπος ἐπούρανιος, “ἃ
heavenly man,’ — an ideal man (see Excursus on ii. 6-11). Ac-
cording to the Epistle to the Philippians, Christ’s manhood begins
with his incarnation, while his preincarnate state is described as
ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων. In other words, according to τ Corinthians,
the preincarnate Christ would be only an ideal man. According
to Philippians, the preincarnate Christ would belong to an order
of beings higher than the heavenly humanity.

The error lies in the misinterpretation of ézovpavios. It is true
that Phil. ii. 6 presents a notion of the preincarnate Christ superior
to that of a mere heavenly man; but ἐπούρανιος in 1 Corinthians
does not refer to the preincarnate Christ, but to the risen and glo-
rified Christ. According to Corinthians, while the first man, Adam,
is of earthly origin (ἐκ γῆς, χοϊκός), the second man, Christ, is of
heavenly derivation (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ), and is in heaven with his glorified
body in which he will appear at his second coming. ὋὉ ἐπούρανιος
is he who is in heaven, not as the heavenly archetype existing
ideally in the mind of God, but as exalted to heaven (Eph. iv. ὃ ;

XXViil INTRODUCTION

Phil. ii. 9). This appears from the term ἐπουράνιοι applied to
risen and glorified Christians (comp. Phil. iii, 20, 21). The
question which Paul is answering in 1 Cor. xv. 35 ff., is, “ With
what kind of a body do they come?” and the question is an-
swered by showing the relation of the resurrection-body, not to
that of the preincarnate Christ, but to that of the risen and glori-
fied Christ. Hence there is no contradiction between the ἐν
μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων by which Paul represents the preincarnate
glory of Christ, and the ἐπούρανιος by which he represents Christ
risen and glorified. In Corinthians Paul is not contemplating the
mode of Christ’s preéxistence at all, but the mode of his existence
as the risen and glorified Saviour, in which all true believers shall
share.

2. Divergences from the Pauline theology in the conception of

~ Jewish law and the doctrine of justification (ili. 4-11). Such are:

the assumption that Paul is blameless as touching the righteous-
ness that is in the law; the antithesis of δικαιοσύνη 7 ἐκ νόμου and
δικαιοσύνη ἡ ἐκ θεοῦ ; the representation of justification by faith as
δικαιοσύνη ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει ; the connecting of objective and subject-
ive righteousness ; the putting of communion with Christ’s resur-
rection before communion with his death.

Some of these objections are treated in the notes on 11]. 4-11.
The words, “‘as touching the righteousness which is of the law,
blameless” (iii. 6), have their parallel in Gal. i. 14; and, in any
case, are used of merely legal righteousness, and are to be read in
the light of Paul’s conception of righteousness in vs. 9. ‘The
doctrine of justification by faith is not treated otherwise than in
Romans, except that the appropriation of Christ by the act cf
faith and the union of the life with Christ are combined in one
conception and are not considered separately as in Romans.

3. Indifference to the objective truth of his gospel (i. 15-18).
The same parties who, in Gal.i. 6, 7; 2 Cor. xi. 4, are said to
preach another Jesus and another gospel, are declared to be
preaching Christ, instead of being anathematised as in Gal. i. 8, 9.

But the parties are not the same (see notes on i. 15, 16). ‘The
words concerning the Judaisers in ch. iii. 2 have the indignant
flavor of Galatians and 2 Corinthians, and exhibit no indifference
to the objective truth.

4. Paul expresses uncertainty concerning his resurrection (iii.

INTRODUCTION ΧΧΙΧ

11), which is inconsistent with the assurance that he displays
elsewhetestmom. V. 07,15, 21, vill. 38, 39; 2 Cor. v.1ff.). But
the words εἴ πως are an expression of humility and self-distrust,
not of doubt. He elsewhere urges the necessity of caution and
watchfulness against a possible lapse from the faith (11. 12; 1 Cor.
x. 12; Gal. ill. 3, v. 4), and he takes the same caution to himself
(see note on iil.11). He displays no uncertainty as to the object-
ive basis of salvation, and the fellowship of suffering with Christ
as the subjective condition of sharing his glory agrees with Rom.
Viti. Τὴ.

5. Self-glorification on the part of Paul in setting himself before
his readers as a type of the righteousness of the law, and after-
wards of justification by faith (111. 4-17). This requires no answer.
Where he speaks of his advantages as a legally righteous Jew,
he describes them as a trusting in the flesh (vs. 4), while as
a Christian he expressly disclaims confidence in the flesh (vs. 3,
7-12).

6. Contradictory expressions as to his expectations for the
future. On the one hand, he looks for a speedy release (i. 25,
li. 24) ; on the other, he contemplates martyrdom (ii. 17). But
he says nothing but what is compatible with the alternations of
hope and fear which are natural to a prisoner ; and circumstances
might have awakened his hopes at one time, and clouded them at
another.

7. The words concerning the gift of the Philippians (iv. 10-19)
contradict 1 Thess. il. 9. ‘There is no contradiction. ‘The latter
passage confirms the statement of iv. 15, that the Thessalonians
were not among the Macedonians who contributed to Paul while
in Corinth. Holsten’s assertion that Paul’s way of thanking the
Philippians is thankless, is nonsense. Nothing can be more
delicate, more hearty, and more manly than his expression of
gratitude.

8. Differences in style from the acknowledged Pauline letters.
Holsten collects these, and classifies them as non-pauline, un-
pauline, and anti-pauline.

It would seem self-evident that any writer whose mind is alive
and whose thoughts do not move always in the same round, will
use in one book or letter words and phrases which he does not
use in another. The difference in subject or mood may be suffi-

XXX INTRODUCTION

cient to account for this. The mere counting of unique words in
any single epistle amounts to little or nothing. To forty-three
hapaxlegomena in Ephesians, there are above a hundred in
Romans, and more than two hundred in : Corinthians. In
Ephesians the special treatment of the unity of the Christian
body accounts for a group of words with σύν not found in the
other epistles.

But Pauline words abound in this epistle. For a very full table,
see Speaker's Commentary on FPhil., supplementary note at the
close of the Introduction, ‘‘ On the Pauline Diction of this Epistle.”
For parallels with Romans, see Lightf. Comm. p. 43.

Schiirer (cit. by Godet) says: “ All the reasons advanced in
this sphere against the authenticity, have weight only with him
who makes the Apostle Paul, that most living and mobile spirit
the world has ever seen, ἃ man of habit and routine, who behoved
to write each of his letters like all the others, to repeat in the fol-
lowing ones what he had said in the preceding, and to say it again
always in the same way and in the same terms.”

The authenticity and genuineness of the epistle are defended
by Liinemann (Pauwh ad Phil. Ep. contra Baurium defendit,
τή); Β. Briickner (22. ad Phil. Paulo auctori vindicata contra
Baurium, 1848) ; Ernesti (Stud. wu. Kriz, 1848, 1851) ; Grimm
(Zw. Th., 1873) ; Hilgenfeld (Zw. Th., 1873, 1875, 1877, 1884) ;
Schenkel (Bibellex. iv. 534, Christusbild der Apostel) ; Weizsacker
(Ja. Th., 1876 ;, Apost. Zeital.) ; A. Harnack (ZKG. ii., 1878) ;
Mangold (Der Rémerbrief, 1884, and Bleek’s Find. in ad. NV. T.,
1886) ; Pfleiderer (Urchristenthum,; Paulinismus) ; Davidson
(Introd. to the Study of the N. T.); Lipsius (Hand-Comm. ii.,
Einl. 2. Phil.) ; Godet (ntrod. au Nouv. Test, pt. i., 1893) ;
B. Weiss (Lehrb. ἡ. Einl. in ad. N. T., 1889) ; Jiilicher (2722. 12
ad. VN. T., 1894) ; Klopper (Paulus an die Philipper, 1893).

H. J. Holtzmann (Zin/. in d. N. T. 3 Aufl., 1892) says: “ It
is the testament of the apostle which we have before us, and he
wrote it at Rome.” It is accepted by Reuss and Renan.

For the history of the controversy, see the Introds. of Holtz-
mann and Weiss, and Lips. in the Hand-Comm., Bd. ii. See also
Knowling (Zhe IVitness of the Epistles, p. 6 ff.) and Theo. Zahn
(Die Briefe des Paulus seit fiinfsig Jahren im Feuer der Kritih,
ZWL., 1889).

INTRODUCTION ἘΣΣΙ

VII
INTEGRITY

To any one reading this epistle as a familiar letter of Paul to a
greatly beloved church, intended to inform them concerning his
own circumstances, to thank them for their generous care for him,
and to give them such counsel as his knowledge of their condition
might suggest, its informal and unsystematic character, and its
abrupt transitions from one theme to another, will appear entirely
natural. Modern criticism, however, refuses to be satisfied with
this view of the case, and has discovered, as it thinks, substantial
reasons for challenging the integrity of the letter.

The principal stumbling-block is at iii. 2, where, after being
about to close the letter, as is claimed (vs. 1), the apostle begins
afresh, and proceeds to the discussion of most important matters,
and then returns thanks for the contribution, which the letter con-
veyed to Philippi by Epaphroditus could not have omitted. This,
it is asserted, forms an abrupt and harsh transition, since the point
at which he proposed to close is really the middle of the epistle.
Holtzmann remarks that “the rush of all the tides of criticism
upon this passage raises the suspicion of a hidden rock.”

Stephan Lemoyne (Varia Sacra), Heinrichs (in Koppe’s WV. 7., 1803),
Paulus (Heidelb. Jhrb., 1812), Hausrath (MV. 7. Zettgesch. iii. 2 Aufl., 1873-
1877; Der Apostel Paulus, 2 Aufl., 1872), Weisse (Beitr. 2. Kritik ὦ,
paulin. Br., 1867),—all assumed two letters. The last four assumed that
111. I-iv. 20 was addressed to a narrower circle of readers, — perhaps the
superintendents of the church. MHausrath held that the first letter was
written after Paul’s first hearing before the imperial tribunal, and the sec-
ond some weeks later, after his receipt of the gift. Schrader (Der Afostel
Paulus) regarded iii. I-iv. 9 as an interpolation; while Ewald (Semdschr.

_ des Ap. Paulus, 1857), Schenkel (Bibellex.), and Reuss (Gesch. d. heil.
Schr. N. T., 1874) held the portion from iii. 1 to be a later addition,
prompted by fresh information received by Paul. V6lter (7%. Δ, 1892)
holds that there were two letters, —a genuine and a spurious one. The
former consisted of i. 1, 2 (exc. ἐπισκ. καὶ διακ.), 3-7, 12-26, ii. 17-30,
iv. 10-20, 21, and perhaps 23; the latter of i. 8-11, 27-30, ii. 1-16, iii. 1-
iv. 9. Liinemann, Ewald, Schenkel, Hilgenfeld, and Mangold hold that
lii. 1 implies former and lost Philippian letters; and the question thus
becomes complicated with the interpretation of the passages in Polyc. ad
Phil, iii., xiii. (see note on iii. 1).

XXX INTRODUCTION

The theory of two letters rests mainly on the assumption that τὸ
λοιπόν in 111. 1 indicates an intention to close the letter. But while
τὸ λοιπόν may mean ‘finally,’ it also means ‘for the rest’; ‘as to
what remains,’ as 1 Thess. iv.1; 2 Thess. iii. 1. The phrase is
common with Paul where he loosely attaches, even in the middle
of an epistle, a new subject to that which he has been discussing.
In 1 Thess. iv. two entire chapters follow τὸ λοιπόν in vs. 1. If
Paul had meant to close the letter at iii. 1, he would surely have
expressed his thanks for the Philippians’ gift before reaching that
point. To λοιπόν means there ‘as to what remains,’ and is an
introduction to what follows, not the close of what precedes.

The abrupt transition and apparent lack of connection accord,
as has been remarked, with the unsystematic, informal, familiar
character of the whole letter. Ifthe Judaistic and Libertine influ-
ences as a germ of discord demanded such an utterance as iil. 2 ff.,
the transition was not easy to make in a familiar letter to those
with whom the apostle’s relations were so intimate and affection-
ate. The want of connection, however, is rather apparent than
real, since the divisions likely to be created by these dangerous
influences would militate against that unity and concord which the
apostle urges in the former part of the letter. Without specifying
and pressing some such definite points, the earlier exhortations
might have appeared abstract and vague.

There seem to be, therefore, no sufficient grounds for disputing ~
the integrity of the epistle. If the partition theory is admitted,
the attempt to fix the dividing lines must be regarded as_ hopeless
in the face of the differences between critics.

See R. A. Lipsius (Hand-Comm. Einl. z. Phil.), Holtzmann (Zin.
N. 7.), Klépper (Komm. Eind.), Lightfoot (Prz/. p. 69).

IX
CONTENTS AND GENERAL CHARACTER

The opening salutation is of unusual length, consisting of the
first eleven verses, and containing thanks to God for the Philip-
pians’ former Christian fellowship with the apostle, and their
cooperation in promoting the gospel, expressions of confidence
in the completion of the good work begun in them by God, and
prayer for their spiritual growth.

INTRODUCTION XXXIil

From vs. 12 to vs. 26 St. Paul describes his own condition as a
prisoner, the progress of the gospel, the work of his opposers,
the increased zeal and boldness of the Christians in Rome, and
expresses his own feelings in view of the alternative of his speedy
death or of his continuing to live and labor for the church.

With vs. 27 he begins an exhortation to Christian unity and
courage which extends to the fourth verse of ch. 11., where he
introduces the example of Jesus Christ as an exhibition of the
humility and self-abnegation which are essential to the maintenance
of their fellowship. A few words of exhortation follow ; and ch. ii.
closes with an expression of the hope of his speedy release, his
intention of sending Timothy to Macedonia, and the announce-
ment of the sickness, recovery, and return of Epaphroditus.

Chapter iii. opens with an exhortation to joy, after which he
proceeds to warn the church against the possible attempts of the
Judaisers to influence its members, characterises them in severe
terms, and contrasts their religious attitude and teachings with
those of the true household of faith; the true circumcision with
the false ; the power of faith with the inefficiency of works and
ordinances ; and adduces in illustration a comparison of his own
early education, aims, and religious attainments with his present
position and hopes as a Christian. He follows this with an exhor-
tation to steadfastness, a lament over those who had yielded to
the influence of the Epicurean Libertines, and had thus fallen into
sensuality and worldliness, and a contrast of such with the citizen
of heaven, who minds not earthly things, but confidently awaits
the appearing of the Lord Jesus as Saviour.

Chapter iv. begins with a repetition of the exhortation to stead-
fastness. [wo prominent women of the church are urged to
reconcile their differences, and a former fellow-laborer of the
apostle is entreated to aid them in this. Then follow exhorta-
tions to forbearance, trustfulness, prayer, and giving of thanks, to
the cultivation of all holy and gracious thoughts and dispositions,
and to the imitation of his own Christian example as they had
seen it in the days of their former intercourse. ‘To all is added
the promise of the comfort of God’s peace.

With iv. ro begins the acknowledgment of the gift received
from the church, accompanied with hearty commendations of
their habitual thoughtfulness and generous care for himself, and

XXX1V INTRODUCTION

an expression of his assurance that such a spirit and such ministry
will redound to their spiritual growth.

The closing salutations are general. No names are mentioned.
The epistle ends with the benediction, “The grace of the Lord
Jesus Christ be with your spirit.”

The pervading tone of the letter is imparted by Paul’s strong
personal attachment to the church, in which respect it resembles
the first Thessalonian epistle. It is entirely devoid of official
stateliness. ‘The official title is dropped from the opening saluta-
tion, and the apostle greets the church as their friend and fellow-
servant of Jesus Christ. The character of the epistle is almost
wholly commendatory, in strong contrast with the epistle to the
Galatians and with portions of the two Corinthian letters. While
2 Corinthians is tumultuous, often stern, sometimes almost men-
acing, this letter flows on to the end in a steady stream of thankful
joy. It breathes the spirit of unimpaired confidence. It some-
what resembles Ephesians in the freedom with which the apostle
abandons himself to those spontaneous impulses of thought which
lead away from the direct line of his subject into the profound
depths of some divine counsel, or bear his soul upward in impas-
sioned prayer. It exhibits ‘none of the sensitiveness about the
behavior of his converts to himself which appears in Galatians
and 2 Corinthians ; none of the earnestness about points of differ-
ence, none of the consciousness of the precarious basis of his
authority in the existing state of the two churches” (Jowett).
There is the assumption throughout of frank understanding and
Christian friendship.

The epistle is also marked by the absence of formulated doc-
trinal statement. It exhibits the substance and heart of the gospel
rather than its relation to any specific form of doctrinal error.
The doctrinal points elaborated in other epistles are here matters
of allusion rather than of discussion. Between the apostle and
his readers there is assumed a community of faith in the truths
to which he so confidently appeals for the enforcement of all that
is pure, lovely, and of good report, and a knowledge of those
truths which renders formal instruction unnecessary.

Where points of doctrine are touched, it is invariably with a
view to their practical application. The ethical character of the
epistle is very pronounced. Even the splendid passage, ii. 5-11,

INTRODUCTION XXXV

is introduced, not for the purpose of formulating the doctrine of
Christ’s preexistence and of defining the nature of his humanity
as related to his preincarnate condition, but in order to enforce
the practical exhortation to humility. Thus, too, the doctrine of
justification by faith as treated in ch. iii. lacks none of the essen-
tial elements of the discussion in Romans ; yet it gains in practical
force and attractiveness by being intertwined with the doctrine of
mystical union with. Christ. It is this which makes that passage,
brief as it is, so valuable for the study of the real Pauline doctrine
of justification, affording as it does no room for that scholastic
and mechanical interpretation according to which justification is
resolved into a forensic adjustment effected by a legal fiction of
imputed righteousness.

Yet the attitude of the epistle towards doctrinal error is neither
hesitating nor compromising. Its dealing with the Judaisers in
ch. iil. reminds us that the writer is still the Paul of the Galatian
and second Corinthian letters. None the less it bears witness to
the discriminating quality of a ripe charity, to the sound wisdom
of Christian love which knows how to draw the line between weak-
ness and perverseness ; between the occasional lapses of Christian
immaturity and the wicked obstinacy of an estranged heart ;
between the mistakes of an untutored conscience and the selfish
persistence of unholy desire.

But while the character of the epistle is ethical rather than doc-
trinal or controversial, it gives no countenance to the tendency to
resolve the gospel into a mere code of morals. The moral inspira-
tion which it represents has its impelling centre in a person and a
life, and not ina code. The personal Christ is its very heart. It
exhibits Christ zz Paul rather than defore him. Christ is not a
subject of controversy ; he is not simply a pattern of conduct.
He is the sum of Paul’s life. Paul’s ideal is to be found in him.
His death is not a sorrowful reminiscence ; it has been shared by
the apostle in his own death to sin. ‘The view of the resurrection,
which this letter in common with that to the Romans presents, is
_ a standing rebuke to the superficial conception and the loose
grasp which the church too often brings to that truth. The res-
urrection of the Lord is to Paul a present, informing energy and
not only a memory and a hope. He would know the power of
the resurrection now and here as well as hereafter. He not only

XXXVI INTRODUCTION

lives according to Christ’s life, he lives it. Christ loves, obeys,
suffers, sympathises, toils, and hopes in him. Under the power
of this life his own natural affection is transfigured. He knows
not men after the flesh, but loves and longs for them in the heart
of Jesus Christ.

With the exhibition of these facts goes the corresponding em-
phasis of the apostle’s personality. The letter is more distinct-
ively personal than any of the epistles to the churches except
2 Corinthians. In this lies largely its peculiar fascination. But
the personality is accentuated on a different side. Its sensitive,
indignant, self-vindicatory aspect, so marked in the Corinthian
letter, is completely in the background here. The Paul of the
Philippian letter is not the man whose apostolic credentials have
been challenged, and whose personal motives have been impugned ;
not the vindicator of himself and of his ministry against the pre-
tensions of false apostles; not the missionary who is reluctantly
constrained in his own defence to unfold the record of his labors
and sufferings. He is the disciple who counts all things but loss
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord ; for
whom to live is Christ, and to die is to be with Christ. What a
blertding of the restfulness of faith with the tenseness of aspira-
tion! What an upreach of desire! With an experience behind
him unique in its depth and richness and variety, with the mem-
ory of personal vision of Christ and of ravishment into the third
heaven, with a profound knowledge of the mysteries of divine
truth won through heart-shaking moral crises, in solitary medita-
tion and in the vast experience of his missionary career, — his
attainment is only a point for a larger outlook, an impulse to more
vigorous striving. In Christ he is in a sphere of infinite possibili-
ties, and he counts not himself to have apprehended, but stretches
forward under the perpetual stress of his heavenward calling.

TEXT

THE epistle presents no textual questions of importance. The
authority for the sources is Tischendorf’s 8th ed. Cr7tz Wa. 1
have also used the 4th ed. of Scrivener’s /rz¢roduction to the Criti-
cism of the NV. T., ed. Miller, and in some places have noted the
readings of Weiss in his recent Zextkritische Untersuchungen und
Textherstelung, 1896.

The text followed is that of Westcott and Hort with two or
three exceptions.

The following manuscripts are referred to:

PRIMARY UNCIALS

x Cod. Sinaiticus: 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in the convent
of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai, in 1859. Now at St. Petersburg. Con-
tains both epistles complete. Correctors: δᾶ, nearly contemporary;
xb, 6th century; x°, beginning of 7th century, treated by two correct-
ors, — N° XP,

A. Cod. Alexandrinus: 5th century. British Museum. Contains both
epistles entire.

B. Cod. Vaticanus: 4th century. Vatican Library. Contains both epistles
entire. Correctors: B?, nearly the same date; B*, roth or 11th century.

C. Cod. Ephraem. 5th century. Palimpsest. National Library, Paris.
Very defective. Wanting from τοῦτο οὖν (Eph. iv. 17) to καὶ τί αἱρή-
σομαι (Phil i. 22), and from pew (Βενιαμειν) (Phil. ili. 5) to the end.
Correctors: C?, 6th century; (3, 9th century.

D. Cod. Claromontanus: 6th century. Greco-Latin. National Library,
Paris. Contains both epistles entire. Corrector: D>, close of 6th
century.

F. Cod. Augiensis: gth century. Graeco-Latin. Library of Trinity College,
Cambridge. Philippians entire; Philemon wanting in the Greek from
πεποιθὼς (vs. 21) to the end.

G. Cod. Boernerianus.* 9th century. Greeco-Latin. Dresden. Wanting
Greek and Latin, Philem. 21-25.

An asterisk added to the title of a MS., as D*, signifies a correction made
by the original scribe. i
XXXVil

XXXVU1 TEXT

SECONDARY UNCIALS

K. Cod. Mosquensis: 9th century. Moscow. Contains both epistles entire.
L. Cod. Angelicus: oth century. Angelican Library of Augustinian monks
at Rome. Wanting from ἐξουσίαν (Heb. xiii. 10) to the end of
Philemon.
P. Cod. Porphyrianus : beginning of 9th century. Palimpsest. St. Peters-
burg. Both epistles entire, but many words illegible.
MINUSCULES
17. National Library, Paris: 9th or roth century. Both epistles entire.
31. British Museum: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
37. Library of Town Council of Leicester: 15th century. Both epistles
entire. See Miller’s Scrivener, vol. i. 202.
47. Bodleian Library: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
67. Vienna: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
80. Vatican: 11th century. ' Philippians entire; Philemon mutilated.
137. Paris: 13th or 14th century. Both epistles entire.
VERSIONS
Latin :
Vetus Latina (Lat. Vet.). Vulgate (Vulg.).
Egyptian :

Coptic, Memphitic, or Bohairic (Cop.). Bashmuric (Basm.).
Sahidic (Sah. ).

Syriac :
Peshitto (Pesh.). Syr.4tr (Peshitto and Harclean
Harclean (Harcl.). versions).
Syr.seh (Schaaf’s ed. of Peshitto). Syr.P (Harclean).

Other versions :

Armenian (Arm.). Ethiopic (4&th.).
Gothic (Goth.).

COMMENTARIES

PATRISTIC

Chrysostom, Theodoret, GEcumenius, Theophylact, Theodore of
Mopsuestia.

Chrysostom’s commentary is in the form of fifteen homilies. Τί
is not regarded as one of his best, but it illustrates his peculiarities
as an expositor: his honest effort to discover and interpret his
author’s meaning; his sound grammatical and historical treat-
ment; his avoidance of forced and fanciful allegorical interpre-
tations ; his felicitousness in illustration, fluency of style, dramatic
power, and general knowledge of Scripture. Migne’s Patrolo-
gia, Paris, 1863; Trans. Library of the Fathers, Oxford, 1843;
Schaff’s Wicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.

Theodoret: simple and literal, mingling the expository and
apologetic. Migne.

The commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia remain only in a
few Greek fragments and a Latin version. They are valuable as
a protest against the vicious allegorical method of the Alexandrian
school. Theodore is distinguished by close adherence to the text,
attention to grammatical points and textual variations, — by his
exegetical instinct and his effort to adhere to the line of his
author’s thought. Zheodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary on the
Minor Epistles of St. Paul: The Latin Version with the Greek
Fragments. Ed. from the MSS., with Notes and an Introduction,
by H. B. Swete, Cambridge University Press.

EARLIER COMMENTARIES

Among these may be named those of Erasmus, Bucer, Zwingli,
Beza, Calvin, Calixtus, Daillé, Musculus or Meusslin, Velasquez,
[ἢ ja χχχὶχ

xl COMMENTARIES

Le Clerc, Hyperius, Vorstius, Grotius, Crocius, Aretius, Piscator,
Estius, a Lapide, Breithaupt, am Ende, Rheinwald, Matthies, van
Hengel, Hoelemann, Bengel, Rilliet.

Joun CALVIN is marked by solid learning, contempt for exegetical tricks,
independence, thoroughness, terseness, and precision
of language.

Joun ALBERT BENGEL: Guomon Novi Testamenti. Ed. of Steudel, 1855.
Translations by Fausset, Edinburgh, and Lewis and
Vincent, Philadelphia, 1860. While most of his criti-
cal work is obsolete, he remains distinguished for keen
spiritual insight, terse and pithy diction, and suggest-
ive exposition of the force and bearing of individual
words. Always mentioned with respect by modern
commentators.

Ἂς LRM ODES Commentatre sur ὦ ’Epitre de l’Apotre Paul aux Philip-
piens. 1841. With illustrative essays. Learned, —
not controversial or dogmatic, — interesting, Scriptural,
clear in statement. Issued before the attacks of the
Tiibingen school.

MODERN COMMENTARIES

HENRY ALFORD: Greek Testament, 1849-1861 and later. Largely a digest
of German exegesis which he was the first to introduce
to the scholars of the established church in England.
He is judicial rather than original, sometimes too much
given to balancing opinions after the earlier German
method; but in his treatment of this epistle, his judg-
ments show considerable independence and decisive-
ness, and the commentary contains matter which is
still valuable.
W. M. L. DE WETTE: Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testa-
ment. Kurze Erklérung der Briefe an die Kolosser,
an Philemon, an die Epheser und Philipper. 1836-
1848. Wide and accurate scholarship; sound exegeti-
cal tact, — independent, acute, concise.
H. A. W. MEYER: Xritisch exegetisches Handbuch tiber die Briefe an die
Philipper, Kolosser, und an Philemon, 5 Aufl. A. H.
Franke, 1886. New ed. in preparation. This volume
of the Kommentar iiber das Neue Testament was pre-
pared by Dr. Meyer’s own hand. Meyer stands in the
very front rank of exegetes. Great learning; remark-
able exegetical insight; devout, fair, independent, clear
and forcible in statement; strong historic sense. He
leans somewhat towards excessive literalism, and is not

67 ELLicorr :

J. B. LicHTroor:

B. WEIss:

ALBERT KLOPPER:

COMMENTARIES xli

a good authority on text. The American edition, 1885,
4th Germ., contains the notes of President T. Dwight
of Yale University. These are discriminating and help-
ful. Dr. Dwight has a rare faculty of putting into a
clear and simple form the factors of a complicated
exegetical discussion.

A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul’s

Lpistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.
5th ed. Ripe exegetical judgment; careful discrimi-
nation of grammatical niceties; remarkable power of
stating fine distinctions and shades of meaning; great
accuracy. His commentary is still most valuable.

St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. Revised Text with

Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. ist ed. 1868;
12th ed. 1896, a reprint of the revised and slightly
altered 4th ed. of 1885. Has long held a very high
rank among commentaries on this epistle. The la-
mented author’s large and varied learning appears
especially in the essays and excursuses which so de-
lightfully exhibit the historical setting of the letter. In
point of exegesis, the commentary, while always sug-
gestive, is not equal to some others.

Der Philipperbrief ausgesetst und die Geschichte seiner

Auslesung kritisch dargestellt, 1859. A most thorough
piece of work. It leaves no point untouched, and treats
every point with ample learning, conscientious pains-
taking, independence, and positiveness. It is valuable
in studying the history of the exegesis.

Der Brief des Apostel Paulus an die Philipper. 1893.

A commentary which must be reckoned with. Care-
fully and conscientiously done, with adequate scholar-
ship. Needlessly elaborated; too diffuse; but the
reader who has the patience to make his way through
the mazes of an involved style will commonly be re-
warded for his pains. His critical tendencies are radi-
cal, but he accepts and defends the authenticity of the
epistle.

JosEPH AGAR BEET: 4 Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Ephesians,

J. Rawson Lumby

Philippians, and Colossians, and to Philemon. 1891.
With a good scholarly basis. It can hardly be called
a popular commentary, but does not meet the demands
of a full critical commentary. In the attempt to con-
dense, some things are passed over with mere state-
ment which deserve more careful notice.

: The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. Schaft’s Popular

Commentary, 1882. Bright, interesting, and suggestive.

xlii

KARL BRAUNE:

R. A. LIpsius:

H. von SODEN:

JOHN EADIE:

COMMENTARIES

Die Briefe Sti Pauli an die Epheser, Kolosser, Philipper, -

theologisch-homiletisch bearbeitet. Lange’s Bibelwerk,
1867. Trans. with additions by H. B. Hackett, Schaff’s
Lange, 1870. ‘The value of Lange’s Bzdelwerk is im-
paired by an accumulation of doctrinal, ethical, homi-
letical, and practical material. The quality of Dr.
Hackett’s work is always good, and his additions are
valuable.

Briefe an die Galater, Rimer, Philipper. Hand-Com-

mentar zum Neuen Testament, von Foltzmann, Lip-
situs, Schmiedel, und von Soden. Bd. ii. Abth. 2, 2
Aufl., 1892. In striking contrast with most earlier Ger-
man commentaries in which conflicting opinions are
elaborately discussed; terse and condensed; learned,
acute, penetrating, and clear. Introduction valuable.
Represents the radical German school of N. T. criticism.

Der Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Philipper. 1889.

A charming homiletical exposition.

A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul

to the Philippians. 2d ed. 1884. A full and useful
commentary; too much of the homiletic element.

Ambrost.
Ans.

Aug.

Chr.

Clem. Alex.
Clem. Rom.
Cyr. Alex.
Euseb.
Greg. Nys.
Hil.
Hippol.

25.

App.
Aristid.
Aristoph.
Aristot.
Athen.
Corp. I. Lat.

Corp. I. Gr.
Dem.
Diod. Sic.
Dion. H.

Eur.

Alf.
am Εἰ,

ABBREVIATIONS

ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS

Ambrosiaster.
Anselm.

Augustine.
Chrysostom.
Clement of Alexandria.
Clement of Rome.
Cyril of Alexandria.
Eusebius.

Gregory of Nyssa.
Hilary.

Hippolytus.

CLASSICAL

ZEschylus.

Appian.

Aristides.

Aristophanes.

Aristotle.

Athenzeus.

Corpus Inscriptionum
Latinarun.

Corpus ILnscriptionum
Graecarum.

Demosthenes.

Diodorus Siculus.

Dionysius of Halicarnas-
sus.

Euripides.

Ign.

ets

Joh. Dam.
Jos.

Just. M.
Cc.
Polyc.
Tert.
Thdrt.
Theo. Mop.
Theoph.

WRITERS

Hadt.
Hom.
Juv.
Ov.
Petron.
Pind.
Plut.
Polyb.
Q. Curt.
Soph.
Suet.
acs
Ter.
Thue.
Xen.

Ignatius.

Jerome.

John of Damascus.
Josephus.

Justin Martyr.
CEcumenius.
Polycarp.
Tertullian.
Theodoret.
Theodore of Mopsuestia.
Theophylact.

Herodotus.
Homer.
Juvenal.
Ovid.
Petronius.
Pindar.
Plutarch.
Polybius.
Quintus Curtius.
Sophocles.
Suetonius.
Tacitus.
Terentius.
Thucydides.
Xenophon.

COMMENTATORS AND WRITERS ON N. T.

Alford.
am Ende.

Aq.
B. Crus.

xliii

Aquila.
Baumgarten Crusius.

Ead.
Ellic.
Erasm.
Ew.
Grot.
Heinr.
Hack.
Hofn.
Holtzn.
Holst.
Hoel.
Jil.
Ke
Lips.
Lightf.
Lum.

Burt.
Crem.
Herz.

Hesych.

Suid.
Thay.
Win.

WH.
Tisch.

Ravi
A.V.
ALES

ABBREVIATIONS
Bengel. Luth. Luther.
Bleek. "| Mey. Meyer.
Calovius. Matth. Matthies.
Calvin. Mich. Michaelis.
Conybeare and Howson. | Nedr. Neander.
Crocius. ῬΗ: Pfleiderer.
De Wette. Pisc. Piscator,
Dwight. Rhw. Rheinwald.
Eadie. Ril. Rilliet.
Ellicott. Rosenm. Rosenmiiller.
Erasmus. Str. Storr.
Ewald. Symm. Symmachus.
Grotius. v. Fl. von Flatt.
Heinrichs. van Heng. van Hengel.
Hackett. van Oos. van Oosterzee.
Hofmann. v. Sod. von Soden.
Holtzmann. ‘ Weizs. Weizsacker.
Holsten. Westc. Westcott.
Hoelemann. Wetst. Wetstein.
Jiilicher. Wiesel. Wieseler.
Kl6pper. Wies. Wiesinger.
Lipsius. W. St. Vincent: Word Studies
Lightfoot. 272 the Ne les

Lumby.

GRAMMARIANS AND LEXICOGRAPHERS

Burton: WV. 7. Moods and Tenses.

Cremer: Biblico- Theological Lexicon of N. T. Greek.

Herzog: Real-Encyclopidie fiir protestantische Theologie und
Kirche.

Hesychius: Zexzcon.

Suidas: Lesxzcoz.

Thayer: Greek-English Lexicon of the N. T.

Winer: Grammar of N. T. Greek. 8th ed. of Eng. Transl. by
Moulton. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms,
8 Aufl., von P. W. Schmiedel. 1 Theil, 1894.

TEXTUAL

Westcott and Hort: Zhe Mew Testament in the Original Greek.

Tischendorf: ovum Testamentum Graece. Lditio Octava Cri-
tica Major.

Revised Version of 1881.

Authorized Version.

Textus Receptus.

‘ABBREVIATIONS xlv

’

PERIODICALS

Zw. Th, Zeitschrift fiir wissenschafiliche Theologie.
TRE. Theologische Literaturzeitung.

Is We Theologische Jahrbiicher.
Wn He Theologisch Tijdschrift.

Sp. Th. Sahrbiicher fiir protestant. Theologie.

Stud. τε. Krit. Studien und Kritiken.

Wes Mies Sahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theologie.

fleidelb. Jhrb. Heidelberg Jahrbiicher.

ZEG. Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte.

ZWL. Luthardt’s Zeitschrift fiir kirchl. wissenschaft und kirchl. Leben.

OTHER ABBREVIATIONS

Apocr. Apocrypha. Const. Construe.

Art. Article. LXX Septuagint Version.
Bib. Gk. Biblical Greek. Sap. Wisdom of Solomon.
Bib. Bible. Sir. Wisdom of Sirach.
Class. Classics or Classical. = Equivalent to.

Comp. Compare.

tO tees PoTEIPPIANS

1 117. THE PROLOGUE

THE Prologue contains :

AN ADDRESS AND GREETING (1-2);
A THANKSGIVING (3-5) ;
A COMMENDATION AND PRAYER (6-11).

oe
Paul and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, send greeting

to the members and officers of the church at Philippi. Grace and
peace to you from God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

All my remembrance of you is mingled with thanksgiving to God.
On every occasion of my prayers 7 joyfully make my petition for you
all, giving thanks for your cobperation in promoting the gospel from
the time it was first preached among you until the present, and with
confidence that God will perfect the good work which he has begun
in you and will show it completed in the day when Christ shall
appear. And my confidence in you ts justified by my personal
affection for you, by your sympathy with me in my imprisonment,
and by the aid which you give me in the defence and establishment
of the gospel; thus showing yourselves to be sharers tn the grace
which enables me to preach Christ and to suffer for his sake.

God is my witness how L long after you all with a Christly affec-
tion. I pray that you may abound in intelligent and discriminating
love: that in your inquiries into truth and duty you may approve
that which ts supremely good: that you may be sincere and blame-
less in view of the day when Christ shall appear: and that you
may be filled with the fruit of righteousness which shall redound
to the glory and praise of Goa.

The character of the whole Epistle is reflected in this introduc-
tion. It is unofficial, affectionate, familiar, unlike the opening of
B I

2 PHILIPPIANS [11

the Galatian Epistle, and more nearly resembling the introductions
to the two Thessalonian letters. At the same time it is solemn
and deeply earnest.

ADDRESS AND GREETING

1. Ἰ]αῦλος καὶ Τιμόθεος : So in the introductions of 2 Cor., Col.,
and Philem., and of 1 and 2 Thess. where the name of Silvanus is
added. ‘Timothy was well known to the Philippian Church as
Paul’s intimate friend and companion. He was with Paul at
Rome. He had been his companion in his first visit to Mace-
donia (Acts XVil. I, 3, 10,13). He had visited Macedonia later
(Acts xix. 22, xx. 1, 4) ; and Paul was proposing to send him
again as his representative to the Philippian Church (Phil. 11. 19-

3). His name, however, in this letter, is associated with Paul’s
only in the salutation, although the omission of Paul’s apostolic
title is not due to his naming Timothy with himself. (Comp.
2 Cor. i. 1; Col. 1. 1.) That Timothy acted as amanuensis is pos-
sible, but is not indicated by anything in this letter. The omission
of the title “ apostle”? (comp. Introductions to 1 and 2 Cor., Rom.,
and Gal.) accords with the familiar and unofficial character of the
letter, and also with the fact that his apostolic claims were not
challenged by a Judaising party in Philippi as they were in Galatia
and Corinth.

Δοῦλοι Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ: Δοῦλος occurs in Paul’s introductory
salutations only here and in Rom. and Tit. The phrase ‘ bond-
servants of Jesus Christ’ exhibits the general conception under
which ‘apostle’ is classed. Jerome observes: ‘‘ Ambo servi, non
ambo apostoli. Omnis enim apostolus servus, non omnis autem
servus apostolus.”” ‘The servile element does not enter into Paul’s
use of the expression. It carries for him the thoughts of cheerful
and willing service which, in his view, is inseparable from true
freedom (Rom. vi. 18, 22); of dependence upon Christ; of
ownership by Christ (1 Cor. iii. 23, vii. 22) ; and of identification
with Christ in his assuming the form of a bondservant (Phil. il. 7).
The term may be slightly colored with a reference to his special
calling, as is διάκονος in 1 Cor. iii. 5 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6; Eph. iii. 7.
He would thus announce himself as not acting in his own name,
but as the agent of another. (Comp. Gal. i. 10; Rom. i. 1;
Colvive τ 2.) “The phrase sim “3p, LXX δοῦλος θεοῦ or κυρίου, 15
often applied to the O. 7 prophets ina body. (See Amos iil. 7 ;
Jer. .vu-'25 ; Ezra ΙΧ. τὰ ; 4Dan. 1x.6.) ΔἸ τὸ Moses, jos.1..2
(6 θεράπων) ; to Joshua, Jud. ii. 8 (δοῦλος) ; to David, Ps. xxxvi.
(xxxv.), title, Ixxviii. (Ixxvii.) 70, Ixxxix. (Ixxxvili.) 4, 21 (δοῦλος):
It is found in the introductory greetings of Rom., Tit., Jas., Jude,
2 Pet., “showing,” as Professor Sanday justly remarks, “that as
the apostolic age progressed, the assumption of the title became

τ 1] THE PROLOGUE 3

established on a broad basis. But it is noticeable how quietly
St. Paul steps into the place of the prophets and leaders of the
Old Covenant, and how quietly he substitutes the name of his
own Master in a connection hitherto reserved for that of Jehovah”
(Comm. on Rom., 1. 1).

The MS. readings of the Pauline introductions vary between ᾿Τησοῦς
Χριστὸς and Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς. For a table of the variations see Sanday’s
note on Rom. i. 1.

From this it appears that IX is peculiar to the earlier group of intro-
ductions, and X’I to the later; 1 and 2 Cor. and Rom. being doubtful. The
change seems to point to the increasing use of Χριστὸς as a proper name
instead of a title. Nevertheless, in the bodies of the Epistles both designa-
tions occur; in Rom., Gal., Eph., Col., and the Pastorals, almost equally,
while ΧῚ predominates in 1 and 2 Cor. and Phil., and IX predominates
decidedly only in the Thessalonian Epistles.

πᾶσιν τοῖς ἁγίοις : It will be observed that the letter is addressed
to all the individual Christians in Philippi, though the superin-
tendents and ministers are named immediately after. See farther
in Excursus on Bishops and Deacons. Ἅγιος, which is rare in
classical Greek, in the LXX is the standard word for “holy.”
Both the LXX and N.T. writers bring it out of the background in
which it was left by classical writers. Its fundamental idea is
setting apart. ‘Thus, in class., “ devoted to the gods.’”’ Occasion-
ally in a bad sense, “ devoted to destruction” ; “accursed”; but
not in Biblical Greek. In O.T., “set apart to God,” as priests
(Lev. xxi. 6, 7) ; the tithe of the land (Lev. xxvii. 30) ; the holy
place in the house of God {τ K. viii. 10; comp. Heb. ix. 2); the
most holy place (Ex. xxvi. 33 ; comp. Heb. ix. 3) ; the Israelites,
as separated from other nations and consecrated to God (Ex. xix.
Obey. xx, 265 Deut, vii 6; Dan. Υἱ} 22; 2 Esdras vill. 23).
This idea is transferred to the N.T. and applied to Christians
(το στ ΡΠ τὶ hom. ἃ 7; τ Cor. vic 1,-2.5; τ Pet. i..9).
Ideally ἅγιος implies personal holiness; moral purity. See Lev.
ἘΠ 4 δ. 2 eM OF. Vi. 34 5/0) Pet. 1.16. “Of John the: Baptist
(Mk. vi. 20) ; of Christ (Acts ili. 14); of God (1 Sam. vi. 20;
nexvil. tT); bet.1. τὸ: οἱ God's law (Rom. vii. 12) ; of the
Spirit of God (Acts i. 33,38; Rom.v. 5;-etc.). Paul uses it
here as a common designation of Christians belonging to the
Philippian community. It does not imply actual holiness, but
holiness as appropriate to those addressed and obligatory upon
them, as persons set apart and consecrated. In this sense it
does not occur in the Gospels (except, possibly, Mt. xxvii. 52)
or in the Epistles of Pet. and John. It is rare in Acts. Τί
appears in the opening salutations of all Paul’s letters to Churches
except Gal. and 1 and 2 Thess. It is applied to Jewish Christians
πο ον xvi τ τὸ: 2. Cor vii. 4, 1x2) το τ; Rom. xv.'25, 26, 31).
Chrys. remarks: “It was likely that the Jews too would call

4 PHILIPPIANS [τὸ 2

themselves ‘saints’ from the first oracle, when they were called
‘a holy and peculiar people’ (Ex. ix. 6; Deut. vii. 6). For this
reason he added ‘that are in Christ Jesus.’ For these alone are
holy, and those henceforward profane.’ Similarly. Theoph. (See
Delitzsch, Art. “ Heiligkeit Gottes” in Herz. 7. Enc.)

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: Connect with τοῖς ἁγίοις. This, and the
kindred formulas ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐν “Incot, ἐν Κυρίῳ, ἐν αὐτῷ, are com-
mon Pauline expressions to denote the most intimate communion
of the Christian with the living Christ. Ἔν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ occurs
48 times, ἐν Χριστῷ 34, ἐν Κυρίῳ 50. ‘These phrases are not found
in the Synoptic Gospels, though their equivalent appears in John
in the frequent ἐν ἐμοί. The conception is that of a sphere or
environment or element in which a Christian lives, as a bird in the
air, a fish in the water, or the roots of a tree in the soil. Christ
glorified, Christ as πνεῦμα (2 Cor. iil. 17), is the normal life-
element of the believer. He “puts on” Christ as a garment
(Gal. iii. 27). In Christ alone he truly lives, and his powers
attain their full range and efficiency. ‘The order is invariably év
Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ.

The formula is elaborately and ably discussed by G. A. Deissmann in his
monograph Die neztestamentliche Formel ‘in Christo Jesu,’ Marburg, 1892.
He carefully traces the use of ἐν with the personal singular through the
Classics, the LXX and the N.T., and concludes that the phrase is original
with Paul. His discussion as to whether a material conception is at the

bottom of it, or whether it is a purely rhetorical mode of speech is not
important.

»
συν ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις :

B3 DK read συνεπισκοποις, “to the fellow-bishops.” So Chrys., Theoph.

Render: ‘with the superintendents and ministers,’ and notice
that the mention of these officials is appended to the more special
salutation to the members of the Church. See Excursus at the
end of this chapter.

2. χάρις ὑμῖν Kal εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ
Χριστοῦ: So in Rom., 1 and 2 Cor., Gal., and Eph. Col. omits
καὶ κυρ. IX. 1 Thess. has χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη. 2 Thess. omits
ἡμῶν after πατρὸς. τ and 2 ‘Tim. add ἔλεος to χάρις and εἰρήνη
and have Χτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν. ‘Tit.: χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ
θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ Χτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν. Notice the com-
bination of the Greek and Hebrew forms of salutation. Χάρις is
primarily that which gives joy or pleasure (χαρά, χαίρειν). Its
higher, Christian meaning is based on the emphasis of /veevess in
a gift or favor. It is the free, spontaneous, absolute lovingkind-
ness of God towards men. Hence it often stands in contrast with
the ideas of debt, law, works, sin. Sometimes the cause is put for
the effect ; so that it means the s¢a¢e of grace into which God’s
freely-bestowed favor brings Christians (Rom. v. 2; Gal. v. 4),

I. 2, 3] THE PROLOGUE 5

and consequently the capacity or ability due to that gracious state
(Eph. iv. 7). It is this free favor of God, with all that follows it,
that Paul in his salutation desires for his readers. Εἰρήνη is not
tranquillity or repose, save as these are conceived as resulting from
the cessation of hostility between God and man. Reconciliation
is always at the basis of the Pauline conception of peace. Simi-
larly Psrxxix, ti σεν Ὁ; 5: 1πΠ| Ὁ These terms, therefore,
are not to be regarded as mere equivalents of the ordinary forms
of salutation. ‘They link themselves with these, and it is also true
that Paul does not use them with any distinct dogmatic purpose ;
but it is inconceivable that he should have employed them with-
out some consciousness of the peculiar sense which attaches to
them throughout his letters. Thus Weiss justly says that “the
fact that these terms connect themselves with the ordinary Greek
and Hebrew greetings does not exclude the employment of ‘grace’
in its specifically Christian and Pauline sense in which it denotes
the unmerited divine operation of love, which is the source and
principle of all Christian salvation. Similarly, ‘peace’ is not to
be understood primarily in the technical sense of Rom. v. 1, as
the first-fruit of justification; but we may be sure that, in Paul’s
mind, the whole state of tranquillity and general well-being which
was implied in ‘ peace’ attached itself at the root to the fact of
reconciliation with God.”

The fact that God and Christ appear on an equality in the salu-
tation cannot be adduced as a positive proof of the divine nature
of Christ, though it falls in with Paul’s words in ch. ii., and may
be allowed to point to that doctrine which he elsewhere asserts.
We cannot be too careful to distinguish between ideas which
unconsciously underlie particular expressions, and the same ideas
used with a definite and conscious dogmatic purpose. This Epis-
tle especially has suffered from the overlooking of this distinction.

THE THANKSGIVING

3. Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ bed ἐπὶ πά 7 ‘a ὑμῶ ἵντοτε ἐν TAT
3. χαριστ D θεῷ μου ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν, πάν ν πάσῃ
14 c ol ΄“- Ν , /
δεήσει μου, ὕπερ TAVTWV UPLWV μετὰ χάρας ΤῊΝ δέησιν ποιουμέενος =

evxapioTw Tw θεω μου αὶ ABDKLP, Vulg., Syr.", Cop., Basm.
eyw μεν εὐχαρίστω TW KUpLW ἡμων D* FG.

Render: ‘I thank my God in all my remembrance of you ;
always, in every supplication of mine, making my supplication for
you all with joy.’ Thus πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει pov is attached to
the following words, and ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν belongs, not to ἐν πάσῃ
δεήσει μου, but to τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος.

This is the most natural and simple arrangement of the words (so Weiss,
ΚΙ., Lips., Weizs.). Lightf. makes a single clause of πάντοτε... ὑμῶν and

6 PHILIPPIANS [I. 3-5

attaches it to the foregoing words; and makes μετὰ χαρᾶς... ποιούμενος a
separate explanatory clause defining the character of πάσῃ δεήσει. He
joins πάντοτε with evxapict®. EJlic. connects ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν with
δεήσει μου, as Mey.

Comp. 1 Whess. 1. 25 Rom, 15. Ὁ, 103 “Eph: τ 01 1.
Philem. 4.

τῷ θεῷ μου: For μου with the sense of personal relationship, see
ACIS XXVIl.- 23: SOM, δ᾽; ΠΠ ΠΕ 1:

ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν : The local sense of ἐπὶ runs into the
temporal, and blends with it (Jelf, Gz 634, 2). Render ‘in,’
and comp. 11. 17. The sense is similar if not identical where ἐπὶ
occurs with the genitive in 1 Thess. i. 2; Eph. i. 16; Philem. 4.
But see Ellic. here. Not ‘upon every remembrance’ as A.V.,
which is precluded by the article with μνείᾳ, but ‘in all my
remembrance’; my remembrance of you as a whole is mingled
with thanksgiving. Μνεία is not ‘mention’ (as KI.), a meaning
which it has only when joined with ποιεῖσθαι, as Rom. i. 9 ; Eph.
i. 16; 1 Thess. i. 2. To make ὑμῶν the subjective genitive, ‘your
thought of me,’ with an allusion to their gift, is against usage, and
would require a definite mention of the object of remembrance.
Harnack, 7%. LZ., 1889, p. 419, wrongly renders “ for every mode
of your remembrance,” adding “whereby, in the very beginning
of the letter, the Philippians’ gift is thought of with tenderness.”
The thought is quite unsuitable that Paul is moved to remem-
brance only by the exhibition of their care for him.

4. πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει : ἸΠάσῃ δεήσει defines πάντοτε, as πάν-
tore marks the occasions of εὐχαριστῶ. On every occasion of his
praying he makes request for them. Aéyots is petitionary prayer ;
‘supplication.’ Paul alone joins it with προσευχὴ, which is the
more general term for prayer. (See Phil. iv. 6; Eph: vi. 18;
1 Tim. 11. 1.) Προσευχὴ is limited to prayer to God, while δέησις
may be addressed to man. (See Trench, JV. 7. Syz. li. ; Schmidt,
Synon. 7, 4; Ellic. on 1 Tim. ii. 2; Eph. vi. 18.) Tyv denow
defines the more general πάσῃ δεήσει, and is in turn defined by
ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν.

μετὰ χαρᾶς : The petitions are accompanied with joy, the cause
of which is indicated in vs. 5-7.

5. ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν : Connect with εὐχαριστῶ, not with τὴν
δέησιν ποιούμενος. For, 1. εὐχαριστῶ would thus be left without an
object. 2. The ‘fellowship’ is not the subject of Paul’s prayer,
but of his thanksgiving. 3. Εὐχαριστεῖν and similar verbs are used
by Paul with ἐπὶ, as 1 Cor. i. 4; 2 Cor. ix. 15; but emi never
occurs with δέησιν ποιούμενος Or δεῖσθαι to mark their cause or
ground. Neither should ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ be connected with pera
χαρᾶς which would require τῆς before ἐπὶ.

κοινωνίᾳ : “ Fellowship’ (κοινὸς, ‘common’). A relation between
individuals which involves common and mutual interest and par-

Z, 536] THE PROLOGUE 4

ticipation in a common object. The word occurs often in Paul
and in John’s epistles. Occasionally of the particular form which
the spirit of fellowship assumes, as the giving of alms (Rom. xv. 26 ;
Heb. xiil. 16), but always with an emphasis upon the principle
of Christian fellowship which underlies the gift. Here it means
sympathetic participation in labor and suffering.

τῇ κοιν. ὑμῶν : ‘your fellowship.’ ‘Not fellowship with you’
(objective genitive) ; for when Paul uses the objective genitive
with κοινωνία, it is to express fellowship with a divine and not a
human persom,(@reCor. 1.0; 2 Cor. xii. 13 ;. Phil: ii. 1)... More:
over, when κοινωνία is used of fellowship wth (wna cum) human
persons, the relation is indicated by μετὰ (1 John i. 5, 7). Comp.
πρὸς, 2 Cor. vi. 14. Hence ὑμῶν here is subjective. No defining
word indicates their fellowship with him. ‘The meaning is their
fellowship with each other in the cause of the gospel. If the ref-
erence had been particularly to their fellowship with Paul, per’
ἐμοῦ would probably have been added.

εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον : Describes the character and object of the fel-
lowship. For κοινωνία with εἰς, see Rom. xv. 26; 2 Cor. ix. 13;
and comp. ἐκοινώνησεν eis, Phil. iv. 15. ‘The meaning is not ‘con-
tribution,’ though the thought of their gifts may have been dis-
tinctly present to the apostle’s mind (so Ellic. and Lightf.) ; nor
‘participation’ in the gospel as sharers of its blessings ; but ‘ your
close association in the furtherance of the gospel.’

ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἡμέρας:

WH. «πὰ Weiss retain τὴς with s ABP 37. Tisch. omits with DFGKL.

‘The first day’ is the day when they received the gospel. (See
Acts xvi. 13; Col.i.6.) Connect with τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν, not with
πεποιθὼς.

ἄχρι τοῦ voy: As Rom. vill. 22. Only in Paul.

THE COMMENDATION AND PRAYER

6. πεποιθὼς : ‘being confident.’ Appended to εὐχαριστῶ and
parallel with ποιούμενος.

αὐτὸ τοῦτο: Not governed by πεποιθὼς, but appended to it as
specially marking the content and compass of the action (Ellic.).
It prepares the way for the matter introduced by ὅτι. (Comp.
Eph. vi. 22 ; Col. iv. 8.) Not ‘for this very reason’ (Mey.), 2.2,
by reason of your past cooperation, but referring to what follows.

ὃ évapSapevos : ‘He’ —God— is the source of Paul’s confidence,
not only for himself, but for his converts ; God, whom he thanks
in all his remembrance of them. For the omission of θεὸς, comp.
PaMivitigkt (Gal. 1 Ὁ, i. 8: i. τὸν. ὃ; 1£)Thess: v. 24. That
ἐναρξάμενος contains a sacrificial metaphor, the beginning of the
gospel-work among the Philippians being conceived as the inaugu-

8 PHILIPPIANS [1. 6, 7

ration of a sacrifice (Lightf.), is not probable. The word is used
in that sense mostly in poetry, and the conception, in any case, is
far-fetched. ΑΒ compares ll. 17, but that can hardly be said
to be in point. Ἔνάρχεσθαι occurs three times in the N.T.
(2 Cor. viii. 6; Gal. i. 3), only in Paul, and always with ἐπιτελεῖν.

ἐν ὑμῖν : ‘In you’; in your hearts. Not “among you.’ (Comp.
it; ats)

ἔργον ἀγαθὸν : Comp. il. 13. The work begun in their reception
of the gospel, and developed in their activity and close fellowship
for its promotion. ‘The thought is taken up again in vs. 7.

ἐπιτελέσει : ‘Complete,’ ‘consummate.’ For the thought, comp.
1 Cor.1..8; x Thess. v.24; 2\Thess. τ 5 (he Sense usapren-
nant; will carry it on toward completion, and finally complete.

ἄχρι ἡμέρας ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ : ‘Day of Jesus Christ’ is the second
coming or _parousia of the Lord. ‘The phrase is varied in Paul’s
epistles: ἡ ἡμέρα, ἃ absolutely (1 Thess. v.45 (Cor aiters aom-
ΧΗ]. 12) 5 9 ἡμέρα ἐκείνη ( ἘΠ ΈΞΘΕ il: 10); ; ἡμέρα X pieces (Phil.
το 1 16) 5 ἡ εραι κυρίου ΟΥ τοῦ ,κυρίου (1 Cor. v. 5) a aihess:
ν. 2; 2 Thess. il. 2) ; ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ (Χτοῦ) (1 Cor.
1.8; 2 (ΟΥὙἃ 1. 14). It refers to a definite point of time when the
Lord will appear, and Paul expects this appearance soon. At-
tempts to evade this by referring his expressions to the day of
death, or to the advance toward perfection after death until the
final judgment, are forced and shaped by dogmatic preconceptions
of the nature of inspiration. (See Jowett, “On the Belief of the
Coming of Christ in the Apostolical Age,” in Zhe Epistles of St.
Paul to the Thessalonians, etc.).

7. καθώς ἐστιν δίκαιον ἐμοὶ τοῦτο φρονεῖν ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν:
‘Even as it is right for me to be thus minded on behalf of you all.’

Καθώς is a nearer definition of πεποιθὼς, stating its ground in the
affectionate relation between Paul and his readers. For a similar
usage, see Gal. 11.6. Iam confident, even as it is right for me
to have such confidence. Comp. also iii. 17; Rom. i. 28; 1 Cor.
1.65 Eph. 11:

ἀρὰ τ in the general moral sense, as iv. 8; Acts iv. 19; Eph.
Vie 05 Ol avait, ΠΕ ΘΓ, asin classical usage, to the concep-
Wan of what i 15 normal, yet having at its foundation, not the natural
relation of man to man, but the moral relation of man to God.
‘The classical construction of the clause would be δίκαιον ἐμὲ τοῦτο
φρονεῖν, OF δίκαιος εἰμὶ τοῦτο pp. (See Win. Ixvi.)

φρονεῖν : “ΤῸ be minded’; not as A.V., ‘to think.’ The word
denotes rather a general disposition of the mind than a specific
act of thought directed at a given point. Comp. ili. 15, 19, iv. 2;
Rom. ‘vii: 5, x1. 205. 1 Cor. xin. τὰ: (Gale ν τὸ: eater views
and see on ili. 15. Comp. also φρόνημα (Rom. viii. 6, 7,27). Mey.
defines ‘the ethical Christian quality.’ Similarly, in class. Greek,
φρονεῖν Often occurs with εὖ, καλῶς, ὀρθῶς, κακῶς : τά τινος φρονεῖν

1. 7] THE PROLOGUE 9

is to be of one’s party or on his side. (See Schmidt, Sywon. 147,
7; 8.) The reference of φρονεῖν here is to πεποιθὼς, not to the
‘supplication’ (vs. ΤΣ which the sense of φρονεῖν does not admit.

ὑπὲρ παντῶν ὑμῶν: Ὑπὲρ is stronger than περὶ, ‘concerning.’
Const. with φρονεῖν, as iv. το. § All,’ collectively. The reference
of this frequently recurring ‘all’ to Paul’s deprecation of divisions
in the church is far-fetched.

διὰ TO ἔχειν με ἐν TH καρδίᾳ ὑμᾶς : * Because I have you in my
heart.’ Not, ‘because you have me,’ which is forbidden by the
position of the words, and by the following verse (Win. xliv.).
It is right for me so to think, because I have a personal affection
for you (comp. 2 Cor. vil. 3), as those who are my partakers in
grace and my co-laborers in the work of the gospel. ‘This is not
to be understood as if Paul’s natural affection for his readers made
it right for him to expect that the work begun in them would be
completed, but the expectation was justified by his love for them
in Christ. We knew no man after the flesh (2 Cor. v. 16); he
loved them ‘in the heart of Jesus Christ’ (vs. 8), and the reason
for his love was also the fundamental reason for his confidence in
the completion of the work of God im them.

ἔν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς pov, etc.: Not to be taken with the preceding
sentence, so as to read ‘I have you in my heart both in my bonds,’
ere. (so Mey., De W-) Alf, Beet, Weizs.), but to be attached to
the following συνκοινωνούς ... ὄντας (so Lips., Lightf., Dw., Weiss,
Ellic., K]., Ead., WH., R.V.), ‘I have you in my heart as being
(ὄντας) partakers with me in grace both in my bonds and in the
defence,’ etc. ‘The development of the thought as related to
κοινωνία (vs. 4) and the repetition of ὑμᾶς, which is more easily
accounted for if the new clause begins with ἔν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς,
make this connection the more probable one. ‘The apostle is con-
fident because of his love for them in Christ, and he cherishes
them in his heart because of the evidence furnished by them that
in his sufferings and in the defence of the gospel they are united
with him in the closest Christian fellowship.

καὶ ἐν TH ἀπολογίᾳ καὶ βεβαιώσει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου :

ev repeated before τη απολογια, with 8 BDb© EKLP. Probably omitted
(as in ADFG) because it was wanting before PeBawoer, the transcriber
overlooking that Be8. was included with ἀπολ. under one article.

᾿Απολογία occurs in the sense a defence against a judicial ac-
cusation (Acts xxv. 16; 2 ‘Tim. "Oye As a defence against
private persons (1 Cor. ‘ix, ὭΣ oe vii. 11). In a loose sense,
including both these (Phil. i. 16; 1 Pet. ili. 15). Here it may
include Paul’s defence before the Roman authorities, but it must
not be limited to that. It includes all his efforts, wherever put
forth, to defend the gospel.

Βεβαίωσις occurs only here and Heb. vi. 16. Τί is closely allied

10 PHILIPPIANS [τῷ 7.8

but not synonymous with ἀπολογία, and does not form ἃ hendiadys
with it — ‘defence for confirmation.’ Notice the binding of the
two words under the same article. The defence was made for
establishment or confirmation, and resulted init. For the kindred
verb βεβαιοῦν, See 10. 1. Ὁ; ὃ; ΣΙ 51

συνκοινωνούς μου τῆς χάριτος : Συνκοινωνὸς Occurs in aie ΝΟΣ
with both persons (1 Cor. ix. 23) and things (Rom. xi. 17).
Render ‘ partakers with me of grace,’ not as A.V. ‘partakers of
my grace.’ Against this is the order of the pronouns, and the
fact that when Paul speaks of the grace peculiar to himself he
never says μοῦ ἡ χάρις OF ἣ χάρις μου, but 7 χάρις ἡ δοθεῖσα μοι
(Gal. ll. 951 Cor. lii. τὸ ; Rom. xii. 3, xv. 15) 5 OF ἡ xapis avrod
ἡ εἰς ἐμὲ (1 Cor. xv. 10). Moreover, the grace is characterised
by ‘in my bonds,’ etc. For a similar construction of a noun with
a double genitive, of the person and of the thing, see 1. 25, il. 30.
The article with χάριτος characterises the absolute grace of God in
its peculiar applications to his trials and theirs, and in its manifes-
tations in their sympathy and effort. Grace prompted them to
alleviate his imprisonment, to codperate with him in defending
and propagating the gospel, and to suffer for its sake.

8. μάρτυς yap μου ὃ θεός :

The reading μοι for μου, Vulg. γι1}1, has little support.

A strong adjuration thrown in as a spontaneous expression of
feeling, like “God knows.” (Comp. Rom. i. 9; 2 Cor. 1. 23;
1 Thess. ii. 5, 10.) Chrys. says it is an expression of his inability
to express his feeling, ‘I cannot express how I long.’ Similarly,
Aretius, “ No necessity compels him to this appeal, yet the great-
ness of his love does not satisfy itself without betaking itself to
God’s tribunal.”

Some of the earlier interpreters explained the words as an attestation of
Paul’s love made with a view of heightening that of his readers; as a
formal oath in verification of his teaching; as a protection against slander-
ers and against suspicion. Klépper thinks that they were aimed at certain
persons in the church who were not in full sympathy with him and did not
wholly trust his assurances. All these explanations are forced. ‘The gen-
eral statement, ‘I have you in my heart,’ is carried out by the stronger
expression.

ὡς ἐπιποθῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς ἐν σπλάγχνοις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ:

ὡς: ‘how,’ as Rom. i. 9; 1 Thess. ii. ro. Not ‘that.’ (See
Thay. Lex. sub voce, i. 6.)

ἐπιποθῶ: Mostly in Paul. The only exceptions are Jas. iv. 5 ;
1 Pet. ii. 2. Ἐπὶ denotes the direction, not the intensity of the
emotion, as Lightf. and ΚΙ.

σπλάγχνοις : Σπλάγχνα are the nobler entrails — the heart, liver,
and lungs, as distinguished from the intestines (ra danny and
regarded collectively as the seat of the feelings, the affections and

I. 8, 9] THE PROLOGUE Il

passions, especially anxiety and anger. ‘ Heart’ is used similarly
by us. A like usage appears in Hebrew, though the nobler organs
are not selected for the metaphorical usage. Thus ΘΝ, ‘ bowels,’
‘womb,’ ‘stomach,’ and 37), ‘ bowels,’ ‘ belly,’ ‘womb,’ are both
used for the heart as the seat of feeling. ‘The plural of Gia, thie
womb,’ 8379, is rendered in the LXX is οἰκτιρμοί, Ps. xxv. (xxiv. )
6, xl. (xxxix.) 123; by ἔλεος, Is. xlvii. 6 ; by σπλάγχνα, Prov. xii. 10.
The word occurs occasionally in the singular, σπλάγχνον, in the
tragedians. (See Aisch. Zum. 240; Soph. 47. 995 3 Eur. Oresz.
1201, Lhippol. 118.) BoreNeissusage. see πἰ τ; 2 Cor. vi. 12,

se Col. mene > Philem' ἢ; 12, 20:

eee Ἰησοῦ: Paul’s feeling is not his mere natural affection,
but an affection so informed with Christ that it is practically
Christ’s own love. Christ loves them in him. ‘Thus Beng., “ In
Paulo non Paulus vivit sed Jesus Christus; quare Paulus non in
Pauli, sed Jesu Christi movetur visceribus.”

9. καὶ τοῦτο προσεύχομαι : With reference to δέησιν in vs. 4.

Καὶ not connecting τοῦτο προσ. with ἐπιποθῶ, so as to read ‘ how
I long and how I pray’ (so Ril.).. This would weaken, if not
destroy the force of vs. 8. A new topic is introduced by καὶ.

Τοῦτο points to what follows, calling attention to the subject of
the prayer. ‘This which follows is what I pray.’

iva ἣ ἀγάπη ὑμῶν ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύῃ : ‘That your
love may abound yet more and more.’

“Iva marks the purport of the prayer. For προσεύχ. ἵνα, see
WACOM XIV. 17.

There is abundant evidence that iva has, in many cases, lost its telic
sense and has come to express result or purport. See, for example,
1 Thess. v. 4; 1 Cor. vil. 29, and the sensible remarks of Canon Evans

* on the latter passage in the Speaker’s Com. The examples are drawn out
and classified by Burton, Syztax of the Moods and Tenses of N. T. Greek,
IgI-223. See also Simcox, Language of the N.T., p. 176 ft.

9 ἀγάπη ὑμῶν : Your mutual love ; not your love for me, save as
I am one of the common brotherhood.

ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύῃ : Comp. 1 Thess. iv. 9, 10.
Notice the accumulation of comparative phrases so common with
Pauly ds. Vs. 27... Σ Cor. ἵν. τῇ; Eph: 111: 20.

For περισσευη, BD 37 read περισσευση; so Weiss, and WH. marg. K* P
περισσευει. FG περισσευοι.

Love, like other Christian graces, grows. (Comp. iii. 12.) Νο-
tice the progressive present, ‘may continue to abound.’ Chrys.
remarks: ‘ For this is a good of which there is no satiety.”

ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει : ‘in knowledge and in all dis-
cernment.’ “Ezéyvwors and the kindred verb ἐπιγινώσκειν are
favorite words with Paul. Ἐπὶ has the force of addition ; know-

12 PHILIPPIANS [1. 9, 10

ledge superadded ; advanced knowledge, rather than (as Thay.
and ΚΙ.) direction toward ; application to that which is known.
(See Sanday on Rom. 1: 28, and Evans on 1 Cor. xill. 12.) Thus
it signifies here developed knowledge of truth, with more especial
reference to the practical knowledge which informs Christian love
as to the right circumstances, aims, ways, and means. (See Col.
i.g, 10.) The difference between the simple and the compound
word is illustrated in 1 Cor. xiii. 12; Rom. i. 21, 28. “Eziyvwots
is always applied in the N.T. to the knowledge of things ethical
and divine. In all the four epistles of the captivity it is one of
the subjects of the apostle’s opening prayer for his readers. It
is constructed mostly with a genitive of the object, as ἁμαρτώς,
ἀληθείας, and occurs absolutely. only in Rom. x. 2.

αἰσθήσει : Only here in N.T. Comp. αἰσθητήρια (Heb. v. 14).
In LXX, Prov. 1.4, 7, 22, Wl. 20, ν΄ 25 51 ΧΙ το; id aweriege
Primarily of sensuous, but also of spiritual perception. It as the
faculty of spiritual discernment of the bearings of each particular
circumstance or case which may emerge in experience. It is more
specific than ἐπίγνωσις with the practical applications of which it
deals. Πάσῃ is added because this discernment operates in mani-
fold ways, according to the various relations of the subject to the
facts of experience. Ἔν, which belongs to both nouns, follows the
standing usage, περισσεύειν ἐν. (See Rom. xv. 13; 2 Cor. ill. 9,
viii. 7.) Paul prays for the abounding of love in these two aspects,
advanced knowledge and right spiritual discernment; an intelli-
gent and discriminating love; love which, however ardent and
sincere, shall not be a mere unregulated impulse. Even natural
love has a quick perception, an intuitive knowledge ; but without
the regulative principle of the spiritual reason, it is not secure
against partial seeing and misconception, and results which do not
answer to the purity of its motives. ᾿Επίγνωσις is the general
regulator and guide. Αἴσθησις applies ἐπίγνωσις to the finer de-
tails of the individual life, and fulfils itself in the various phases of
Christian tact.

10. εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα : ‘That you may put to
the proof the things that differ.’

Kis governing the infin. with τὸ is frequent in Paul. (See Rom.
1. II, ili. 26, vill. 29; Eph. i. 12.)

Δοκιμάζειν i in class. PS k. of assaying metals. (Comp. LXX, Prov.
Vil, LO, -KVil- 3), Olt. δ᾽; also 1 Cor. ii. ΤΡ: rebel 7.) In
class. the technical Be for testing money (Plato, 77m. 65, c.).
Δοκιμάζειν and πυροῦσθαι occur together (Jers ix. 75s. πὶ (1-96;
Ixvi. (Ixv.) 10). Generally, ‘to prove,’ ‘examine,’ as 1 Cor. xi.
28; Gal. vi. 4; 1 Thess. v.21. ‘To accept’ that which is proved
to be good. ‘This and the more general sense appear together in
i Cor, xvi. 2, 2 Cor. vill..22 541 655: 1 1:

τὰ διαφέροντα : Διαφέρειν, in class. and N.T., means both ‘

I. 10] THE PROLOGUE 13

eee. (Mare vi. 26, x. 31, xil. 12’; Luke xl. 7, 24), and ‘to
diter~ Cavger xv.i45 ; ‘Gal. iv. τς i. 6).

Expositors are divided between two renderings. 1. ‘To put
to the proof the things that differ,’ and so discriminate between
theme (coral. Had.) Gips:, Kl De W., Weiss, Hack.). 2. “To
approve the things that are excellent’ (so Ellic., Mey., Beet,
Lightf., Vulg., R.V., but with 1 in marg.). The difference is not
really essential, since, in any case, the result contemplated is the
approval of what is good. But 1 agrees better with what pre-
cedes, especially with αἴσθησις. Paul is emphasising the necessity
of wisdom and discrimination in love. ‘This necessity arises from
circumstances which present moral problems, and develop differ-
ences of view, and give room for casuistry. The discrimination
of love applies tests, and makes distinctions impossible to the
untrained moral sense. ‘Therefore the Romans are urged to be
‘transformed by the renewing of their mind,’ in order that they
may prove (δοκιμάζειν) the good and acceptable and perfect will
of God (Rom. xii. 2). Paul illustrates this discrimination in the
matter of eating meat offered to idols (1 Cor. viii., x. 19-33).
In that case love abounds, not only in knowledge, but in percep-
tion of a delicate distinction between an act which is right in
itself, and wrong in the light of the obligation to the weak con-
science. The αἴσθησις of love is the only sure guide in questions
which turn upon things morally indifferent. Thus the whole
thought is as follows: ‘May your love increase and abound in ripe
knowledge and perceptive power, that you may apply the right
tests and reach the right decisions in things which present moral
eujerenees. (Comp. Eph. v.10; 1 Thess. v.21; Heb. v. 14.)

The majority of the Greek fathers explained the differences as those
between believers and unbelievers, heretics or errorists, or between true
and false doctrine; many of the moderns of the difference between right
and wrong. (See Klépper on this pass.)

iva ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι::

‘There is good ancient authority for εἰλικ., both with and without
the aspirate. (See WH. WV. 7. Append. sub ‘breathings.’) ‘The
word only here and 2 Pet. iii. 1. The kindred noun εἰλικρίνεια in
PCorvs ὃ; ΖΦ Gor). 12,11. τῇ The meaning is ‘ pure,’ ‘sincere.’

None of the etymologies are satisfactory. The usual one is εἵλη, ‘ tested
by the sunlight,’ but e¢A7 means the /eaz of the sun.

Lightf. suggests a probable(?) derivation from εἔλη, ‘a troop’; others,
from εἴλω or ἔλλω, ‘to turn round,’ — hence ‘judged by turning round,’ or
‘sifted by revolution.’

ἀπρόσκοποι: Either (1) ‘not causing others to stumble’ (Lips.,
Mey., Ead.), or (2) ‘not stumbling’ (Alf., Ellic., Kl., Weiss,
ΠΡ ποτ see G Cor x. 32> and comp. Rom: xiv..13;
2 Cor. vi. 3; for 2, Acts xxiv. 16. The former meaning is clearly

14 PHILIPPIANS [1. 10, 11

preferable, as related to what precedes. The discernment of love
is especially demanded in adjusting a Christian’s true relations to
his brethren. Lightf.’s reason for adopting 2 is that the question
is solely that of the fitness of the Philippians to appear before the
tribunal of Christ, and that therefore any reference to their influ-
ence upon others would be out of place. How influence upon
others can be left out of the question of such fitness, it is not easy
to see. Certainly, if we are to believe Christ himself, the awards
of the day of Christ will be determined quite as much by the
individual’s relations to his fellow-men as by his personal right-
eousness, if the two can be separated, as they cannot be. Christ’s
thought on that point is unmistakably expressed in Matt. xxv. 4o;
and Paul furnishes his own interpretation of ἀπρόσκοποι in Rom.
XIV. 13; 1 Cor. x. 32; 2 Cor. vi. 3; and especially τ Cor wit ae,
eis ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ :

εἰς, not ‘till,’ as A.V., but ‘ for,’ ‘ against,’ as those who are pre-
paring for it. For this sense of eis, comp. ii. 16; Eph. iv. 30;
2 ΠῚ 4: 12:

11. πεπληρωμένοι καρπὸν δικαιοσύνης : “ being filled with the fruit
of righteousness.’ Πεπλ. agrees with the subject of ἦτε in vs. 10,
and defines εἰλικρινεῖς and ἀπρόσκοποι more fully. Καρπὸν is the
accus. of the remote object, as Col. i. 9; 2 Thess. i. 11. (Comp.
LXX, Ex. xxxi. 3.) Paul elsewhere uses πληροῦν with the genit.
or dat.’ (See Rom:i. 20, xvi τῷ 145 2 ΘΟ ΠῚ

The reading of TR kaprwy... τῶν is feebly supported.

Kapzos in its moral and religious sense occurs in vs. 22, iv. 17;
Rom. 1. 13, vi. 21, 22, xv. 28; Gal. v. 22, nearly always of a good
result. The phrase ‘fruit of righteousness’ is from the O.T. (See
Prov. xi. 30; Amos vi. 13. Comp. Jas. πὸ cog ame) cenit
δικαιοσύνης is not appositional, ‘ fruit which consists in righteous-
ness,’ but, as Gal. v. 22; Eph. v.93; Jas. i. 18, ‘the fruit which
righteousness produces.’

Δικαιοσύνη, not in Paul’s more technical sense of ‘ righteousness
by faith,’ but moral rightness; righteousness of life; though, as
Mey. justly observes, it is a moral condition which is the moral
consequence, because the necessary vital expression of the
righteousness of faith. (Comp. Rom. vii. 4; Col.i. 10.) “The
technical and the moral conceptions of righteousness may be
dogmatically distinguished, but not in fact, since the latter cannot
exist without the former” (Weiss). This appears from the next
clause — τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Notice the defining force of τὸν.

Righteousness without Christ cannot be fruitful (Jn. xv. 5, 8, 16).

eis δόξαν καὶ ἔπαινον θεοῦ: Construe with the whole preceding
sentence, and not with καρπὸν only.

Δόξα is not used in N.T. in the classical sense of ‘notion’ or
‘opinion.’ In the sense of ‘reputation’ (Jn. xil. 43; Rom. il. 7,

Ἱ 11; 12] CAPTIVITY FURTHERS THE GOSPEL 15

TO) Acyapmehtness or ‘splendor’ (Acts xxii. 11 ; Rom.ix 4;
1 Cor. xv. 40). ‘The glory of God’ expresses the sum total of
the divine perfections. It is prominent in the redemptive revela-
tion (Is. Ix. 1; Rom. v. 2,vi.4). It expresses the form in which
God reveals himself in the economy of salvation (Rom. ix. 23 ;
Eph. i. 12; 1 Tim.i.11). It is the means by which the redemp-
tive work is carried on; in calling (2 Pet. 1, 3) ; in raising up
Christ and believers with him (Rom. vi. 4) ; in imparting strength
to believers (Eph. ili. 16; Col.i.11). It is the goal of Christian
hape (Rom. v, 2vul. 15, 21; Vit. i. 13). It is, the redemptive
aspect of the phrase which gives the key to its meaning here.
The love of God’s children, abounding in discriminating knowl-
edge, their being filled with the fruit of righteousness, redounds
to (eis) his glory as a redeeming God. It honors him in respect
of that which is preeminently his glory. Every holy character is
a testimony to the divine character and efficiency of the work of
redemption.

ἔπαινον: ‘The homage rendered to God as a God of ‘glory.’
(See Eph, 1.6, 12514 301 Petri. 7)

The apostle now enters upon the subject-matter of the letter.
From vs. 12 to vs. 26 he treats of —

1. The state of the gospel in Rome.
. (a) Its advancement through his imprisonment (12-14).
(2) The different kinds of preachers (15-17).

2. His own condition and hopes (18-26).

12-14. Though you may have feared that the cause of the gospel
as suffering by reason of my imprisonment, I wish to assure you
that it has rather been promoted thereby. My imprisonment has
become known as being for Christ's sake, not only to the whole
band of the pretorian troops, but also to the rest of Rome; and
the majority of the Christian brethren have had their faith in God
strengthened by my example, and their boldness in preaching the
gospel increased.

12. γινώσκειν δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι : ‘now I would have you know.’
This phrase does not occur elsewhere in N.T., but Paul uses
several similar expressions in order to call special attention to
what he is about to say. Thus, θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι (1 Cor. xi. 3 ;
Col. 11. 1) ; οὐ θέλω (omer) ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν (τ Cor. x. 1; Rom. i. 13;
1 Thess. iv. 13) ; yvwpi<w (μεν) ὑμῖν (1 Cor. xv. 13; 2 Cor. viii. τ ;
Caled! 11}

τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ : ‘The things pertaining to me’; my experience as a

16 PHILIPPIANS [I. 12, 13

prisoner. (Comp. Eph. vi. 213 Col. iv. 7.) Not ‘ that which has
been undertaken agazvs¢ me,’ which would require ἐμοῦ.

μᾶλλον: Not ‘more’ (quantitatively), but ‘rather.’ Though
you feared that my circumstances might injure the cause of the
gospel, they have va¢her promoted it. The comparative is often
used without mention of the standard of comparison. (See ii. 28 ;
Rom. xv. 15; 1 Gor! vil: 38, xiv 31 > ΖΦ ΟΝ Vil. Στ ay id:
KER 7)

προκοπὴν : Only here, vs. 25, and 1 Tim. iv. 15. A word of
later Greek, occurring in Plut., Jos., and Philo. (See Wetst.) In
LXX, see Sir. li. 17; 2 Mace: vii: ὃ. The fisure in the wordmis
uncertain, but is supposed to be that of pioneers cutting a way
before an army, and so furthering its march. ‘The opposite is
expressed by ἐγκόπτειν, ‘to cut into,’ ‘to throw obstacles in the
way of,’ and ‘so ‘to hinder ’.(Galvv..7 51 Thess. ire τ Peta, a)

εὐαγγελίου : Originally ‘a present given in return for good news.’
(See Hom. Od. xiv. 152; Aristoph. Azights, 647; 2 Sam. iv. 10,
xvili. 22.) In class. Gk. it meant, in the plu., ‘a sacrifice for good
tidings’ ; hence the phrase εὐαγγελία θύειν (Aristoph. Anzghts, 656 ;
Xen. Hell. i. 6, 37, iv. 3, 14). Later, ‘the good news” itself, as
2 Sam. Xvill. 20, 25, 27;.2 Kings vi. 9. “Hence “the joyful fid=
ings of Messiah’s kingdom —the gospel.’ In the N.T., never in
the sense of a book.

eis . . . ἐλήλυθεν: Not elsewhere in Paul. (See Sap. xv. 5.)
‘Has redounded to’; ‘ fallen out unto.’

13. ὥστε τοὺς δεσμούς μου φανεροὺς ἐν Χριστῷ:

Ὥστε with the accus. w. inf., as 1 Cor. 1, 7. With an explana-
tory force, the explanation being regarded as a result of the notion
of προκοπὴν. (See Jelf, Gram. 863, obs. 7.) Render: ‘so that
my bonds became manifest in Christ’; not ‘my bonds in Christ,’
against which is the position of the words. Moreover, the force
of the statement lies in the fact that his imprisonment has become
a matter of notoriety as being for Christ. His confinement as a
Christian would excite attention and inquiry. (Comp. Ign. Swzvr.
ΧΙ. δεδεμένος θεοπρεπεστάτοις δεσμοῖς πάντας ἀσπάζομαι: ‘A pris-
oner in bonds which are divine ornaments, I salute all men.’’)
Jerome says: ‘‘ Vincula mea manifesta fierent in Christo. Non
solum non obsunt sed etiam profuerunt, dum manifestatur me non
pro aliquo crimine, sed pro Christo omnia sustinere.”

ἐν ὅλῳ TH πραιτωρίῳ :

‘In (or throughout) the whole pretorian guard.’ The pre-
torians formed the imperial guard. They were ten thousand in
number, picked men, originally of Italian birth, but drawn later
from Macedonia, Noricum, and Spain. ‘They were originally
instituted by Augustus, who stationed three of their cohorts in
Rome, and dispersed the others in the adjacent towns. ‘Tiberius
concentrated them all at Rome in a permanent and strongly forti-

I. 13, 14| THE ROMAN BRETHREN TAKE HEART 107

fied camp. Vitellius increased their number to sixteen thousand.
They were distinguished by special privileges and by double pay.
Their original term of service was twelve years, afterwards in-
creased to sixteen. On retiring, each soldier received a bounty
amounting to nearly nine hundred dollars. Paul was committed
to the charge of these troops, the soldiers relieving each other in
mounting guard over him in his private lodging. (See note at
the end of this chapter.)

Kat τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν : (Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 2.) ‘All the rest,’
as distinguished from the preetorians. Not as A.V., ‘in all other
places’ (so Chrys., Thdrt., Calv.). His imprisonment as a Christ-
ian became known beyond the limits of the guard, in the city at
large. Immediately upon his arrival he addressed the chief of the
Jews (Acts xxviii. 17), and later a larger number (vs. 23), and
for two years received all that came to him (vs. 30).

14. καὶ τοὺς πλείονας τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἐν κυρίῳ πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς
pov: ‘And the majority of the brethren having confidence in the
Lord by reason of my bonds.’

τοὺς πλείονας : Not as A.V. ‘many,’ but ‘the greater number.’
(Comp. 1 Core x. 5.)

Differences as to the connection of the words. 1. ἐν κυρίῳ:
(a) with ἀδελφῶν, ‘brethren in the Lord’ (Alf., KI., Dw., Weiss.,
De W., Weizs. [‘Trans.]) ; (4) with πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς, “ rely-
ing on my bonds in the Lord.’ According to this, ἐν, κυρίῳ is the
modal definition of πεπ. τ. deop. The ground of confidence is
τοῖς δεσμ., Not ἐν κυρ., which marks the nature and sphere of the
confidence (so Mey., Lightf., Ellic., Lips., Ead.). 2. πεποιθότας :
(a) with rots δεσμοῖς, as that in which confidence is reposed
(Mey., ΚΙ., Ead., Lightf., Alf., Lips.) ; (4) with ἐν κυρίῳ, as the
ground of confidence (Beet, Hack.).

As to τ (a), ἀδελφοὶ ἐν κυρίῳ does not occur elsewhere. None
of the passages cited by ΚΙ. and others, such as 1 Cor. iv. 17;
Col. iv. 7; Philem. 16, are in point, since in none of them does
the preposition depend directly on ἀδελφὸς. Moreover, the addi-
tion of ἐν «x. would seem superfluous. 1 (ὁ) is grammatically
defensible. (See Gal. v.10; 2 Thess. ili. 4.) But the sense is
forced, if it can be called sense. What is meant by ‘having con-
fidence in,’ or ‘trusting in my bonds’? 2 (6) is a legitimate con-
struction. (See Jer. xxxi. 7, LXX, Avg. 510: xivin..7; Phil. u.
24; and the analogous constructions, Phil. il. 3, 4.) It is true
that in such cases πεποιθ. usually precedes ; but the change of
position is for the sake of emphasis, as Phil. iii. 3. Ἔν κυρίῳ is
the ground of πεποιθ., and τοῖς δεσμ. is instrumental. ‘The sense
is thus simple and consistent. By Paul’s bonds the brethren have
had their confidence in the Lord strengthened. He has already
said that his bonds have become manifest in Christ. The testi-
mony borne by his imprisonment has been distinctly that of

18 PHILIPPIANS [1. 14,.15

Christ’s prisoner, and has therefore encouraged confidence in
Christ.

περισσοτέρως τολμᾷν ἀφόβως τὸν λόγον Tov θεοῦ λαλεῖν: ‘are
more abundantly bold to speak the word of God without fear.’
For περισσοτέρως, comp. 2 Cor. i. 12, li. 4; Gal.i.14. It belongs
with τολμᾷν, not with ἀφόβως.

Τολμᾷν is to carry into action the feeling of resolute confidence
expressed by θαρσεῖν: (See 2 Cor. x. 2, and W. Sz. ad loc.)

τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ: ‘The message of God; the gospel. Very
frequent in N.T. Once in the sense of ‘the declared purpose of
God’ (Rom.ix. 6). Not elsewhere in Paul with λαλεῖν. For the
phrase τὸν λόγ. λαλ. Or τὸν Ady. Ge. λαλ., see Acts iv. 31, ΧΙ]. 46,
XIV. 25.

Paul’s boldness and patience in his captivity have stirred up the
courage and zeal of the Roman Christians, and probably have
awakened shame in some recreant disciples. Chrys. remarks that
their courage had not failed before, but had grown by the apostle’s
bonds.

15-17. But all those who preach Christ are not actuated by
equally pure motives. While some are moved by love and by sym-
pathy with meas a defender of the gospel, others, in a spirit of
envy, contention, and partisanship, proclaim Christ insincerely,
seeking to add to the affliction of my captivity.

15. τινὲς μὲν καὶ διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν : ‘some indeed preach
Christ even of envy and strife.’ These words are independent of
the preceding clause, and introduce a new feature of the condi-
tion of the gospel in Rome. ‘The words τὸν Ady. τ. Oe. AaA. Open
to the apostle the general subject of the preaching of the gospel
in the metropolis. Much wearisome discussion has arisen on the
question whether Paul includes those who preach Christ of envy
and strife in the πλείονας of vs. 14, or treats them as a distinct
class. It seems apparent on its face that the motives of envy and
strife which attach to the τινὲς μὲν cannot be reconciled with the
ἐν κυρίῳ πεποιθ., nor with the sympathetic consciousness that Paul
is set for the defence of the gospel. (See Weiss’ novel effort to
reconcile these.) Moreover, the καὶ has its familiar contrasting
force, and introduces another and a different class, and not the
same class with the addition of a subordinate and baser motive.
Thus the τινὲς μὲν are set over against the πλεώονας.

But who are meant by these τινὲς pév? Some of the Fathers, as
Chrys., GEc., Theoph., explained of unbelievers who proclaimed
Christianity in order to awaken the hatred of Paul’s enemies ;
others, as Grot., of Jews, who brought the gospel and its evi-

I. 15] THE ENVIOUS PREACHERS 19

dences into controversy in order to injure or refute it. Since
Beng. the view has prevailed that they were Judaising Christians
(so Lightf., Lips., Dw., Mey., Beet, Ellic., Lum., Nedr., Weizs.).
But this view does not seem reconcilable with Paul’s words con-
cerning the Judaisers in this very epistle (iil. 2), and in the Gala-
tian and Second Corinthian letters. Nowhere in his epistles does
Paul speak of the Judaisers as preachers of Christ unless it be
“another Jesus” (2 Cor. xi. 4). Although they accepted Jesus
as the Messiah, in their preaching he was thrown into the back-
ground behind the claims of the law. Paul found worse enemies
among these Christians than among the heathen; yet here he
virtually sanctions their preaching, and rejoices in it. ‘To say
that they are shown to have been Judaising Christians because
they preached Christ of envy and strife, is to argue in a circle.
The attempt to solve the difficulty by assuming that the form of
Judaistic opposition was milder in Rome than in the East (Mey.,
Dw., Pfl. Paulinismus, pp. 42, 332) seems like a desperate resource.
To say that a conciliation of the Jewish-Christian element in Rome
is implied in Paul’s recognition of the value of the old covenant
relation (Rom. iii. 1 f., ix. 4, x. 2) ; in his charity towards a nar-
row conscientiousness (xiv. 3-23) ; in his expressions of love and
sympathy for his own race (ix. 1-3, x. 1, xi. 1, 13) ; and in his
warning of the Gentiles against self-elation (xi. 17-24) —is a
piece of special pleading. Paul shows equal respect for narrow
conscientiousness in 1 Cor., and he never fails to treat the law
and the covenants with respect ; while his love and sympathy for
his own race appear everywhere. Weiss (Zid. 7. ἡ. ΔΝ. T: § 26)
remarks on this passage: “This is generally supposed to refer to
Judaistic teachers in Rome, whose appearance is made an argu-
ment for the still strongly Jewish-Christian character of the Roman
church. But the way in which Paul unreservedly gives expression
to his joy respecting this accession of preaching, makes it quite
inconceivable that these personal opponents should have preached
a gospel in any way differing from that which he preached.”

While therefore the τινὲς μὲν, etc., may include individual Juda-
isers, they are not to be limited to these. I incline rather to
regard them as Pauline Christians who were personally jealous of
-the apostle, and who sought to undermine his influence. It may
be, as Weiss suggests, that as the Roman church before Paul’s
arrival had no definite leadership, it was easy for ambitious and
smaller men to obtain a certain prominence which they found
menaced by the presence and influence of the apostle. Comp.
the state of things in the Corinthian church (1 Cor. iil. 3, 4).

διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν : Directed at Paul personally. Ava, ‘on
account of,’ marking the motive. (Comp. Mt. xxvii. 18; Eph.
τη: Roms, ΧΕ 5.)

εὐδοκίαν : A purely Biblical word. As related to one’s self, it

20 PHILIPPIANS [I. 15, 16

means ‘contentment,’ ‘satisfaction’ (Sir. xxix. 23; 2 Thess. 1. 11 ;.
on which, see Bornemann, Comm. ad loc.). As related to others,
it means ‘ good-will,’ ‘benevolence.’ Of God’s good-will to men
(LK: x: 273 Eph, 1. 5,9; Phil. i213) .9) ΠΡ Πα το ΝΣ, desires
(so Lightf. for Sir. xi. 7,and Rom. x. 1 [see comm. on this pass. ],
and Thay. Zex. for Rom. x. 1) cannot be supported. (See Sanday
on Rom. x. 1.) For εὐδοκεῖν, 5ΞΕ6. 1+ Cor.) x. 55 ee er τ τως
1 Thess. ii. 12. Here ‘ good-will’ towards Paul and the cause of
the gospel.

tov Χριστὸν κηρύσσουσιν:

Κηρύσσειν, orig. ‘to perform the duty of a herald’ (xypvé), is
the standard N.T. word for the proclamation of the gospel. Not
often in any other sense. Of the preaching of John the Baptist
(Mt. iii. 1; Mk. i. 4; Acts x. 37) ; of preaching the claims of the
Mosaic law (Acts xv. 21; Gal. v. 11). Chiefly, perhaps wholly,
confined to the primary announcement of the gospel, and not
including continuous instruction or teaching of believers, which is
expressed by διδάσκειν. ' (See both in Mt. iv. 23, ix. 35, xi. 1.)
Vet in passages like 1 Cor. 1. 2354x. 27, Σὺν ΠῚ the sdisnmenom
between missionary and church preaching cannot be clearly in-
ferred. For the phrase κηρύσσειν Χτὸν or tiv Χτὸν, Χτὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν,
T. Χτὸν, see Acts vill. 5; 1 Cora. 23, xv. tes 2 ΘΟ 1 ΤΩ ἢ τ᾿

τον before xTov omitted by Νὰ BFG.

16. The TR reverses the order of vs. τὸ; 17 (so D™ KL., Syr.?,
and several Fathers). ‘The change seems to have been made in
order to conform to the order of the parties in vs. 15. ‘The words
in the correct order of our text exhibit a cross-reference (chzas-
mus), the first specification of vs. 16 referring to the second of
vs. 15. Render: ‘They that are of love (preach Christ) because
they know that I am set for the defence of the gospel; and they
that are of faction (preach Christ) not purely, because they think
to add affliction to my bonds.’

Οἱ μὲν ἐξ ἀγάπης and ot de ἐξ ἐριθίας (vs. 17) are generic descrip-
tions, and the subjects of καταγγέλλουσιν.

Others, as Lightf., K1., Alf., Ead., R.V., take οἱ μὲν, of δε as the subjects,
and ἐξ ἀγ., ἐξ ἐριθ. as qualifying xatayy. ‘Thus the rendering would be:
‘The one preach Christ of love, because they know, etc., and the other
class preach Christ of faction because they think,’ etc. According to this
construction, however, ἐξ ay. and ἐξ ἐριθ. are substantially repetitions of
διὰ εὐδοκ. and διὰ φθόν. καὶ €p. Lightf.’s objection to the other construc-
tion, that thus τὸν Χτὸν carayy. is made too emphatic, is without force.
The emphasis is intended in connection with οὐχ ἁγνῶς.

For the expressions ot ἐξ ἀγάπης and οἱ ἐξ ἐριθίας, comp. Jn. xviil.
272 OM, Wei Gls Wi 7:

Eiddres and οἰόμενοι (vs. 17) have a causal force; ‘since they
know,’ ‘since they think.’

1. 16, 17] THE ENVIOUS PREACHERS 21

ἀπολογίαν : See onvs. 7. The meaning as there. Notas Chrys.,
Theoph., C&c., the ‘account’ of his ministry which Paul was to
render to God.

Keuaeaens Luke i. 245 gebhess: ui.35 1 Tim.i.9. Orig.'‘to
be laid’; ‘ to lie.’ Hence ‘to be appointed or destined.’

17. ἐριθίας - Not from ἔρις, but ἔριθος, ‘a hired servant.’ Hence
ἐριθία is, primarily, ‘labor for hire’ (see Tob. ii. 11), and is applied
to those who serve in official positions for their own selfish pur-
poses, and, to that end, promote party-spirit or faction. Render,
‘faction.’

καταγγέλλουσιν : Substantially the same as κηρύσσουσιν, though
among the compounds of ἀγγέλλειν it signifies ‘to proclaim with
authority,’ with the additional idea of celebrating or commending.
Only in Paul and Acts.

οὐχ ἁγνῶς : ‘Not purely’ or with unmixed motives, summing up
all that is included in διὰ φθόν. καὶ ἔρ., dv ἐριθ., and οἰόμ. θλίψιν ey.

The οὐχ ἁγνῶς and τὸν Xrov are suggestively in juxtaposition.
(See on iv. 8.)

οἰόμενοι: Only here in Paul, and only twice besides in N.T.
(See LEX, Job x: 2 1 -Mace:-v. 61 ; 2 Macc. v. 21, vil. 24.) It
denotes, in class. Gk., a belief or judgment based principally upon
one’s own feelings, or the peculiar relations of outward circum-
stances to himself. In its radical sense it implies the supposition
of something future and doubtful. In Attic Gk., an opinion with
a collateral notion of wrong judgment or conceit (so in the cita-
tions from LXX, above). The £xow/ledge of Paul’s mission by his
friends (εἰδότες) is offset by the malicious zmagining (οἰόμενοι) of
his enemies.

θλίψιν ἐγείρειν : ‘to raise up affliction.’

TR επιῴφερειν with DKL.

The phrase is unique in N.T., but a similar usage is found in
Pe selon ΤΣ χὰ τὶ ΣΝ ΤΙ: oll, xxx. 7. “The meaning
is not that they deliberately set themselves to aggravate Paul’s
sufferings, but that their malice was gratified by the annoyance
which their efforts to promote their own partisan ends caused him.

18-26. What then comes of this insincere preaching and of this
malice towards me? Only this, that whether Christ is preached
in pretext or in truth, he is preached, and in that I rejoice. Yes,
and 7 will continue to rejoice; for 7 know that this train of afftic-
tions will turn out for my salvation in answer to your prayer and
through that which the Spirit of Christ shall supply to me. And
thus will be fulfilled my earnest expectation and my hope that I
shall be put to shame in nothing; but that, as with all boldness

22 PHILIPPIANS [I. 18

I shall continue to preach and to suffer for Christs sake, Christ
will be magnified in this afficted body of mine, whether I live or
die. or as to life, life to me ts Christ. As to death, tt is gain.
Now, if to continue to live means fruitful labor, I have nothing to
say as to my own preference. Lam strongly appealed to from both
sides. If I should consult only my own desire, [ should wish to go
and be with Christ, for that ts by far the better thing. But, on
the other hand, [am assured that, for your sake, it 1s more neces-
sary that I should continue to lve; and therefore I know that 7
shall remain with you, that I may promote your advancement and
your joy in your faith; so that, in Christ Jesus, your joy in me
may abound through my being present with you again. +

18. τί yap: To be followed by the interrogation-point. Inter-
jectional, and called out by what immediately precedes. (Comp.
Rom. iii. 3.) They think to raise up affliction for me in my chains.
What then? Suppose this is so. (Comp. Eng. ‘for why.’) For
γάρ in interrogations suggested by what precedes, see Mt. xxvii. 23 ;
Rom. ἵν. 2; X1..34 ; 1 (Cor, 1 τὸν 31. 22." (See, Wins Iu olin)

πλὴν ore: ‘only that.’

TR omits o71,as DKL. B reads orc without πλην.

What does it signify? Only that, in any event, Christ is ene
He leaves the annoying side of the case to take care of itself, and
passes on to the encouraging aspect. For πλὴν, comp. iii, 16,
iv. 14 ¢ 1 Cor. xi. 11; Eph. v. 33., Age with τι ΟΠ Acts eee:
(See Blass, Gramm. § 77, 13.)

παντὶ τρόπῳ : ‘in every way’ of preaching the gospel.

εἴτε προφάσει εἴτε ἀληθείᾳ : Expanding and defining παντὶ τρόπῳ.

προφάσει: Using the name of Christ as a cover or mask for
personal and selfish ends. For the word, comp. 1 Thess. ii. 5.
Used absolutely, Mk. xii. 40; Lk. xx. 47.

Χριστὸς καταγγέλλεται : Christianity thrives even through insin-
cere preaching. ‘The enemies of the truth proclaim it by their
opposition. ‘The words imply Paul’s confidence in the power of
the mere proclamation of Christ as a fact.

Mey. thinks that the interrogation-point should be placed after xarayy.
instead of ri γάρ. In that case the rendering would be: ‘ What else takes
place save that Christ is preached?’ But though τί γάρ as an independent
question occurs only twice, Paul often uses τί οὖν in that way. There is no
instance in his letters of πλὴν ὅτι = τέ ἀλλὸ ὅτι. He uses πλὴν elsewhere
in the sense given above. The construction of καὶ ἐν τούτῳ χαίρω is simpler
and more natural if united with πλὴν... καταγγέλλεται than if taken as an
answer to a question, Tf... katayy.; (See Dw.)

ἐν τούτῳ: In the fact that Christ is preached, though with
different motives.

I. 18, 19] SALVATION THROUGH PERSECUTION 23

“=

aipw: Joy is a frequent theme in this letter. Beng. says:

‘The samo: the episile is, “ll rejoice, do yerejoice.’” _ (See 1.
ΠΕ. 19, 263 20, {Π| Delve, 4, 10.)

ἀλλὰ Kal χαιρήσομαι: Punctuate with a period or colon after
χαίρω, thus connecting οἶδα yap with ἀλλὰ καὶ χαιρήσομαι (so WH.,
Tisch.), ‘I rejoice. Nay but I will also continue to rejoice, since
I know,’ etc. His thought passes from the present to the future
joy, which is assured by their prayer and by the supply of the
Spirit of Christ.

19. οἶδα yap ὅτι τοῦτο μοι ἀποβήσεται εἰς σωτηρίαν : ‘for I know
that this shall turn out to my salvation.’

yap with WH. Tisch. B 37, 61, 116, Sah., read δε.

Οἶδα as distinguished from γινώσκειν is the knowledge of intuition
or satisfied conviction, or absolute knowledge. So often, by John,
Mahesh (Uke En Ve 32, Vi. Οὐ GL, Of, Vil. 20, Vill. £4, ΣΙ 1,12).
so. baul, of God (2 Cor. xi, 11, χα 2). In Jn. xxi 17 the two
verbs appear together. οἶδα is often used by Paul in appealing to
what his readers know well, or ought, or might naturally be ex-
Pected, to know (Rom. my 2, vu. τη; 1 Cor. vi. 24 Gal. ‘iv. 13);
© Ehess. ia 55 οἰ δ):

τοῦτο: In a general sense, explained by τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ (vs. 12).
This whole train of afflictions which has attended my preaching
of the gospel.

So Lightf., ΚΙ., De W., Lum., Hack., and the patristic interpreters. But
Mey., Ellic., Dw., Lips., Weiss, Ead., Alf., Beet, refer to the τούτῳ of vs. 18.
It seems unlikely, however, that Paul should have said ‘I know that the
fact that in every way Christ is preached will turn out to my salvation,’
ΚΙ. justly remarks that, on this supposition, Paul would have been more
likely to express his expectation of a favorable result which would offset
the fears or wishes of those who looked for an evil result, than of a result
which would redound to his own advantage.

ἀποβήσεται εἰς : ‘Shall turn out to’; ‘effectively go to.’ The
formula ἀποβαίνειν eis is not used elsewhere by Paul, and only
in one other pass. in N.T. (Lk. xxi. 13). In LXX, Job xiii. 16
fencd here) sxwea : Τὐχ it: Ae

σωτηρίαν : Not his release from prison, since the result will be
the same whether he lives or dies (vs. 20). Nor ‘ will be salutary
for me’ (Mey.), since Paul habitually uses σωτηρία in its Messianic
connection. Nor does it mean ‘ salvation from eternal destruction’
(Weiss, Kl.). The key to the meaning is found in vs. 28, il. 12 ;
Rom. i. 16 ; and especially 2 Thess. ii. 13. It is used here in its
widest N.T. sense ; not merely of future salvation, but of the whole
saving and sanctifying work of Christ in the believer.

διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως καὶ ἐπιχορηγίας τοῦ πνεύματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ:
‘through your supplication and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus
Christ.’ Δέησις ὑμῶν and ἐπιχορηγία τ. mv. IX are thus two dis-

24 PHILIPPIANS [1.19

tinct instruments of ἀποβήσεται, and therefore are not both in-
cluded under the one article τῆς.

Lightf., Alf., Lips., Weiss, make τῆς cover both nouns, rendering ‘ through
your supplication and supply of the Spirit,’ etc.; 2.4. the supply of the Spirit
which you furnish through your supplication. This construction would,
further, seem to involve the uniting of ὑμῶν with both nouns. So, dis-
tinctly, Weiss, Alf., Lips., and apparently Lightf. It is claimed that if
two distinct instruments were intended, τῆς would be repeated. But:
1. The absence of a second article does not necessitate the inclusion of
both nouns under τῆς, since each has its own defining genitive, and there-
fore the second article may be dispensed with (Win. xix. 52). 2. Even if
the two were included under the one article, that would not be decisive as
to the union of ὑμῶν with both. If the genitive τοῦ πνεῦματος is subjective
(see below), there are two personal agents— you, in your supplication,
and the Spirit with its supply —codperating for the same end. Nor, if
ὑμῶν is taken with δεήσεως only, is the idea excluded that the supply of the
Spirit is in answer to the prayer of the Philippians.

διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως :, Paul makes mention of the Philippians in
his own supplications (vs. 4). Here he assumes that their fellow-
ship with him in furtherance of the gospel (vs. 5), and their
partaking with him of grace (vs. 7), will call out their supplica-
tions for him. Comp, 1 Thess. v.25 > 2) 1655. ΠῚ © ieee Σ᾿
11; Rom. xv. 30-32; Philem. 22. Also Ign. Philad.v. adn’ 7
προσευχὴ ὑμῶν με ἀπαρτίσει, “ But your prayer will make me perfect.’

ἐπιχορηγίας : Only here and Eph. iv. 16. Lightf.’s explanation
of ἐπι, bountiful supply, is unwarranted. ‘The force of ἐπι is
directive. Comp. ἐπιχορηγῶν (Gal. iii. 5), where the idea of
bountifulness resides in the verb. (See Col. il. 19 ; 2 Cor. ix. 10.)
In 2 Pet. 1. 11, πλουσίως is added to ἐπιχορηγηθήσεται.

τοῦ πνεύματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ: The genitive is subjective, ‘the
supply which the Spirit of Jesus Christ affords’ ; not appositional,
‘the supply which is the Spirit,’ etc. Lightf.’s combination of the
two—-the Spirit at once the giver and the gift—ds contrary to
N.T. usage. The exact phrase, wv. IX, occurs only here. Πνεῦμα
Χριστοῦ is found Rom. viii.g; 1 Pet.i.11. The Holy Spirit is
called the Spirit of Christ (Rom. viii. 9; Gal. iv. 6), not as pro-
ceeding from Christ (Thdrt.), since the impartation of the Holy
Spirit is habitually ascribed by Paul to the Father. (See 1 Cor.
Vi. τὸ: Eph. i. τῇ; Gal. ti. Ὁ; τ Thess: ἵν π᾿ 5
Christ is represented as dispensing the Spirit. The Spirit of Jesus
Christ here is the Spirit of God which animated Jesus in his human
life, and which, in the risen Christ, is the life-principle of believ-
ers (1 Cor. xv. 45; comp. Rom: Viti. 9=11).)@hmist as fully
endowed with the Spirit (Mk. i. 10; Jn. i. 32); he sends the
Spirit from the Father to the disciples, and he is the burden of
the Spirit’s testimony (Jn.-xv. 26, xvi. 7, Ὁ. Τῶ 15). 4 lhe Para-
clete is given in answer to Christ’s prayer (Jn. xiv. 16). Christ
identifies his own coming and presence with that of the Spirit

Tg; 20] CHRIST WILL BE MAGNIFIED 25

(Jn. xiv. 17, 18). Paul identifies him personally with the Spirit
(2 Cor. iii. 17). The Spirit which Christ has is possessed also by
members of his body (Rom. viii. 9 ; Gal. iv. 6). In Rom. viii. 9,
10, Paul uses πνεῦμα θεοῦ, πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ, and Χριστὸς as convert-
ible terms.

20. κατὰ τὴν ἀποκαραδοκίαν καὶ ἐλπίδα μου: Connect with ἀπο-
βήσεται (vs. 19). ‘This shall turn out to my salvation as I am
expecting and hoping.

ἀποκαραδοκίαν : Only here and Rom. viii. το. A picturesque
word: ἀπὸ, ‘away’; κάρα, ‘the head’; δοκεῖν (Ion.), ‘to watch.’
Watching something with the head turned away from other ob-
jects; hence zzfen¢t watching. So Chrys. 9 μεγάλη καὶ ἐπιτετά-
μενη προσδοκία. Seldom in patristic Greek. Kapadoxety occurs in
class. Gk. (Hdt. vil. 163 ; Xen. Mem. ili. 5, 6; Aristoph. Kuzighés,
663, etc.), but not the compound dzoxap., which, however, is found
in later Gk., as Polybius and Plutarch. Lightf.’s ref. to Josephus,
&. J. ui. 7, 26, is felicitous. See also Philo, De Jos. 527 19:

Others, however, give ἀπὸ a local sense —the place from which (Fllic.,

Ead.); others an intensive sense, ‘to wait to the end; wait it out’ (Mey.
on Rom. viii. 19. See also Crem. and Thay. Zers.).

ἐλπίδα : The inward attitude, while ἀποκαρ. represents the out-
ward attitude. “EAzis sometimes in N.T. as the odject of hope:
the things hoped for, (See Gal..v. 55 Colo 1. 5; Heb: vi τὸ;
Tit. ii. 13.) This can hardly be the meaning here.

ore: ‘that’; not ‘because.’ It denotes the object of the hope,
supplying the specific definition of the more general εἰς σωτηρίαν
(vs. 19).

ἐν οὐδενὶ, ‘in nothing’: in no point or respect. Not ‘by no
one,’ since no persons are brought forward in what follows.

αἰσχυνθήσομαι : ‘shall I be put to shame.’ Rare in N.T., and
only twice in Paul. Frequent in LXX, as Ps. xxxv. (xxxiv.) 4, 26 ;
Ixx. (Ixix.) 2. (Comp. 2 Cor. x. 8.) He will not be brought into
disgrace by the frustration of his efforts and the disappointment
of his hopes. He will not be shown to be a deluded enthusiast,
a fanatic, a preacher of a fancied and impossible good. On the
contrary, —

μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν TO σώματί μου:

Μεγαλυνθήσεται = ‘shall be glorified’ ; lit. ‘enlarged.’ Often in
LXX for 5". (See 2 Sam. vii. 26; 1 Chron. xvii. 24; Ps. xxxiv.
xm | 3, xxxv: fixxxiv.] 27.)

ἐν τῷ σώματί μου: Instead of the simple ἐμοί; because the
question of bodily life or death was imminent. In his afflicted,
imprisoned body Christ will be magnified. (Comp. 2 Cor. iv. 10;
Gal. vi. 17.)

The force of this positive and general statement, ‘Christ shall
be magnified in my body,’ is heightened by three incidental
E

26 PHILIPPIANS [1 20, 21

clauses, which are to the following effect: 1. Christ will be
magnified, though Paul shall refuse to modify his preaching and
shall continue to proclaim the gospel with all boldness. 2. Christ’s
being magnified in spite of opposition will be nothing new. It has
always been so. 3. The result will be the same whether Paul shall
live or die.

ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ : in contrast with αἰσχυνθήσομαι, as τ Jn. ii. 28 ;
LXX, Prov. xii. 5. The primary meaning of παρρησία is “ free
and bold speaking’; speaking out every word (πᾶν, ῥῆμα). The
verb παρρησιάζεσθαι always in N.T. in connection with speaking.
The dominant idea of παρρησία is boldness, confidence. (See
2 Cor. lil. 12, vl. 4; Eph. vi. 19 5/4) Pessoa 2: ee lems ane
Lightf. on Col. ii. 15.) It is opposed to fear (Jn. vii. 13), and to
ambiguity or reserve (Jn. xi. 14). The idea of publicity some-
times attaches to it, but as secondary (Jn. vii. 4). Πάσῃ, the
direct opposite of οὐδενὶ"; every way in which boldness can mani-
fest itself. (Comp. Eph. vi. 18.) Christ will be magnified in his
bold and uncompromising preaching of the unpalatable truth.

ws πάντοτε καὶ viv: ‘As always, so now.’ Kat in the apodosis
answers to ὡς in the protasis. ~ (See Mit) vi τὸ: π᾿ τι πὴ.
Gal. i..9; 1 Jn. 11: τ: Win. lois.) Stas’ the testmanyron
history that Christ has always been magnified in spite of oppo-
sition. As Paul’s imprisonment has, up to this time, ministered
to the progress of the gospel (vs. 12), he is no less confident of
the same result now that his fate is hanging in the balance.

εἴτε διὰ ζωῆς εἴτε διὰ θανάτου : “Inimicis suis insultat, quod ei
nocere non valeant. Si enim eum occiderint, martyrio coronabi-
tur. Si servaverint ad Christum annunciandum, plurimum facient
ἐρεῖν \(jier.).

The last words lead him to speak of his own feelings respecting
the possible issue of his trial.

21. ἐμοὶ yap τὸ ζῆν Χριστὸς : “ For to me to live is Christ.’ For
Paul life is summed up in Christ. Christ is its inspiration, its aim,
its end. ‘To trust, love, obey, preach, follow, suffer, —all things
are with and in Christ. So Theoph. καινήν τινα ζωὴν ζῶ, καὶ ὃ
Χριστὸς μοί ἐστι τὰ πάντα, καὶ πνοὴ; Kat ζωὴ, καὶ φῶς : “A kind of
new life I live, and Christ is all things to me, both breath and life
and light.” See further on ἐν αὐτῷ (ch. iii. 9), and comp. ill. 7-10,
20, 21; Rom. vi. 11; Galhil. 20; 2 Cor. vy. πο; τ τ ees
Ign. Eph. iii., IX τὸ ἀδιάκριτον ἡμῶν ζῆν, ‘our inseparable life’ ;
and Mag. 1, ἸΧ τοῦ διὰ παντὸς ἡμῶν ζῆν, ‘our never-failing life.’
To ζῇν is the continuous present. In the three other passages of
Paul in which it occurs (vs. 22; Rom. vill: 15. 5 ἴδω 3d), it
denotes the process, not the principle, of life.

I. 21, 22] WHETHER TO LIVE OR DIE? 27

τὸ ἀποθανεῖν κέρδος : ‘to die is gain’; because it will introduce
him to complete union with Christ, unhampered by limitations of
the flesh. His gain will therefore magnify Christ. (See Rom. viii.
17.) ‘This is in striking contrast with the Stoic apathy which, in
proud resignation, leaves all to fate. (See a beautiful passage in
Pfleiderer, Paudinismus, 2 Aufl. p. 219.)
22. ci δὲ τὸ ζῇν ἐν σαρκί, τοῦτό μοι καρπὸς ἔργου, . . . καὶ TL
αἱρήσομαι οὐ γνωρίζω :
B reads αἱρησωμαι.

Render : ‘ But if living in the flesh — (if) this 15 fruit of toil to me,
then what I shall choose I do not declare.’

The protasis is thus ef δὲ τὸ (jv... ἔργου. The apodosis is καὶ τί
αἱρήσομαι, etc. The subject of the protasis, τὸ (nv ἐν σαρκί, is resumed by
τοῦτο, which brings out the contrast of καρπὸς ἔργου with the subjective
personal κέρδος (vs. 21). The apodosis is introduced by καὶ ‘then.’ (So
Chrys., Gic., Mey., Ellic., Dw., De W., Alf., Lum., K1., Lips., Ead.) Sev-
eral other arrangements have been advocated, the principal one of which is
to take εἰ δὲ τὸ (Hv ἐν σαρκί as protasis, and τοῦτο... ἔργου as apodosis,
making καὶ merely connective: ‘ But if living in the flesh (be my lot),
this is fruit of toil to me, and what I shall choose I do not declare.’
(So Weiss and Beet.) Lightf. suggests an arrangement in which he has
been anticipated by Rilliet, —to take ef as implying an interrogation (as
Rom, ix. 22; Acts xxiii. 9), and to regard the apodosis as suppressed:
‘But what if my living in the flesh is to bear fruit? In fact what to choose
I know not.’ The rendering adopted seems to me to satisfy most of the
conditions, though neither of those proposed is entirely free from objection.
On the one hand, the awkward ellipsis required by the second appears quite
inadmissible. On the other hand, the καὶ introducing the apodosis after a
conditional protasis with εἰ is of doubtful authority, though I think that
Jas. iv. 15, with the Fees ζήσομεν καὶ ποιήσομεν, is a fair case in point,
not to mention 2 Cor. ii. 2, which is perhaps a little more doubtful. Some
weight also should be ilewed to the LXX passages, Ex. xxxiii. 22; Lev.
XIV. 34, Xxill. 10, xxv. 2; Josh. iii. 8, viii. 24. Though not strictly analo-
gous, these imply a sort of condition in the protasis. The exact construc-
tion is certainly found in Gk. poetry (see Hom. 72. v. 897; Od. xiv. 112). Δὲ
is also used in the same way (Hom. I. 1.135, xii. 246; Od. xii. 54). In Apoc.
iil. 20, καὶ in the apodosis after ἐάν is retained by Tisch. and stands in marg.
in WH. (See Blass, § 77,6.) The use of εἰ as explained by Lightf., though
legitimate, leaves some awkwardness attaching to καὶ. (See Win. Ixiv. Wc ἢ

Ei is not conditional or problematical (Beet), but syllogistic.
(Comp. Rom. v.17.) It assumes that fruitfulness will follow his
continuance in life. Τοῦτο is not redundant, but resumptive and
emphatic, calling attention to remaining in life. It was just Zh7s,
in contrast with dying, which was to mean fruit of toil.

καρπὸς ἔργου : fruit which follows toil and issues from it.

τί αἱρήσομαι. Tc for πότερον (Comp. Mt. ix. 5, xxi. 31; Lk.
Vii. 42, xxii. 27; and see Win. xxv. 1.) The future αἱρήσομαι
takes the place of the deliberative subjunctive (Win. xli. 4 4).

ov γνωρίζω: ‘I do not declare.’ Most modern commentators
render ‘I do not perceive’ or ‘know.’ The meaning ‘to make

28 PHILIPPIANS [I. 22, 23

known,’ ‘ point out,’ ‘declare,’ is extremely rare in class. One
case occurs (Asch. Prom. 487). In the sense of ‘to become
known’ (passive) it is found in Plato and Aristotle (see Stallbaum
on Phaedrus, 262 B); but the prevailing sense is ‘to become
acquainted with,’ ‘to gain knowledge of.’ In the N.T. the sense,
without exception, is ‘to make known’ or ‘declare.’ This is also
the prevailing sense in LXX, though there are a few instances of
the other meaning, as Job xxxiv. 25. See, on the other hand,
1 Sam. Vi. 2,X. 8, xiv. 12; Dan. 11: Ὁ, τὸ τ ἡ; Ἐπ σὺ (cy) τι:
cit. Acts 1. 28. For Paul's usage 5Ὲ8 iv. σι ἐπ τ τ᾿
Gal. i. 11. No sufficient reason can be urged for departing from
universal N.T. usage. Paul says ‘to die is gain; but if the case
is put to me that it is for your interest that I should continue to
live, then I have nothing to say about my personal choice.’ Pos-
sibly he felt that under the strong pressure of his desire to depart,
he might be tempted to express himself too strongly in favor of
his own wish. As it is, he will leave the matter in the hands
of his Master. ‘“ Marvellous!’’ says Chrys. ‘‘ How great was
his philosophy! How hath he both cast out the desire of the
present life, and yet thrown no reproach upon it.”
23. συνέχομαι de ἐκ τῶν δύο :

The TR yap for de is very slenderly supported.

Aé introduces an explanation, and at the same time separates
it from that which is to be explained. (See Jn. iii. 19, vi. 39;
1 Cor. i. 12.) It may be rendered ‘now.’ Ido not declare my
preference. Now the reason is that I am in a strait, etc. Suve-
xouat is used by Paul only here and 2 Cor. v.14. (See Lk. xii.
505. Acts xvi. 5; LXX; Job mi. 24, vil. τὰ χ τὸ aes) he
figure is that of one who is in a narrow road between two walls.
I am held together, so that I cannot move to the one or the other
side. (Comp. Ign. Rom. vi.) The pressure comes from (ἐκ) both
sides, from ‘Zhe two’ (τῶν δύο) considerations just mentioned,
departing and abiding in the flesh.

τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἔχων : ‘having the desire.’ Τὴν has the force of a
possessive pronoun, ‘my’ desire. ᾿Ἐπιθυμία is used in N.T. in both
a good and a bad sense. (Comp. Lk. xxii. 15 and Mk. iv. 19;
Rom:.124, νὴ; (Gal. v.16 4 τ τ τῶν

eis τὸ ἀναλῦσαι: Lit. ‘to break up’; ‘unloose’; ‘undo.’ It is
used of loosing a ship from its moorings, of breaking camp, and
of death. Paul uses ἀνάλυσις of his own death (2 Tim. iv. 6).
If he employs the verb here with any consciousness of its figura-
tive meaning, the figure is probably that of breaking camp. Paul’s
circumstances would more naturally suggest the military than the
nautical metaphor; and, singularly enough, nautical expressions
and metaphors are very rare in his writings. ‘The idea of striking
the tent and breaking camp falls in with 2 Cor. v. 1. For the

1. 23, 24] TO BE WITH CHRIST IS BEITER 29

construction with εἰς, comp. Rom. i. 11, ili. 26, xii. 2; 1 Thess.
iil, 10.9 lew. Xi. 3.

σὺν Χριστῷ εἶναι : Beng. says : “ΤῸ depart was sometimes desired
by the saints (of the O.T.), but to be with Christ is peculiar to
the New Testament.” Paul assumes that, on departing this life,
he will immediately be with the Lord. (Comp. 2 Cor. v. 6-8 ;
Acts vii. 59.) On the other hand, Paul elsewhere treats death as
a sleep from which believers will awake at the appearing of the
Mord (ν Car: τὴ τι 52; Vhess: iv. 14, 16).

The passage does not lend itself to controversies on the condi-
tion of the dead in Christ. It is not probable that the dogmatic
consciousness enters at all into this utterance of the apostle. Dis-
cussions like those of Weiss and Klopper as to the agreement or
disagreement of the words here with those of Cor. and Thess.
are beside the mark, as is the assumption that Paul’s views on this
subject had undergone a change which is indicated in this passage.
Lightf. is quite safe in the remark that the one mode of represen-
tation must be qualified by the other. Weiss (4767. Zheol. § 101)
justly says that “if the more particular dealing with eschatological
proceedings is reserved in the four principal epistles, to a yet
greater extent is this the case in the epistles of the captivity, with-
out its being possible to show any essential change in the position
on these points.” In this familiar epistle, in this passage, written
under strong emotion, Paul throws out, almost incidentally, the
thought that death implies, for him, immediate presence with
Christ. If it be asserted that death introduces believers into a
condition of preparation for perfect glorification, that supposition
is not excluded by either these words or those in Cor. and Thess.
In 2 Cor. v. 8 the intimation is the same as in this passage. In
any case we are warranted in the belief that the essential element
of future bliss, whether in an intermediate or in a fully glorified
state, will be the presence of Christ. These words do not exclude
the idea of an intermediate state, nor do the words in 1 Cor.
exclude the idea of being with Christ.

πολλῷ yap μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον: “ for it is very far better.’

DFs'G read ποόσω for πολλω.
yap with x* ABC 17, 31, 47, 67, WH. Tisch. Omitted by s* DFGKLP,

Vulg., Goth., Syr.4*", Basm., Arm., A‘th.

Notice the heaping up of comparatives according to Paul’s
habit. (Comp. Rom. viii. 37 ; 2 Cor. vii. 13, iv. 17 ; Eph. 111. 20.)
Render, ‘very far better.’

24. τὸ δε ἐπιμένειν TH σαρκὶ:

For eripeverv B reads επιμειναι.
BDFGKL add ev with σαρκι. ἐπιμένειν ἐν occurs only in Paul (1 Cor. xvi. 8).

Observe the change of construction from τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἔχων.
Render, ‘ to abide by the flesh.’ Not precisely the same as τὸ ζῆν

30 PHILIPPIANS [I. 24-26

ἐν σαρκί (vs. 22), which was a little more abstract, expressing life
in general, while this refers specifically to his own staying by the
flesh. (Comp. Rom. vi. 1.)

ἀναγκαιότερον : ‘he comparative is slightly illogical. ‘The strong
emotion which shaped the comparative πολλῴ μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον
carries on that form, by its own momentum, to the succeeding
adjective. ‘The point of comparison is not definitely conceived.
Living is the more necessary under the present circumstances.
(Comp. Seneca, /f. 98: “ Vitae suae adjici nihil desiderat sua
causa, sed eorum quibus utilis est.” Also a striking passage
£p. 104). ‘Two practical errors are suggested by these words, —
the subsiding of all interest in the future world, and the undue
longing for it which strikes at patient submission to the will of
God. There is also to be noted the higher grade of self-abnega-
tion exhibited by Paul, not in the casting aside of earthly pleasures
and honors, which really possessed little attraction for him, but in
the subjugation of the higher longing to enjoy the perfect vision
of Christ. '

25. καὶ τοῦτο πεποιθὼς οἶδα: ‘And being confident of this I
know.’ Construe τοῦτο with πεποιθὼς, not with οἶδα, as Lightf.,
who takes ze. adverbially with οἶδα, ‘I confidently know,’ citing
Rom. xiv. 14; Eph. v. 5. But these are hardly in point. (Comp.
vs. 6.) Οἶδα is not prophetic. It merely expresses personal
conviction.

μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ :

TR συμπαραμενω with DEKLP and some Fathers.

For similar word-plays, see Rom. i. 20, v. 19; 2 Cor. iv. 8,
v. 4; 2 Thess. iii. 11 ; Acts vill. 30. Mev@ is absolute, ‘to abide
in life’: παραμενῶ is relative, ‘to abide with some one.’ Tapa-
μενῶ in a manner defines the simple verb. The value of his
remaining in life lies chiefly in his being with his brethren and
promoting their spiritual welfare. Paul uses μένειν in the sense of
continuing to live, only here and 1 Cor. xv. 6.

εἰς τὴν ὑμῶν προκοπὴν Kal χαρὰν τῆς πίστεως : ‘for your progress
and joy in the faith.’ For προκοπὴν, see on vs. 12. The genitives
τῆς πίστεως and ὑμῶν to be taken with both nouns. (Comp. 1. 20,
and see Win. xix.) For the phrase ‘joy of faith,’ comp. χαρὰ ἐν τῴ
πιστεύειν (Rom. xv. 13). Progressiveness and joyfulness alike
characterise faith.

ΚΙ. and Weiss take πίστεως with χαρὰν only.

26. iva τὸ καύχημα ὑμῶν περισσεύῃ : ‘that your glorying may
abound.’ “Iva marks the ultimate aim of μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ, and
the clause defines more specifically the general statement εἰς τὴν
ip. προκ., etc. Καύχημα is the mater or ground of glorying, not
the «εξ of glorying, which would be καύχησις, as Rom. ili. 27 ;
2 Cor; i. 12 (Comp..Rom. iy, 2; 1 Ger. ax.froeeeal vie.)

I. 26] I SHALL ABIDE WITH YOU 31

Ὑμῶν is subjective: Not ‘my ground of glorying in you,’ but
‘your ground of glorying.’

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: With περισσεύῃ, not with καύχημα. (Comp.
i.g; Rom. iii. 7; Col. ii. 7.) Christ is the element or sphere in
which the abounding develops. Christ is always needed to con-
trol, no less than to promote, overflow. ‘The abundant glorying
does not take place in the sphere of human ambition, like that of
the Jew in his law and his nationality, — the ‘ boasting according
το {πὸ Mes s(am@or. xi. τ)»; “im men’ (r Cor. ii. 21) 5; ‘in
appearance’ (2 Cor. v. 12).

ἐν ἐμοὶ : The immediate occasion of the glorying would be Paul.
The ground of boasting would attach specially to him as the rep-
resentative of the cause which was the great matter of glorying.
Ἔν ἐμοὶ is a special cause or ground within the sphere designated
by ev ΧΊ.

διὰ τῆς ἐμῆς παρουσίας πάλιν πρὸς ὑμᾶς : Connect with ἐν ἐμοὶ as
a special instance. ‘The ground of glorying is first, and compre-
hensively, in Christ ; then in Paul as representing Christ ; then in
Paul’s personal presence again with them. Παρουσίας, in its ordin-
ary sense, as ji. 12; 1 Cor. xvi.17,etc. There is a slight emphasis
on the word as contrasted with letters or messages. How far
Paul’s confidence in his liberation and future personal intercourse
with the Philippians was justified, it is impossible to determine
without more knowledge concerning the latter portion of his
career.

He now proceeds to give his readers some practical exhorta-
tions. Until he can personally minister to their faith, he must
content himself with writing to them. Their standard of Christian
consistency and efficiency must not be regulated by his personal
presence or absence.

27-30. Only, under any circumstances, — whether I shall come
to you, as I hope to do, or remain absent, as J may be compelled to
do,—TI exhort you to bear yourselves as becomes members of a
Christian community, in your steadfasiness, unity, and active exer-
tion on behalf of the gospel, and in your courage in the face of your
adversaries ; which will demonstrate the hopelessness of their efforts
and their doom to destruction, and will be God’s own evidence to
you of your own salvation. For the privilege conferred upon you
of suffering for Christ will show that you are one with him, and
partakers of that same grace which has enabled me to contend for
his cause, and of that same conflict which you saw me undergo,

and which you now hear of my still waging in my Roman prison.

32 PHILIPPIANS [I. 27

27. μόνον ἀξίως τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ Χριστοῦ πολιτεύεσθε : ‘ only
let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ.’ Fora
similar usage of μόνον see 1 Cor. vil. 39; Gal. 11.10; 2 Thess. ii. 7.
Not as though he would say: ‘ Look to your own conduct and God
will take care of me’; nor as though he intended to state the only
condition on which he would come to them ; but, ‘ whether I come
or not, I have only to say,’ etc. Only on this condition can he
successfully minister to their furtherance and joy of faith if he
shall come to them, and only thus can these be maintained if
he shall not come.

πολιτεύεσθε : Lit. ‘be citizens’; ‘exercise your citizenship.’ The
verb occurs in N.T. only here and Acts xxiva. In’ LXX, see
2 Macc. vi. 1, xi. 25. For the kindred noun πολίτευμα see ch. iil.
20. Paul’s usual word for Christian conduct is περιπατεῖν, ‘ to
walk’ (Rom. vi. 4, vill. 4; 1 Cor. ill. 3), with déiws, Eph. iv. 1;
Col. i. το. The primary reference is to their membership in the
church at Philippi; and the word is selected as pointing to their
mutual duties as members of a local Christian commonwealth ;
probably not without an underlying thought of the universal Christ-
ian commonwealth embracing all the saints in earth and heaven.
(Comp. iii. 20, and Clem. Rom. ad Cor. iii., xxi., liv.) Clement
develops the idea of individual obligation to a spiritual polity by
comparison with the obligations due to secular states, in lv. See
also Polyc. ad Phil. v. The word would naturally suggest itself to
Paul, contemplating from the metropolitan centre the grandeur of
the Roman state, and would appeal to the Philippians as citizens
of a Roman ‘colonia’ which aimed to reproduce, on a smaller
scale, the features of the parent commonwealth. (See Introd. II.)
Here, as elsewhere in Paul’s letters, may be detected the influence
of Stoicism upon his mode of thought. Stoic philosophy had
leavened the moral vocabulary of the civilised world. Its lan-
guage was fruitful in moral terms and images and furnished appro-
priate forms of expression for certain great Christian ideas. A
favorite Stoic conception was that of a world-wide state. (See
Lightf.’s essay on “St. Paul and Seneca,” Comm. p. 270 ff.)

ἀξίως τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ Χριστοῦ: ‘in a manner worthy of the
gospel of Christ.’ Τοῦ Χτοῦ is the objective genitive, — the gospel
which proclaims Christ. This is Paul’s more usual formula. (See
1 Cor. ix. 12; 2 Cor, 11.12; Gal. a. ἢ; τ Uhess ames) ee eae
also εὐαγγ. Tod υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ (Rom. i. 9) ; τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν “Inood
(2 Thess. i. 8) ; τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ (2 Cor. iv. 4).

ἵνα εἴτε ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν ὑμᾶς εἴτε ἀπὼν ἀκούω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν.

x8 ACDFGKL read akovow.

The construction is rhetorically inexact. “Iva goes with ἀκούω,
and εἴτε ἐλθ. x. ἰδ. bu. and εἴτε ἀπ. are appositional with the per-
sonal subject of ἀκούω. ᾿Ακούω, which in regular construction

ΠῚ 27] IN ONE SPIRIT 33

would be ἀκούων followed by γνῶ or some similar verb, takes the
finite form from the suggestion of the personal subject in ἀπὼν.
‘The construction is moulded by the thought of absence, which is
last and most prominent in the writer’s mind. The verb which
would have been used on the supposition of his seeing them is
dropped, and that which implies his absence is alone expressed.
Ta περὶ ὑμῶν, as 11.19, 20; Col. iv. 8; comp. τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ (ch. i. 12):
‘the things concerning you’; ‘your state’(R.V.). Render the
whole: ‘That whether I come and see you or remain absent, I
may hear of your state.’

ὅτι στήκετε, etc.: Explaining the details of their ‘state.’ δ τήκειν
mostly in Paul, and always signifying frm standing, acquiring that
meaning, however, from the context. In Mk. iii. 31, xi. 25, it
means simply ‘ to stand.’

ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι: ‘in one spirit.” (Comp. Eph. iv. 4, and see
Clem. ad Cor. xlvi.) Tvedpa here is not the Holy Spirit (as
Weiss), but that disposition which is communicated in Christ to
believers, filling their souls, and generating their holy qualities
.and works. In the possession of this they are πνευματικοί, ---- they
are joined to the Lord and are one spirit with him (1 Cor. vi. 17.
Beer 2 Coral. 18: DK 1 τῇ; Πὴ va. 63.5 Acts “i 10). The
character, manifestations, or results of this disposition are often
defined by qualifying genitives; as, the spirit of meekness, faith,
power, wisdom. (See Rom. viii. 2, 15 ; 1 Cor. iv. 21; 2 Cor. iv.
13; Gal. vi.1; Eph.i.17; 2 Tim.i. 7.) At the same time it is
to be carefully observed that these combinations are not mere
periphrases for a faculty or disposition of man. The energy of
the Holy Spirit is always assumed as behind and animating the
disposition in its various manifestations. (See JV. S4 on Rom.
Vili. 4.)

pea Yuyy: ‘with one mind.’ (Comp. ch. il. 2, 20.) Ψυχὴ is
the mind as the seat of sensation and desire. It is that part of
the individual, personal life which receives its impressions on the
one hand from the πνεῦμα, the higher divine life-principle, and on
the other hand from the outer world. There are cases where the
meanings of ψυχὴ and πνεῦμα approach very nearly, if indeed they
are not practically synonymous. (See Lk. i. 46, 47; Jn. xi. 33,
comp. ΧΙ]. 27; Mt. xi. 29; 1 Cor. xvi. 18.) But there must, never-
theless, be recognised a general distinction between two sides of
the one immaterial nature which stands in contrast with the body.
Πνεῦμα expresses the conception of that nature more generally,
being used both of the earthly and of the non-earthly spirit ; while
ψυχὴ designates it on the side of the creature. Πνεῦμα, and not
ψυχὴ, is the point of contact with the regenerating forces of the
Holy Spirit,—the point from which the whole personality is
moved Godward. Ψυχὴ must not be restricted to the principle
of animal life; nor must it be distinguished from πνεῦμα as being

34 PHILIPPIANS [I. 27, 28

alone subject to the dominion of sin, since πνεῦμα also is described
as being subject to such dominion. See 2 Cor. vii. 1; Eph. iv. 23 ;
1 Cor. vii. 34; 1 Thess. v. 23, which imply that the πνεῦμα needs
sanctification. Ψυχὴ is never, like πνεῦμα, used of God. (See
W.S¢z.on Rom. xi. 3.) Here μιὰ ψυχῇ is not to be construed
with στήκετε, but only with συναθλοῦντες.

συναθλοῦντες TH πίστει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου : ‘striving together for the
faith of the gospel.’ Svvaf. only here and iv. 3. The simple verb
ἀθλεῖν occurs in 2 Tim. 11. 5, where it signifies ‘to contend in the
games’; but in class. it is used also of contending in battle (Hat.
vil. 212; ‘Hom. 77. vil. 453, xv. 30) 5 of conflicts of cittesn( Bla
Tim. xix.c). The compounded σὺν does not mean with Paul (so
Mey.), but in fellowship with each other. Mey. appeals to vs. 30,
but there the apostle’s conflict is introduced as a new point.
Others refer to iv. 3, but there μοί is written. Lightf., after
Erasm., renders ‘in concert with the faith,’ faith being personi-
fied. He cites 1 Cor: xii: 6; 2 Tim: 1 ὃ... 21 8. ΤΙΝ ΠγΞ
fairly in point, but the two others are too much in dispute to be
decisive.

τῇ πίστει : Dat. ofinterest. ‘The trustful and assured acceptance
of Jesus Christ as the Saviour from sin and the bestower of eternal
life, is the clear sense of πίστις in the majority of N.T. passages.
At the same time, there is an evident tendency of the subjective
conception to become objective. The subjective principle of the
new life is sometimes regarded objectively as a power. It is the
sender or proclaimer of a message (Gal. ili. 2; Rom. x. 16. See
Sieffert on Gal. iil. 2, and Bornemann on 1 Thess. ii. 13). It is
something to be contended for (Jude 3). It is a precious gift to
be obtained (2 Pet.i.1). It is something to be held fast (1 Tim.
i. 19). Hence, though not equivalent to doctrina fidei (so Lightf.
here and on Gal. 111. 23, and Sanday on Rom. i. 5), its meaning
may go beyond that of the subjective energy to that of the faith
as a rule of life (so Galan. 23/591 mies 19, iV. 1: ane vbere).
Thus Kl. explains πίστις here as “the new regimen of those who ὦ
are Christ’s; the objectively new, obligatory - way of life.” The
phrase πίστις τοῦ εὐαγγελίου occurs nowhere else inN.T. Accord-
ing to the common analogy of genitives with πίστις, εὐαγγελίου
would be the objective genitive, ‘ faith in the gospel’; but accord-
ing to the meaning of πίστις given above, it will be rather ‘ the
faith which belongs to the gospel,’ the rule of life which distinct-
ively characterises it.

28. πτυρόμενοι : ‘startled,’ ‘affrighted.’ Used of a frightened
horse.

ἐν μηδενὶ: As 2 Cor. vi. 3, vil. 9; Jas. 1. 4.

τῶν ἀντικειμένων : ‘your adversaries.’ (See Lk. xiii. 17, xxi. 15 ;
1 Cor. xvi. 9; 2 Thess. ii. 4.) Of all kinds, Jewish and Pagan.
Paul’s sufferings at Philippi had been caused by Gentiles.

1 28, 29] THE GIFT OF SUFFERING 35

yrs: ‘seeing it is.’ ‘It,’ ze. your unterrified attitude. The
relative, with an explanatory force (as Eph. ill. 13; Col. i. 5;
Heb. x. 35), takes its gender from the predicate ἔνδειξις (Win.
xxiv. 3), but agrees logically with μὴ πτυρόμενοι, etc.

αὐτοῖς : whether they recognise the token or not.

évoetéus : ‘an evidence,’ ‘a proof.’ R.V., ‘evident token.’ The
word isnotcommonin N.T. (See Rom. 11]. 25, 26; 2 Cor. viii. 24.)

Comp. ἔνδειγμα : 2 Thess. i. 5. The verb ἐνδείκνυσθαι almost
entirely confined to Paul. Lit., ‘a pointing out.’ Used in Attic
law of a writ of indictment.

ἀπωλείας : ‘destruction’ or ‘waste’ in general (as Mk. xiv. 4;
Acts vill. 20) ; but specially and principally as here, the destruc-
tion which consists in the loss of eternal life. The meaning is
determined by the contrary σωτηρίας. ‘The undaunted bearing of
the Philippians in the face of opposition and persecution will be
a token of destruction to their adversaries. It will show that their
persecutors are powerless to thwart God’s work ; that their resist-
ance is working out their own spiritual ruin ; that they are fighting
against God, which can mean only destruction.

ὑμῶν de σωτηρίας : ‘but of your salvation.’

ὑμῶν, as 8 ABC? P 17, 31, 47, Arm., Syr.?.
υμιν in DKL Vulg., Cop., Basm., Goth., A‘th.

Future and eternal salvation as contrasted with ἀπωλείας.

καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ θεοῦ: ‘and that from God.’

Καὶ has an ascensive force ; not only a token, but a token from
God.

Τοῦτο refers to the whole preceding statement ; viz. that an evi-
dence of their enemies’ destruction and of their own salvation is
furnished in their brave bearing. Not merely to ἀπωλείας and
σωτηρίας, nor merely to ἔνδειξις (as Weiss). “It is not the token
alone that is from God, but the token and what it points to”
(Ead.).

29. ὅτι: ‘because,’ justifies the preceding statement, but with
special reference to σωτηρίᾳ. ‘The evidence that your courage is
a divine token of salvation lies in the fact that God has graciously
bestowed on you, along with faith in Christ, the privilege of suffer-
- Ing with him. For faith implies oneness with Christ, and therefore
fellowship with his sufferings (Rom. villi. 17; 2 Thess. i.5; 2 ‘Tim.
11. 12; Phil. iii. 10). That you suffer with Christ proves your union
with him, and your union with Christ insures your salvation.

Ὑμῖν has an emphatic position corresponding with that of ὑμῶν
in vs. 28.

ἐχαρίσθη : ‘it hath been granted’ ; freely bestowed as a gracious
gift. The word is significant as opening the conception of suffer-
ing from the Christian point of view. God rewards and indorses
believers with the gift of suffering. In Paul’s bonds the Philip-

36 PHILIPPIANS [I. 29, 30

pians are partakers with him of grace (vs. 7. Comp. Acts v. 41).
The aorist points to the original bestowment of the gift. (See
Wit ave ττ; Mik x 79. 72.)

τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ : ‘on behalf of Christ.’ To belongs to πάσχειν,
but the connection is broken by οὐ μόνον... . πιστεύειν, after which
τὸ is repeated. With the whole passage, comp. 2 Thess. i. 4-10.

30. éxovres: ‘you having,’ or ‘so that you have.’ Character-
ising ὅτι ὑμῖν ἐχαρ. . . . πάσχειν by the concrete case of their
share in his own conflict. The participle agrees with ὑμεῖς, the
logical subject of the entire clause. (Comp. similar construction in
Eph. iii. 17, iv. 2; 2 Cor.i. 7; Col.ii. 2.) Not with orjxere (vs. 27),
making yrs . . . πάσχειν a parenthesis, which would be clumsy.

ἀγῶνα : ‘conflict.’ (Comp. συναθλοῦντες [ vs. 27 | and Col. 11. 1 ;
1. Thess. ii. 2; 1 Tim. vi. 12; Heb: xiiv1))” The word applied
originally to a contest in the arena, but used also of any struggle,
outward or inward. For the latter see Col. ii. 1, and comp.
Col. iv. 12. The reference here is to his experience in his first
visit to Philippi, and to his latest experience in Rome. ‘Their
conflict is the same (τὸν αὐτὸν). They too have suffered persecu-
tions, and for the same reason, and from the same adversaries.

εἴδετε : “γε saw,’ when I was with you at Philippi (Acts xvi. το ;
τ Thess. ii. 2). ‘They saw him scourged and imprisoned.

νῦν ἀκούετε: ‘you now hear,’ as you read this letter, and listen
to the account of Epaphroditus.

ἐν ἐμοί : IN my person.

EXCURSUS
BISHOPS AND DEACONS (PHIL. I. 1)

It is evident that these words are related to the large and
complicated question of primitive church polity. Do they denote
official titles, or do they merely designate functions? What is
their relation to the πρεσβύτεροι of the Acts and Pastoral Epistles? .
Were the offices of bishop and presbyter originally the same, and
the names synonymous; or, was there an original distinction?
Were the ἐπίσκοποι the direct successors of the apostles, distinct
from the πρεσβύτεροι and higher; or, was the episcopate a devel-
opment from the presbyterate, formed by gradual elevation, and,
finally, appropriating to itself the title which was originally com-
mon to both, so that the New Testament knows only two orders
—presbyters and deacons? What light is thrown on the ques-
tion by the use of the terms here ?

To deal adequately with these questions, and with the volumin-
ous discussion which they have called out, is manifestly impos-
sible within the limits of an excursus, and the result of the most
elaborate discussion cannot be decisive, owing to the imperfection
of the sources at our disposal.

ἘΠῚ BISHOPS AND DEACONS 1.

The theory of the original identity of bishops and presbyters
has been a subject of controversy from a very early date. It was
opposed to the Roman theory that bishops were the only success-
ors of the apostles, and had from the beginning the divine com-
mission to rule the church. ‘This latter theory was issued as a
dogma by the Council of Trent, and the opposite view was de-
clared heretical. ‘The Roman dogma was rejected by the Calvin-
ists and Lutherans. About the middle of the seventeenth century
the battle over this question raged between the Anglican church
on the one hand, and the English Puritans and the French Re-
formers on the other. Dissatisfaction with the Roman view devel-
oped as the discussion gradually shifted from a dogmatic to a
historical basis. The present century has been prolific in attempts
to solve the problem. Passing by those of Baur, Kist, Rothe, and
Ritschl, the three most significant discussions from 1868 to 1883
were those of Lightfoot in his essay on “The Christian Ministry ”’
in his Commentary an Philippians ; Hatch, in the Bampton Lect-
ures for 1880 (Zhe Organisation of the Early Christan Church),
and Harnack’s translation and development of Hatch’s work (/.
Hatch: Die Gesellschaftsverfassung der christlichen Kirchen im
Alterthum, tibers. von A. Harnack, 1883). WHarnack’s views were
further expounded in his Lehre der zwilf Apostel, 1884; his Re-
view of Loening’s Gemeindeverfassung in Th. LZ., 1889, No. 17;
in Gebhardt and Harnack’s Zexte und Untersuchungen, Bd. il.
Heft 1, 5, and in his Dogmengeschichie.

Among the most important of the later discussions are : Lechler,
Das apostolische und das nachapostolische Zeitalter, 3 Aufl., 1885 ;
Kiihl, Die Gemeindeverfassung in der Pastoralbriefen, 1885; E.
Loening, Die Gemeindeverfassung des Urchristenthums, 1889 ;
F. Loofs, Die urchristliche Gemeindeverfassung, Stud. u. Krit.,
1890, Heft 4; Weizsacker, Das apostolische Zettalter der christl-
chen Kirche, 2 Aufl., 1892 ; Rud. Sohm, Azrchenrecht, Bd. i., 1892 ;
Jean Réville, Zes Ovigines de 1’ Episcopat, 1894. Harnack is re-
viewed by Professor Sanday in Zhe Expositor, 3d ser. vol. v. This
and the succeeding volume contain an interesting group of papers
by J. Rendel Harris, J. Macpherson, C. Gore, W. Milligan, G.
Salmon, G. A. Simcox, and Professor Harnack.

The Pauline epistles, omitting for the present the Pastorals,
exhibit church polity in a rudimentary and fluid state in which
official designations are not sharply defined, and the offices them-
selves have not taken permanent and definite shape. ‘The forms
of polity are simple, founded upon local conditions, and not uni-
form over the entire area of the church. The official designations,
so far as they have arisen, are the natural and familiar expressions
of particular functions. The terms often overlap or are confused,
and a term in use in one part of the church does not appear in
another part. An apostle, a bishop, a teacher, a deacon, are alike

38 PHILIPPIANS [1.1

“servants.” An overseer will be likely to be a presbyter, chosen
on account of his age and experience. The overseers may be
called προϊστάμενοι, ἡγούμενοι, Or κυβερνήσεις. ‘The assistants of
an overseer may be known as διάκονοι Or ἀντιλήμψεις.

In short, we find within this circle an entire lack of uniformity
in the terms applied to church officials, and a marked vagueness
in their use. ‘The terms do not wholly explain themselves. Most
of them are capable of a functional meaning ; and in most, if not
all, cases of their occurrence, they may be explained as indicating
the peculiar function of an official instead of his official title. This
is the case in Acts xx. 28, which is so often cited as decisive of
the original identity of presbyter and bishop. Ἐπίσκοπος occurs
but once in these epistles (Phil. 1. 1) ; διάκονος but once in an
official sense (Phil. 1. 1) ; προϊστάμενοι in Rom. xii. 8; 1 Thess. v.
12, both times functionally. In 1 Cor. xii. 28, we have, besides
apostles, prophets, and teachers, δυνάμεις, ἀντιλήμψεις, and κυβερνή-
σεις, Which are abstract terms. “Exicxozos, διάκονος, προϊστάμενος,
however they may be explained in any particular case, denote
functions. Ἐπίσκοπος is an overseer; διάκονος a servant; προ-
ἱστάμενος One who stands in front. Διακονία is applied to religious
and churchly ministries of all kinds. In Eph. iv. 11, 12, Paul
says that Christ gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and
teachers to the work of διακονία for the perfecting of the saints.
Paul and Apollos, Timothy and the secular ruler, are alike διάκονοι
(1 Cor, ii. 5; 1 Thess, au. 2 5 “Rom: x4).

This unsettled state of the nomenclature corresponds with the
fact that the primitive church was not a homogeneous body
throughout Christendom. While the Jewish-Christian church as-
sumed the connection of all local congregations with the mother-
church at Jerusalem, there was no similar bond among the Gentile
churches. Paul’s zdea/ was one body —the church, as the body
of Christ, embracing all Christians of every nationality and social
condition. He aspired to found a world-wide society, united
neither by national tradition nor by common rites, but by ἃ
common faith and a common inspiration (1 Cor. x. 16, xil. 27;
Rom. xii. 5; Eph. ii. 14-22). He speaks of “the church of
God” (1 Cor. x. 22), ‘and of “the church” {τ τ ον τ
labored to hold the provincial churches together by his letters and
messengers {τ Cor. xvi. 19; 2) Commi. 1): he *boldnessscishis
ideal, and his profound faith in the truth which he proclaimed, are
all the more striking when the heterogeneous character of his
churches is considered. (See a fine passage in Réville, Zes Ov7-
gines de l’ Episcopat, p. 115.) But the Gentile churches were
united mainly through their relation to him, and all the churches
were not within the sphere of his personal authority and work.
Hence a collective Christendom was, as Holtzmann observes, ‘a
genuine, zdea/ whole, identical with the body of the Lord, but not

1.1] . BISHOPS AND DEACONS 39

an actual fact” (Pastoralbriefe, p. 193). The primitive Pauline
church consisted of a number of little fraternities, composed
largely of the poor and of the lower orders of society, holding
their meetings in the private houses of some of their members.

These communities were self-governing. ‘The recognition of
those who ministered to the congregations depended on the free
choice of their members. At Corinth the household of Stephanas
is commended by Paul to the church as being the earliest converts
in Achaia, and as having voluntarily assumed the work of ministry
to the saints (1 Cor. xvi. 15, 16). They were not regularly ap-
pointed to office. ‘The church is exhorted to render obedience
to them, and also to every one who shall coéperate with them in
their ministry. (See Pfleiderer, Paudinismus, 2 Aufl. p. 244.)
Phoebe is not a deaconess, but a servant of the congregation, a
patroness (προστάτις) of Paul and of others (Rom. xvi. 1,2). The
congregation exercises discipline and gives judgment (1 Cor. v.
SoG) ce ΘΟ 6,77, Vil, 1s 123 (τ ΜΠ 1) In t.Cor. vit 1, Paul
recommends to the church to settle their differences by arbitra-
tion. The alternative is litigation before heathen tribunals. There
is, in short, no hint of any one ecclesiastical office endowed with
independent authority. ‘‘ Paul,” to quote the words of Réville
(p. 99), “is a sower of ideas, not a methodical administrator; a
despiser of ecclesiastical forms and of ritualism ; a mighty idealist
filled with Christian enthusiasm, and who knew no other church
government than that of Christ himself inspiring his disciples with
the knowledge of what they ought to say and do.”

It is thus evident that within the circle of the generally acknow-
ledged Pauline epistles there is no trace of formally constituted
church officers, except, apparently, in the Philippian epistle where
bishops and deacons are addressed. Of this presently. Certain
functions, however, are distinctly recognised by Paul as of divine
institution in the church; and to these, necessarily, pertained a
degree of prominence and influence in the congregation.

The measure of this prominence and influence cannot be discussed here.

Harnack (on Loening, 7%. ZZ., 1889) thinks that the pneumatic functions

carried with them a “despotic” authority. (See Loening, Gemeinde-
verfassung, ch. ii.; Loofs, Stud. τ. Krit., 1890, p. 622.)

Apostles, prophets, and teachers are declared by Paul to have
been set by God in the church, and to these are added δυνάμεις,
ἰάματα, ἀντιλήμψεις, κυβερνήσεις, γένη γλωσσῶν (1 Cor. xii. 28;
comp. Eph. iv. 11, 12; and see Réville, p. 124 [}.

I do not agree with Réville that the προϊστάμενοι of 1 Thess. vy. 12
(comp. Rom. xii. 8) are to be regarded as charismatically endowed.

These do not represent offices resting on the appointment of
the church. Their warrant is a special divine endowment or
χάρισμα. Apostles, prophets, teachers, do not signify three official

40 PHILIPPIANS {π|τ

grades in the church. The same man could be both a prophet
and a teacher. Whatever authority they possessed depended upon
the church’s conviction that their charisma was of divine origin.

In Paul’s two lists in 1 Cor. and Eph. of those who have
been divinely commissioned in the church, neither ἐπίσκοποι,
πρεσβύτεροι, Nor διάκονοι appear. Nor do they appear anywhere
in the acknowledged epistles of Paul with the exception of the
greeting to the bishops and deacons in the Philippian letter. But
in the Ignatian epistles (100-118 A.D.) we find a clear recognition
of three orders of ministry, — bishops, presbyters, and deacons, —
without which it is asserted that a church is not duly constituted
(Zrav. iii.). ‘This ministry is the centre of church order. The
bishop is distinguished from the presbyter as representing a higher
order. He is to be regarded as the Lord himself (Zi. vi.) ; to
be obeyed as Christ and as God (Zva/. ii.; Mag. ili.). Nothing
is to be done without his consent (ὦν. iv.). He is to be fol-
lowed as Jesus followed the Father (Smyv. viii.). The presbyters
are to preside after the likeness of the council of the apostles
(Mag. vi.). Obedience is to be rendered to them as to the
apostles of Jesus Christ (777. ii.). The deacons are to be
respected as Jesus Christ (7Z7a//. iii.). In short, we have in
these epistles the strongly marked beginnings of the monarchical
episcopacy.

See Lightf. Zevatius, vol. 1. p. 389 ff.

Somewhat earlier, in the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians
(about 96 a.D.), we find a greater variety of names applied to
church functionaries. Besides ἐπίσκοποι, πρεσβύτεροι, and διάκονοι,
occur the titles ἡγούμενοι, προηγούμενοι, πρεσβύτεροι καθεσταμένοι,
and ἐλλόγιμοι ἄνδρες. But it is also distinctly asserted (xlii., xliv.)
that the apostles appointed bishops and deacons to succeed them
because they knew through Christ that strife would arise over the
name of the bishop’s office (ἐπισκοπὴ). It is to be noticed that
presbyters are not mentioned.

Assuming the Philippian letter to have been written in 61 or
62 A.D., we have less than forty years to the time of Clement’s
epistle, and less than sixty to the time of the Ignatian letters. A
great development has taken place in those years from the rudi-
mentary conditions of church polity which we have been consid-
ering. ‘This change did not come at a leap. Its elements must
have been long in solution in the fluid and more democratic polity
of the earlier time. ‘The important and difficult question is the
process by which the earlier and crude forms of polity developed
into that system which is more than foreshadowed in Clement,
sharply defined in Ignatius, and an accepted fact in Irenzus,
Tertullian, and Cyprian.

Here a difficulty arises as to our sources. “Emioxo7oe and

1.1] BISHOPS AND DEACONS 41

διάκονοι appear in Phil.; ἐπίσκοποι, πρεσβύτεροι, and διάκονοι in
the Pastoral Epistles; ἐπίσκοποι and πρεσβύτεροι in the Acts and
t Pet.; πρεσβύτεροι in Jas., 1 Pet., 2 and 3 Jn., and the Apoca-
lypse. Harnack places the Pastorals in the middle of the second
century ; Holtzmann, in its former half. The modern radical
criticism of the Acts pushes its date forward into the second
century (so Harnack) besides impugning its reliability on various
grounds.

See Weizsicker, Apost. ZA. 84 ff., 167 ff., 199 ff.; J. Jiingst, 2226 Ouellen
der Apostelgeschichte, 1895; C. Clemen, Die Chronologie der paulinischen
Briefe, 1893.

The point to be observed is, that if the later date of the Pas-
torals be accepted, they must be held to represent an advanced
stage in the development toward the episcopal polity. Only let
it be noted that Harnack’s date brings us within the circle of the
Ignatian polity, and warrants us in expecting a far more precise
use of terms in the three epistles than we actually find. There is
a great distance between the episcopate of the Pastorals and that
of the Ignatian epistles. (See Réville, p. 304.)

If, on the other hand, the Pastorals be accepted as late products
of Paul’s hand, and the Acts as composed within the first century,
we have in these, along with the Epistle to the Philippians and
the Catholic epistles, traces of the transition from the looser to
the better defined polity. We have evidence of the existence of
πρεσβύτεροι and ἐπίσκοποι in the church contemporary with Paul,
without our being compelled to admit either that the ἐπίσκοπος
was a regularly ordained ecclesiastical officer, or that πρεσβύτεροι
and ἐπίσκοποι are synonymous. We have simply what we have
reason to expect ; namely, that the three titles, ἐπίσκοποι, πρεσβύ-
tepot, and διάκονοι, fall within the period of unsettled polity and
loose nomenclature. ‘The fact that all these names may represent
functions without designating official titles accords with this view.
The process of crystallisation is going on. ‘These different desig-
nations emerge here and there in the church as local develop-
ments, just as the terms προϊστάμενοι and ἡγούμενοι. It may be
admitted that one term might, on occasion, have been loosely
used for another; but the recognised and habitual identification
of ἐπίσκοποι and πρεσβύτεροι is precluded by the very assumption
that these functions had assumed the character of regularly con-
stituted church offices or orders of the ministry. If such had
been the case, such looseness and confusion in the use of the
names of formally appointed and recognised church officers is
inconceivable. I think that the indications of the nature of
church polity furnished by the Pastorals are far fewer and less
definite than is often assumed, and much too scanty to warrant
the positive inferences based upon them as to the later date and

42 PHILIPPIANS [1.1

the non-Pauline authorship of the letters. Harnack’s admission
that older documents have been used in the composition of the
Pastorals is an important concession, which makes against the
theory of their testimony to a later stage of ecclesiastical polity.

According to our view of the case, therefore, the mention of
bishops and deacons in the Philippian letter furnishes no excep-
tion to the statement that, within the circle of the acknowledged
Pauline letters, there is no evidence of regularly constituted church
officers representing distinct orders in the ministry. While the.
greeting to bishops and deacons is unique, it does not imply a
polity differing substantially from that exhibited in 1 Cor. and
1 Thess. It will be observed that the greeting is first to the
church, and that the letter is addressed to the whole church.
The special mention of the bishops and deacons by way of
appendage is explained by the fact that the letter was called out
by the pecuniary contribution of the Philippian church to Paul,
of the collection and sending of which these functionaries would
naturally have charge. it will also be noticed that the address
assumes several ἐπίσκοποι, showing that the right of administration
is possessed by no single one.

At the same time, I think it must be granted with Harnack
(Lxpositor, 3d ser. vol. v. p. 330) that while there cannot yet be
any reference to an ecclesiastical authority over the church, the
greeting of the Philippian letter implies a development of polity,
in that the ministry has become divided into a higher and a lower
ministry, and that its functionaries have obtained special designa-
tions, so that the name διάκονος has received a narrower significa-
tion, and designates a lower grade of ministry. The church at
Philippi, at the time when Paul wrote this letter, had been in
existence for ten years, and was the oldest Pauline church in
Europe. It would not have been strange if its polity had become
somewhat matured and more sharply defined, especially since it
had suffered less distraction than other churches from conflicts
with the Jews.

The Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles is most import-
ant in its bearing on this subject. This brief church manual or
directory, composed, probably in Syria, about roo a.p., is ἃ valu-
able contribution to the literature of the period between the
destruction of Jerusalem (A.p. 70) and the middle of the second
century, the least-known period of church history. Its special
value consists in marking the transition-period from the apostolic
to the later church polity, in which the spiritual functions pass
over from the apostles, prophets, and teachers to the local officers
—the bishops and deacons. On the one side it is linked with the
apostolic polity. The principal offices are still the charismatic
offices. The apostle, who is to be received as the Lord (xi. 4), is
a travelling missionary, and is not to remain for more than two

| BISHOPS AND DEACONS 43

days in a place (xi. 5). The prophet speaks by divine inspira-
tion, and is not to be tried or proved, as if for appointment to
his office (xi. 7). The prophets are the chief priests (xiii. 3).
Comp. the emphasis on prophecy in r Cor. xii. 28, xiv. 1-37.
Presbyters are not mentioned, though it does not follow from this
that they did not exist in some of the Syro-Palestinian churches.
(See Réville, p. 259.) But bishops and deacons are distinctly
recognised. ‘They are local officers. ‘They are elected to office
(xv. 1), and on occasion they are to perform the ministry of the
prophets and teachers (xv. 1); that is to say, the distinctively
spiritual functions of the prophets may be discharged by them
when the prophet is not present (xili.).

The testimony of the Didache, therefore, does not bear out the
original prominence which is claimed for the bishop. He is a
secondary officer. He falls into the background behind the apos-
tles, prophets, and teachers. ‘The testimony, further, goes to show
that spiritual functions did not originally attach to the offices of
bishop and deacon. The evidence prior to the Didache that
bishops or presbyters exercised such functions is very slight.
The principal point insisted on is the laying on of hands (τ Tim.
iv. 14 [see especially Loening, p. 75 ff.]) and the allusions to the
gift of teaching or preaching as a qualification of presbyters or
bishops (1 Tim. 11. 2, v.17; Tit. 1.9). As to ordination, it will
be observed that the charisma described as imparted to Timothy
is given through the medium of prophecy (διὰ προφητείας). As
to teaching or preaching, 1 Tim. v. 17 shows that even if this
function was occasionally exercised by presbyters or bishops, it
did not pertain to the office as such. “The elders who rule well”
are to be accounted worthy of double honor, esfecza//y those who
labor in word and teaching, which clearly implies that there were
elders who did not labor in word and teaching.

In the Didache the spiritual functions belong, as in 1 Cor., to
the prophets and teachers. The prophet is to discharge them
when he is present. ‘The prophet alone is allowed the free use of
extemporary prayer (x. 7). In other respects the teacher is on
the same footing with him. In the absence of the prophet or
teacher, his ministry may be assumed by the bishops and deacons
(xili., xv. 1). In other words, the evidence of the Didache is to
the effect that, as the special supernatural endowments subside,
as the visits of the prophets become less frequent, the ministra-
tions of worship devolve more and more upon the subordinate and
local officers.

This view is carried out by Harnack in his discussion of the
Apostolical Ordinances or Canons (Tt. τε. Unt. ii. 5). One por-
tion of this formed a considerable part of the Didache. ‘Iwo
more parts, dating from forty to eighty years later than the
Didache, mention the church officers in the following order:

44 PHILIPPIANS [1.1

bishop, presbyter, reader, deacon. ‘The bishop is the shepherd
of the flock. The presbyters, two in number, form the council of
the bishop, oversee church discipline, and take part with the
bishop in the celebration of the Eucharist. ‘The deacon has
charge of the church charities, and keeps an eye upon disorderly
members. The reader discharges the duties of an evangelist.
He is a preacher or expounder, succeeding the evangelist, who
belonged originally to the class of charismatically endowed teach-
ers (comp. Eph. iv. 11) ; thus showing how formally appointed
officials gradually succeeded to the functions of those who were
supernaturally endowed by the Spirit.

The office of the ἐπίσκοπος thus acquired a different character
when it assumed the teaching function. This does not yet appear
in Clement. The function is described as λειτουργεῖν and προσφέρ-
ew Ta δῶρα (xliv.), yet the position is different from that of the
Pauline period. With the passing away of the apostles, the
authority of the bishop has increased. Its recognition no longer
depends so exclusively on the approval of the members. Clement
proclaims the apostolic origin and authority of the office, and at
least suggests its life-long tenure (xliv.), a theory, as Harnack
justly says, which has the appearance of being devised to meet
an emergency; while some remnant of the earlier democratic
sentiment is apparent in the ejection of the church authorities
which was the occasion of Clement’s letter.

The bishop’s office, therefore, was originally not spiritual but
administrative. He had a local function in a particular commun-
ity. The question as to the precise nature and range of this
function cannot be answered decisively ; but some modern critics
have, I think, narrowed it too much. Hatch, following in the
track of Renan, Foucart, Liiders, Heinrici, and Weingarten, de-
rives the term ἐπίσκοπος from the financial officers in the heathen
municipalities or in the confraternities or guilds which were so
common in the Roman Empire (see note on τῇ Kat οἶκον σου
ἐκκλησίᾳ [Philem. 2]), and regards the original ἐπίσκοπος as
simply a financial officer.

Sanday justly remarks that the evidence, on this theory, is rather better
for ἐπιμελητής than for ἐπίσκοπος (Hxpositor, 3d ser. vy. p. 98). See also
on this point, Réville, Zes Origines de 2 Episcopat, p.153f. The subject of
the relations of the Christian official nomenclature to that of the heathen
guilds is ably discussed by Loening, Gemeindeverfassung, pp. 12, 20, 64.
See also Sohm, A7rchenrecht, p. 87, and Salmon, Lxfosttor, 3d ser. vi.
p- 18 ff.

In favor of this view it is also urged that the earliest authorities
concur in demanding that bishops should be free from covetous-
ness. Thus the Didache requires that bishops and deacons shall
be ἀφιλαργύρους (xv. 1). So in 1 Tim. iii. 3, a bishop must be
ἀφιλάογυρος, and a deacon (vs. 8) μὴ αἰσχροκερδὴς. It is also

1.1] BISHOPS AND DEACONS 45

claimed that Tit. i. 7 is to the same effect, the bishop being
described as θεοῦ οἰκονόμος. It is assumed, in short, that such
expressions were determined by the special temptations which
attached to the financial function of the bishop.

It seems to me quite possible to lay undue stress upon these
indications. Without denying that the episcopal function included,
and was possibly largely concerned with the financial interests of
the church, it could not have been confined to these. It must
have extended to the social relations of the community, to
inspection of the performance of social duties, to guardianship
of those rules and traditions which were the charter of the infant
organisation, and to representation of the community in its rela-
tions with other Christian churches or with the outside world. Τί
can hardly be supposed that, in associations distinctively moral
and religious, one who bore the title of overseer should have
been concerned only with the material side of church life. (See
Réville, p. 306 ff.).

Sohm, whose Avrchenrecht is among the very latest and strongest con-
tributions to this discussion, holds that, though the original character of
the bishop’s office was administrative, the teaching function attached itself
naturally to his duty of receiving and administering the offerings of the
congregation presented at the celebration of the Eucharist. He claims
that the episcopal office grew, primarily, out of this celebration, and that
the bishop’s distribution of the offerings to the poor involved a cure of souls
and the consequent necessity of teaching. See also Reville, pp. 178, 309.

But though it cannot be shown that the Christian title ἐπίσκοπος
was formally imitated from the Pagan official, we are not thereby
compelled to deny entirely the influence of the Pagan nomenclat-
ure in determining it. No doubt its adoption came about, in
both cases, in the same natural way; that is to say, just as seva-
tus, and γερουσία, and πρεσβύτερος passed into official designa-
tions through the natural association of authority with age, so
ἐπίσκοπος would be almost inevitably the designation of an over-
seer. ‘The term was not furnished by the gospel tradition ; it did
not come from the Jewish synagogue, and it does not appear in
Paul’s lists of those whom God has set in the church. The process
of natural selection, however, would be helped by the familiar
-employment of the title in the clubs or guilds to designate func-
tions analogous to those of the ecclesiastical administrator. (See
the interesting remarks of Réville, p. 160 f.) The title can hardly,
I think, be traced to the Old Testament. The usage there is
predominantly functional. There are but two passages in the
LXX where ἐπίσκοπος has any connection with religious worship
MO Num. iv. 16; 2 Kix. 18). It is applied to God (Job xx. 29),
as it is applied to Christ in the New Testament (1 Pet. ii. 25). It
is used of officers in the army, and of overseers of workmen. The
prevailing meaning of ἐπισκοπὴ is “ visitation,” for punishment,

46 PHILIPPIANS [1.1

inquisition, or numbering. In any case, little light can be thrown
on the question by the derivation of the word, until we clearly
understand the functions of the Christian officials.

Into the complicated question of the origin of the presbyterate
it is not necessary to enter. It may be remarked that modern
critical opinion has largely abandoned the view maintained by
Rothe, Baur, Lightfoot, Hatch, and others, that the original
Christian church polity was an imitation of that of the syna-
gogue. ‘This is largely due to the investigations of Schiirer into
the Jewish church constitution.

See Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, 2 Aufl.
Bd. ii., 1866, Eng. trans., 2d divis. vol. il. p. 56 ff.; 2216 GCemetndeverfassung
der Juden in Rom in der Kaiserzett, 1879.

The secular and religious authorities of the Jewish communities,
at least in purely Jewish localities, are shown by Schiirer to have
been the same (comp. Hatch, Lect. iii.),—a fact which is against
the probability that the polity was directly transferred to the body
of Christian believers. ‘The prerogatives of the Jewish elders have
nothing corresponding with them in extent in the Christian com-
munity. Functions which emerge later in the Jewish-Christian
communities of Palestine do not exist in the first Palestinian-
Christian society. At the most, as Weizsacker observes, it could
only be a question of borrowing a current name. ‘The use of
συναγωγὴ for a Christian assembly occurs but once in the New
Testament, and that by James, whose strong Jewish affinities are
familiar. ‘The regular designation of the Christian assembly was
ἐκκλησία. ‘The Christian society regarded itself as the inaugurator,
not of a new worship, not of an ecclesiastical organisation, but of
a new society representing the beginnings of the kingdom of God
on earth, the institutions of which would soon be definitely and
permanently established by the return of the Son of Man in his
glory. Such a society would not be satisfied with forming a
separate synagogue merely, nor would the mere reading and
exposition of the law and the prophets interpret their fresh
Christian sentiment.

See Holtzmann, Pastoralbriefe, p. 217.

However they originated, in the Acts and the Pastoral Epistles
presbyters appear as a factor of church government, forming a
collective body in the congregation. Whatever may have been
their original functions, in these documents the office of teaching
pertains to both them and the bishops. (See τ ‘Tim. iil. 2, v. 17;
Tit. 1.9.) It is at this point that the tendency to confound and
identify the two distinct offices reveals itself. It would be strange
if the two were synonymous, and that two names should be given
to the same functions. Yet Hatch (Lect. ii. p. 39, note) declares

ey BISHOPS AND DEACONS 47

that this identity is so well established that it has been practically
removed from the list of disputed questions. Such certainly is
not the testimony of later critical discussion in which this question
bears a prominent part. The reasons which make against the
identity, moreover, are not trifling. Acts xx. 17, 28, which is so
often urged as conclusive, proves absolutely nothing, or rather
favors the opposite conclusion. Either it may be said that the
word ἐπισκόπους is not titular, but expresses function, describing
the body of presbyters generally as “overseers” of the flock of
God ; or that the ἐπίσκοποι regarded as officers are represented as
belonging to the class of presbyters and appointed from their
number, which does not imply the identification of the official
titles.

Bishops and deacons are habitually associated, while no mention
of presbyters occurs along with them. It is a begging of the
question to affirm that presbyters are not mentioned because they
are identical with bishops. It cannot be proved for instance that
there were not presbyters at Philippi when Paul wrote to that
church ; and the probability is that if they had held a rank identi-
cal with that of the bishops or equal with it, notice of them would
not have been omitted.

Turning to the Pastoral Epistles, in 1 Tim. i. 1-13, we find the
qualifications of bishops and deacons described, with no mention
of presbyters. These are referred to in 1 Tim. v. 17-19, but in
an entirely different connection, —-as worthy of a double mainten-
ance, and not to be accused except on the testimony of two or
three witnesses. In the Epistle of Clement (xlii.) the apostles are
declared to have appointed bishops and deacons, not presbyters.
Passing on to a later date (140?), the Shepherd of Hermas
distinguishes bishops and deacons from presbyters (3 Vis. v. 1 ;
Sim-ix. 27,2. Comp.2 Vis.iv.2f; 3 Vis-i. 8, ix.7; Mand. x1.-12).

The testimony of Clement’s letter to the Corinthians is of spe-
cial importance. It was written on behalf of the Roman church,
rebuking the church at Corinth for ejecting its rulers from office.
(See Lightf. C/em. i. p. 82.) The passages in point are in chs. 1.,
ii XX1. Xie, Mv, ΙΝ liv... lvit.

At first sight it appears as if Clement uses ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύ-
Tepos aS Synonymous terms (see especially xliv., liv., lvil.) ; but in
chs. i., xxi. the ἡγούμενοι and προηγούμενοι, by whom the bishops
are meant, are placed side by side with πρεσβύτεροι as distinct,
πρεσβύτεροι in both cases being contrasted with the young. In
short, a more careful examination of the epistle goes to show
that if the bishops are apparently designated as presbyters, it is
because they have been chosen from the body of presbyters, and
have retained that name even when they have ceased to hold
office. For this reason the deceased bishops are called presby-
ters (xliv.). As the presbyters are not designated by Clement

48 PHILIPPIANS [aa

among those appointed by the apostles as their successors, it
appears that “presbyter” signifies, not an office, but a class or
estate. The presbyters are church members of long standing,
who have approved themselves by their good works and pure
character. ‘The leaders of the church are to be sought among
these ; but “‘the aged” as such are not described as office-bearers
regularly appointed, but merely as a body of persons distinguished
by ripe wisdom and approved character. Thus the exhortation
“Submit yourselves to the presbyters ” (lvii.) tallies with the same
expression in 1 Pet. v. 5, where the younger are bidden to be
subject unto the elder. “The office-bearers belong to the πρεσβύ-
tepot, but the πρεσβύτεροι as such are not office-bearers. ‘The
bishops are reckoned as πρεσβύτεροι, not because the presbyter as
such is a bishop, but because the bishop as such is a presbyter”
(Sohm). ‘The “appointed presbyters” (πρεσβύτεροι καθεσταμένοι
[liv.]) are not the πρεσβύτεροι collectively, but a smaller circle
within the πρεσβύτεροι. It is the bishops who are appointed (xlii.,
xliv.), and who count with the “aged” from whose ranks they
proceed. ‘They are summoned to a specific official activity as
ἐπίσκοποι.

A linguistic usage of the second century which appears in
Trenzeus goes to confirm this view,—the use of πρεσβύτερος to
denote the authorities for the tradition, the survivors of the pre-
ceding generation (Iren: A/aex. 11: 22; 5, 1v- 27,952,590, ΤΠ 3’ ae
V.5, 1,33) 3, 30, τὴ. (See Weizs., Ap ZA” Ρ' ὅτ.) Aihe bisiops
would therefore be called πρεσβύτεροι (/Zaer. ili. 2, 1, 3, 1), in so
far as they successively vouched for the tradition, and thus reached
back into the preceding age.

The qualifications which distinguish a presbyter are indicated
at the close of Clement’s epistle in the description of the three
commissioners from the Roman church who are the bearers of
the letter. They are “old, members of the Roman church from
youth, distinguished by their blameless life, believing, and sober”
(Ixiii.). No official title is given them.

To the same effect is the testimony of the Pastoral Epistles.
1 Tim. 111. treats of the officers of the church, but only of bishops
and deacons, concluding with the statement that this is the direc-
tion concerning the ordering of the church as the house of God
(vs. 14, 15). The offices are exhausted in the description of
bishops and deacons. Nothing is said of presbyters until ch. v.,
where ‘Timothy’s relations to individual members of the church
are prescribed (v. 1) ; and in Tit. ii. 2 ff. these church members
are classified as old men (πρεσβύτας), old women, younger men,
and servants. Similarly, in 1 Pet. v. 1, the apostle describes him-
self as a “fellow-elder” (συνπρεσβύτερος) ; and the church is
divided into elders who feed the flock of God, and the younger
(νεώτεροι) who are to be subject to the elders. In τ Tim. ν. 17

11] BISHOPS AND DEACONS 49

mention is made of “elders who rule well” (οἱ καλῶς προεστῶτες
πρεσβύτεροι). Assuming that elders had an official position iden-
tical with that of bishops, a distinction between two classes of
bishops would be implied, — those who rule well and those who
do not. Whereas the distinction is obviously between old and
honored church members collectively considered, forming the
presbyterial body, and certain of their number who are worthy
to be appointed as overseers. All of the presbyters do not fulfil
equally well the duty of ruling. All are not alike worthy to be
chosen as overseers. Only those are to be accounted worthy of
double honor who have approved themselves as presbyters to be
worthy of the position of ἐπίσκοποι. The following statement in
vs. 19 refers to the rights of the presbyters generally. The pres-
byters as such are not invested with office. There is no formal
act which constitutes an elder or a well-ruling elder. The bishops
are reckoned among the elders, but the elders as such are not
officers.

Thus are explained the allusions to “appointed” elders. ‘Titus
(Tit. i. 5) is enjoined to appoint elders in the Cretan churches,
men who shall be blameless, husbands of one wife, having believ-
ing children who are free from scandal. Then follows, “/or the
bishop (τὸν ἐπίσκοπον) must be blameless,” etc. The qualifica-
tions of the elders are thus fixed by those of the bishop; and the
injunction is to appoint elders to the position of overseers, for
the overseers must have the qualifications of approved presbyters.
Similarly the ordination of presbyters, in Acts xiv. 23, is to be
understood as setting apart elders to the position of superin-
tendents.

The ecclesiastical eldership is, therefore, not identical with the
episcopate, though in the unsettled state of ecclesiastical nomen-
clature, the names might, on occasion, be interchanged, and though,
in the later stage of ecclesiastical development, the assumption of
the teaching function by both classes, through the gradual sub-
sidence of charismatic endowments, tends to confuse them. ‘The
presbyterate denotes an honorable and influential estate in the
church on the ground of age, duration of church membership,
and approved character. Only bishops are “ appointed.” ‘There
is no appointment to the presbyterate.

The special office of deacon occurs in the Pastorals, and nowhere
else in the writings attributed to Paul ; for the deacons in Phil. i. τ
do not stand for an ecclesiastical office, although, as has been
already observed, they mark an advance towards it. They appear
as regular church officers in Clement and in the Didache, and
Clement asserts their apostolic appointment. ‘The testimony does
not bear out the older view of the origin of the diaconate in the
appointment of the seven (Acts vi. 1-6). The terms διάκονος and
διακονία are common expressions of service, either to Christ or to

50 PHILIPPIANS πὰ

others. Paul habitually uses them in this way, applying them to
his own ministry and to that of his associates. Avaxovia is applied
to the service of the apostles (Acts 1. 25, vi. 4), and διάκονοι is
used of the ministers of Satan in 2 Cor. xi. 15. The appoint-
ment of the seven grew out of a special emergency, and was
made for a particular service; and the resemblances are not close
between the duties and qualifications of deacons as detailed in
1 Tim. and those of the seven. The word διάκονος does not
occur at all in the Acts; and when Paul and Barnabas brought
the contribution for the poor saints to Jerusalem, they handed it
over to the elders.

Our evidence on this question is, at best, incomplete. Loening
does not put the case too strongly when he describes the sources
from which alone our knowledge can be drawn as Jickenhaft.
Such as the evidence is, however, it seems to be fatal alike to the
Roman and to the Presbyterian theory of an apostolic norm of
church polity. There can be no doubt that discussions of this
subject have too often been unduly influenced by ecclesiastical
preconceptions, and conclusions reached in which the wish was
father to the thought. To be able successfully to vindicate for
any system of ecclesiastical polity an apostolic origin and sanction
is to put into the hands of its representatives a tremendous lever.
Investigation of this subject, if it is to lead to the truth, must be
conducted on purely historical grounds apart from all dogmatic or
ecclesiastical prepossessions. In the conduct of such investiga-
tions we shall do well to heed the caution conveyed in the words
of Réville. “The prolonged and minute analysis of the smallest
texts, in which one thinks to find an echo of the first Christian
ecclesiastical organisation, tends to a forcing of the meaning and
to an exaggeration of the value of each trace that we discover ;
because we cannot be satisfied without reconstructing a complete
organism, in which all the parts are logically related and mutually
adjusted like the wheels of a perfect machine. Not only is the
mechanism not complete, but, properly speaking, there is yet no
regular mechanism. ‘The organisation of these humble communi-
ties which were still unnoticed by the great world, or noticed only
to be despised, was not the result of sage legislative labor... .
The functions, the dignities, the spiritual magistracies of primitive
Christianity emerge little by little by organic growth” (Les Origines
de 1’ Episcopat, p. 330).

The forms of church polity were gradual evolutions from primi-
tive, simple, crude modes of organisation shaped by existing
conditions. Official titles were naturally suggested by official
functions. The church was not one body, but only an aggregate
of local communities ; and the features of organisation and gov-
ernment in any single community and the official titles which
their administrators bore were not the same in other communities.

I. 13] NOTE ON πραιτωρίῳ 51

Nothing is clearer than the absence of any uniform system of
ecclesiastical nomenclature in the church of the Pauline period.
We see at first a loose, democratic organisation, in which leader-
ship depends upon spiritual endowment and its recognition by the
spiritual community. ‘The early enthusiasm gradually passes away.
The apostle, prophet, and teacher recede, formal election takes
the place of general recognition of the gifts of prophecy or
tongues ; the spiritual functions pass from the charismatic leaders
to the administrative functionaries; gradually the official polity
crystallises as the church grows stronger and its intercourse with
the outside world and among its several branches extends. ‘The
tendency observable in the history of all organisations towards
the concentration of authority in fewer hands develops ; and by
the time the first half of the second century is reached, the epis-
copal polity has defined itself in the Ignatian letters, and the tide
is setting towards the monarchical episcopacy.

NOTE ON πραιτωρίῳ (1. 13)

It is impossible to determine with certainty the place of Paul’s confinement
in Rome. The explanations of πραιτώριον ( pretoriun) are the following:

I. The prztorian camp at the Porta Viminalis (ΚΙ., Lips., Mey., Weiss,
Hack.).

2. The whole przetorian camp whether within or without the city (Ellic.).

3. The preetorian barracks attached to the Neronian palace (Alf, Con. H.,
Weizs. [Ap. Zett.], O. Holtzmann [Neutestamentliche Zettgeschichte],
Merivale [ Hist. Rom. under the Emp.)).

4. The preetorian guard (Lightf., Lewin, De W., Beet, Mangold [Bleek’s
Linl.]).

I do not think that Lightf.’s note (Comm. p. 99) has ever been successfully
answered or his conclusion shaken. He has shown that there is no sufficient
authority for applying the term ‘ preetorium’ to the imperial residence on the
Palatine; and his view on this point is confirmed by Mommsen (2émisches
Staatsrecht, 3 Aufl. ii. p. 807). After stating that the word was used to
denote the headquarters of the emperor, Mommsen goes on to argue against
Hirschfeld’s assertion that the imperial palace itself was regarded as a camp.
“ Against this,” he says, “are both tradition and theory. When the emperor
was absent from Rome he was ‘in praetorio,’ and so Juvenal (iv. 34) rightly
calls Domitian’s Albanum a camp. But the palace in the city is never called
so; for such a designation would be against the existence of the Augustan
principate, and Augustus’ tendency to conceal military domination.”

Livy, xxvi. 15, xxx. 5; Tac. Hist. i. 20, ii. 11, iv. 46; Suet. Wero, 9; Pliny,
NV. H. xxv. 2, 6, with the testimony furnished by inscriptions, are decisive for
the use of ‘ preetorium’ to denote the pretorian guard.

So Marquardt (Romische Staatsverwaltung, ii. pp. 460, 464), and Mommsen

52 PHILIPPIANS [11. 1-4

(Rim. Staatsr. ii. 865, 3 Aufl.), who says of the pretorian troops: “Their
collective designation was praeforium, as appears in the expressions praefectus
in praetorio, mittere ex praetorio, decedere in praetorio. The name of the
emperor was not usually added, though Vespasian speaks of the soldiers who
have served iz praetorio meo (Corp. I. Lat. p. 583).”

Professor Ramsay (S¢. Paul, the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, p. 357)
says that ‘ preetorium’ means “the whole body of persons connected with the
sitting in judgment —the supreme imperial court; doubtless in this case the
prefect or both prefects of the preetorian guard, representing the emperor in
his capacity as the fountain of justice, together with the assessors and high
officers of the court.” For this explanation he cites the authority of Mommsen,
but without giving any references. I must confess that this definition of
‘ preetorium’ is new to me, and I am unable to reconcile it with Mommsen’s
statements. Mommsen says (ΔΛ με. Staatsr. ii. p. 959) that the first emper-
ors, for the most part, personally conducted the imperial court. On p. 972 he
says: “From the penal sentences of the provincial governors, the appeal,
about the middle of the third century, lay to the pretorian prefects; and, as
accused persons from the provinces, sent to Rome for judgment, were, in the
earlier period, committed to the pretorian prefects as guards (here he cites
the case of St. Paul), so, 2v the third century, the judgment of such persons
passed over to them.”

The unquestionable fact that ‘ preetorium’ was used to denote the pretorian
guard makes it unnecessary to assume that the apostle in this passage refers
to any place, and furnishes a simple explanation and one entirely consistent
with the narrative in Acts xxviii. Paul was permitted to reside in his private
lodging under the custody of a preetorian soldier. As the soldiers would
naturally relieve each other in this duty, it would not be very long before Paul
could say, as he does here, that the entire body of the preetorians had become
aware that the imprisonment was for Christ’s sake. This explanation, more-
over, agrees with καὶ rots λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, which, on the other interpretations, is
exceedingly awkward.

II. 1-4. EXHORTATION TO UNANIMITY, LOVE, AND
HUMILITY

If therefore there is any power of exhortation in your experience
as Christians; if your mutual love affords you any consolation ;
if you are in true fellowship with the Spirit of God; if there are
any tender mercies and compassions in your hearts—I beseech
you to complete my joy by your unanimity and your love to each
other. Do not act from a spirit of faction or vainglory, but each
of you account his brother as better than himself, and study his
interests in preference to your own.

1: 1] EXHORTATION TO UNANIMITY, LOVE, ETC. 53

1. εἴ τις οὖν παράκλησις ἐν Χριστῷ : ‘if there be any exhortation
in Christ.’

The particular connection of οὖν is clearly with i. 27, ἥτις...
ἐν ἐμοί being a digression, though not parenthetical. The main
element of πολιτεύεσθε is brave standing for the gospel in a spirit
of concord. It is this which is taken up and expanded in the
opening of this chapter. ‘I have exhorted you to stand fast in
one spirit; to strive with one mind for the faith of the gospel,
unterrified by your adversaries. Zherefore complete my joy by
being of one accord and avoiding faction and vainglory.’ Out of
this appeal grows, logically, the exhortation to humility, without
which such unanimity cannot be maintained. The exhortation
opens in the form of an adjuration. The rapid succession and
variety of the appeals and the repetition of εἴ tus are peculiarly
impressive. Says Chrys.: πῶς λιπαρῶς, σφοδρῶς, μετὰ συμπαθείας
πολλῆς! ‘ How earnestly, how vehemently, with how much
sympathy !”

This earnestness was largely due to the fact that Paul was dis-
turbed by reports of internal dissensions in the Philippian church.
This is indicated not only by his words here, but by his moving
appeal to the example of Christ; his admonition to do all things
without murmurings and disputings (vs. 14); his entreaty of
Euodia and Syntyche (iv. 2) ; his exhortation to moderation or
forbearance (iv. 5) ; and his reference to the peace of God (iv. 7).

The appeal is upon four grounds. ‘The first and third set forth
objective principles of Christian life ; the second and fourth, sub-
jective principles. The appeal is not to what was demanded by
the readers’ personal relations to Paul. So Chrys. “If ye wish
to give me any comfort in my trials, and encouragement in Christ ;
if you have sympathy with me in my sufferings,” etc. So the Gk.
Fathers generally. It is the Christian experience of the Philippians
that is appealed to. ‘I exhort you by those feelings of which, as
Christians, you are conscious.’

παράκλησις ἐν Χριστῷ: If the fact of your being in Christ has
any power to exhort you to brotherly concord. (Comp. 1 Cor.
xii. 12-275 Eph. iv. 15, 16.)

IlapaxAyows from παρακαλεῖν, ‘to call to one’s side’ for help,
counsel, etc. Thus παράκλητος, ‘an advocate,’ is one who is
called in to plead another’s cause. With this primary sense are
associated the ideas of entreaty, exhortation, and consolation. In
the sense of ‘entreaty,’ the noun appears in N.T. only in 2 Cor.
vili. 4, but the verb is common. (See Mt. viii. 34, xiv. 36; Mk.
i. 40, etc.) As ‘consolation’ or ‘comfort,’ the noun, Lk. ii. 25,
τ 2: 5 OOM ln 7, νῖ ἢ: tlic Verb, 2 Cor.-1. 4;.6, vil..6.. As
‘exhortation’ or ‘counsel,’ the noun, Acts xiii. 15 ; Rom. xi. 8;
Heb. xiii. 22 ; the verb, Acts ii. 40, xi. 23 ; Rom. xii. 8; Tit. ii. 15.
The last sense is the usual one in Paul.

54 PHILIPPIANS [111 2

'παραμύθιον : ‘persuasion.’ Only here, but the earlier form zapa-
pvOia, τ Cor. xiv. 3. Class. ‘address,’ ‘ exhortation’ (Plat. Zeg. vi.
773 E, ix. 880 A) ; ‘assuagement’ or ‘abatement’ (Soph. £vc.
130; Plat. Huthyd. 272 B). Hence ‘consolation’ (Plat. Repub.
329 E). See παρακαλεῖν and παραμυθεῖσθαι together, 1 Thess. ii. 11.
Here, the form which παράκλησις assumes —a friendly, mild per-
suasion, “not pzdagogic or judicial” (Kl.). Paul means, there-
fore, ‘if love has any. persuasive power to move you to concord.’

κοινωνία πνεύματος : ‘fellowship of the Spirit... (Comp. Rom.
xv. 30.) For κοινωνία, see oni. 5. ‘The exact phrase only here,
and κοιν. with wv. only 2 Cor. xill. 13.

Πνεῦμα is the Holy Spirit. The meaning is ‘ fellowship with the
Holy Spirit,’ not ‘fellowship of spirits among themselves.’ The
genitive is the genitive of that of which one partakes. So habitu-
ally by Paul (1 Cor. 1.9, x, 16; 2 Cor. vill. 4, xno 145 Ephoiiiigs
Phil. iii. 10). Not ‘the fellowship which the Spirit imparts,’ which
would be grammatical, but contrary to N.T. usage. Hence Paul
means, ‘if you are partakers of the Holy Spirit and his gifts and
influences.’

εἴ τις σπλάγχνα καὶ οἰκτιρμοί: ‘if any tender mercies and com-
passions.’

Tis σπλαγχνα with 8X ABCDFGKLP and nearly all the verss. is over-
whelmingly supported agt. τινα in a few minusc., Clem., Chrys., Thdrt.,
Theoph. But the attested reading is a manifest solecism, — either a tran-
scriber’s error, or a hasty repetition of τις.

For σπλάγχνα, see on i. 8, and comp. Philem. 7, 12, 20. The
exact phrase oA. Καὶ οὐκ: only here, but see Jas. v. 11 ; Col. iii. 12.

SrAayxva is the organ or seat of compassionate emotion:
οἰκτιρμοί are the emotions themselves. (See Schmidt, Syzon.
143, 4-)

2. πληρώσατέ μου τὴν χαρὰν : “ fulfil’ or ‘fill ye up my joy.’

IIAnp., In its original sense, ‘to make full’; the joy regarded
as a measure to be filled. (Comp. Jn: 11 20, xv ΤΙ ΣΝ 1275
2 Cor. Σ- Ὁ.)

Mov before τὴν χαρὰν implies no special emphasis. (See Col.
iv. 18; Philem. 20; and often elsewhere.) (Win. xxii.)

iva: not ‘in order that,’ but to be taken with ‘ I bid’ or ‘ exhort,’
which is implied in the imperat. πληρώσατε, and indicating the
purport of the bidding. (See oni. 9.)

Mey. maintains the telic sense, and Lightf. renders ‘so as to,’ but refers
to i. 9, where he explains ἵνα as signifying purport.

τὸ αὐτὸ φρονῆτε: ‘be of the same mind.’ (Comp. Rom. xii. 16,
xv. 53.2 Corea. τα; Phil. iv.2.) «Hor Φροόνητε Secrom sen yan) ats
more general expression is defined by the following two, not three,
separate clauses.

ΤΙ, 2, 3] SHUN STRIFE AND VAINGLORYING 55

τὴν αὐτὴν ἀγάπην ἔχοντες : ‘having the same love.’ Mutual love,
and the one love of God in all. (See Col. 1.4; 1 Thess. ili. 12;
2 Thess. i. 3; 1 Jn. iv. 12-16.)

σύνψυχοι τὸ ἕν φρονοῦντες : ‘with harmony of soul cherishing
the one sentiment.’ This second participial clause points back to
τὸ αὐτὸ φρονῆτε, and is illustrated by σύνψυχοι, which marks the
common disposition under the influence of which unanimity of
sentiment is to be attained. So Mey., Alf., Ellic., Weiss, Beet.

Others, as WH., ΚΙ., Lightf., De W., Lips., Weizs., take σύνψ. and τὸ ἕν
pov. as separate predicates. ‘The attempted distinctions between τὸ αὐτὸ
and τὸ ἕν are hypercritical. Thus, τὸ ἕν, agreement of mind and will; τὸ
αὐτὸ, agreement in doctrine (Calov., Am E., Rosenm.); τὸ αὐτὸ, unanimity
in general; τὸ ἕν, the one concrete object of their striving (Weiss). The
two are practically synonymous. Wetstein cites λέγοντες ἕν καὶ ταὐτὸ
(Polyb. v. 441), and ἕν καὶ ταὐτὸ φρονοῦντες (Aristid. Concord. Rhodior.
569). This is the only occurrence of σύνψυχος in Bib. Gk. (Comp. ἰσόψυ-
χος, VS. 20.)

For To ev φρον. s* AC 17, Vulg., Goth., read τὸ αὑτὸ φρον., a mechanical
conformation to To αὑτὸ φρονήτε.

The same exhortation to concord is now put negatively, showing
what the requirement excludes.

3. μηδὲν κατ᾽ ἐριθίαν μηδὲ κατὰ κενοδοξίαν : ‘being in nothing
factiously or vaingloriously minded.’ (Comp. Ign. Prz/ad. 1., viii.)
Supply φρονοῦντες from vs. 2, which is better than ποιοῦντες or
πράσσοντες (A.V.; R.V.), since the thought is on the line of
moral disposition rather than of doing. For the suppression
Ὁ verb, comp. Gal: v. τ; 2 Cor. 1x. ὁ; Mt. xxvi.-5.

ἐριθίαν : see oni. 17.

kata: ‘by way of’; marking the rule or principle according to
which something is done. (See Jn. ii. 6; Rom. ii. 2, xi. 215
Win. xlix.)

κενοδοξίαν : ‘vainglory.’ Only here in N.T., but comp. LXX ;
Sap. xiv. 14; 4 Macc. ii. 15, vill. 18; and κενοδοξῶν (4 Macc. v.
9) ; also κενόδοξοι (Gal. ν. 26). Primarily, ‘vain opinion,’ ‘ error,’
as Ign. Magn. xi., ἄγκιστρα τῆς κενοδοξίας. (See on δόξα, 1. 11.)
A vain conceit of possessing a rightful claim to honor. Suidas
defines, ‘any vain thinking about one’s self.’ It implies a contrast
with the state of mind which seeks the true glory of God, as ch. i.
26. Its object is vain and fleshly — something which imparts only
a superficial glitter in the eyes of the worldly-minded. In Gal.
Vv. 26, xevodofo is further defined by ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι, ἀλλή-
λοις φθονοῦντες. ‘The temptation to this fault would arise, on the
Jewish side, from the conceit of an exclusive divine call, privilege,
and prerogative, and an exaggerated estimate of circumcision and
the law (Rom. 111. 1, ix. 4). Against these the Philippians are
warned in ch. iii. On the Gentile side the temptation would lie

56 PHILIPPIANS [11. 3, 4

in the conceit of a profound gnosis, and in their self-esteem grow-
ing out of their call and the rejection of the Jews. Paul deals
with this in Rom. xi. 20-25. They might also be tempted by the
fancy of their own superior culture and breadth of view to despise
the scruples of weak brethren. (See Rom. xiv.; 1 Cor. viii.)

τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ : ‘in lowliness of mind.’ In class. Gk. ταπεινὸς
usually implies meanness of condition; lowness of rank ; abject-
ness. At best the classical conception is only modesty, absence
of assumption, an element of worldly wisdom, and in no sense
opposed to self-righteousness. The word ταπεινοφροσύνη is an
outgrowth of the gospel. It does not appear before the Christian
era. ‘The virtue itself is founded in a correct estimate of actual
littleness conjoined with a sense of sinfulness. It regards man not
only with reference to God, but also with reference to his fellow-
men, as here. ‘The article τῇ probably denotes the virtue consid-
ered abstractly or generically. (Comp. Rom. xu. τὸ ff.) It may,
however, be used possessively, ‘your lowliness’ (Lightf.), or as
indicating the de lowliness which should influence each (Ellic.).

ἀλλήλους ἡγούμενοι ὑπερέχοντας ἑαυτῶν : ‘each counting other
better than himself.’ (Comp. Rom. xii. 10.) ἩἩγεῖσθαι implies
a more conscious, a surer judgment, resting on more careful weigh-
ing of the facts, than νομίζειν. (See Schmidt, Syzon. 105, 4; 70,
193772)

‘Yrepexew with genit. not elsewhere in Paul. (Comp. iv. 7;
Rom. xiii. 1.)

B reads τοὺς with ὑπερέχοντας. DFG υπερεχοντες.

4. ἕκαστοι σκοποῦντες --- ἕκαστοι:

Ist εκαστοι, as ABFG 17, Vulg.; αὶ CDKLP, Goth., Cop., Arm., Syr.t*,
read εκαστος, WH. marg. 2d εκαστοι, as αὶ ABCYi Ds P 17, 31, 47, Cop.;
KL, Goth., Syr.u, Arm., read exaoTos.

For σκοπουντες 1, with a few Fath. reads σκοπειτε.

᾽

σκοποῦντες : ‘looking.’ For this use of the participle instead of
the imperative, comp. Rom. xii. 9; Heb. xii. 5. It forms an
expansion of the previous words. xozeiy is ‘ to look attentively’ ;
to fix the attention upon a thing with an interest init. (See Rom.
xvi. 17; 2-Cor. iv. +185 (81. 1 τὶ; Philo. 17) ene, oiten,
‘to aim at.’ (Comp. σκοπὸν, 111. 14.) Schmidt defines: “to direct
one’s attention upon a thing, either in order to obtain it, or because
one has a peculiar interest in it, or a duty to fulfil towards it. Also
to have an eye to with a view of forming a right judgment” (.Syzon.
Ti, τὴ.

ἀλλὰ Kat: Kat, ‘also,’ is inserted because Paul would not have it
understood that one is to pay no attention to his own affairs.

x* AC 17 join 2d εκαστοι with τοῦτ. φρον. following. The previous
sentence would therefore end with erepwv.

11. 5,6] | CHRIST THE EXAMPLE OF HUMILITY 57

Humility is urged because it is necessary to concord, as κενοδοξία
is fatal to concord. For the supreme example and illustration of
this virtue, the readers are now pointed to Jesus Christ. (Comp.
Rom. xv, 3; 2 Cor. viii. 9; 1 Pet. ii. 21, and the striking parallel
in Clem. ad Cor. xvi.)

5-8. Cherish the disposition which dwelt in Christ Jesus. For
he, though he existed from eternity in a state of equality with God,
did not regard that divine condition of being as one might regard a
prize to be eagerly grasped, but laid it aside, and took the form of
a bondservant, having been made in the likeness of men: and
having been thus found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to God even so far as to suffer death, yea,
the ignominious death of the cross.

On the whole passage, see note at the end of this chapter.

5. τοῦτο φρονεῖτε ἐν ὑμῖν ὃ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ : ‘have this mind
in you which was also in Christ Jesus.’

xe DFGKLP, Goth., Syr.P, insert yap after rovro; x* ABC 17, 37, Cop.,
Arm., Aith., omit yap; Ppoverre with Ν᾿ ABC* DFG 67**, Vulg., Syr.ut;
C3 KLP, Cop., Arm., Goth., read φρονεισθω.

ἐν ὑμῖν : ‘in you’; not ‘among you,’ which is precluded by the
following ἐν XI. (Comp. Mt. iii. 9, ix. 3, 21.) Ἔν ὑμῖν with
the active φρονεῖτε presents no difficulty if it is remembered that
φρονεῖν signifies the general mental attitude or disposition. (See
on i. 7.)

ev ΧῚ : There was a slight difference of opinion as to whether
that which is commended to imitation is Christ’s ταπεινοφροσύνη
(so the Gk. Fathers), or his self-denying zeal for the salvation of
others (Aug. Ans.). It is both combined. They are represented
respectively by ἐταπείνωσεν (vs. 8) and ἐκένωσεν (vs. 7). So Beng.,
‘qui non sua quaesiverit sed se ipsum demiserit.”
_ 6. os: Refers to Christ as the subject. It is the subject of both
classes of statements which follow, — those predicated of Christ’s
preincarnate state and of his human condition. The immediate
context defines the specific reference in each case.

ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ : ‘in the form of God.’ ‘Form’ is an inadequate
rendering of μορφὴ, but our language affords no better word. By
‘form’ is commonly understood ‘shape,’ ‘sensible appearance.’
So of Christ’s human form (Mk. xvi. 12). But the word in this
sense cannot be applied to God. Μορφὴ here means that expres-
sion of being which is identified with the essential nature and

58 PHILIPPIANS [II. 6

character of God, and which reveals it. ‘This expression of God
cannot be conceived by us, though it may be conceived and
apprehended by pure spiritual intelligences.

ὑπάρχων : ‘subsisting’ or ‘ though he subsisted.’ Originally ‘ to
begin,’ ‘make a beginning’ ; thence ‘ to come forth’ ; ‘ be at hand’ ;
‘be in existence.’ It is sometimes claimed that ὑπάρχειν, as dis-
tinguished from εἶναι, implies a reference to an antecedent condi-
tion. Thus R.V. marg. ‘ being oviginally.’ Suidas, = προεῖναι. That
it does so in some cases is true. (See Thuc. iv. 18, vi. 86; Hadt.
ii. 15; Dem, ill. 15, v. 13.) Comp. the meqning “to be taken
fot granted’ (Plat. Symp.°198 D3 Z7m. 300). * Onttine omer
hand, it sometimes denotes a present as related to a future con-
dition. (See Hdt. vii. 144; Thuc. ii. 64; and the meaning ‘to
be in store’ [A#s. Ag. 961].) The most that can be said is that
the word is very often used with a relative meaning ; while, at the
same time, it often occurs simply as ‘to be.’ (See Schmidt,
Synon. 81, 7.)

οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ : ‘counted it not a prize
to be on an equality with God.’

“Αρπαγμὸν is here equivalent to ἅρπαγμα, the more regular form
for the object of the action, — the thing seized, — while substan-
tives in μος have usually an active sense. There are, however,
exceptions to this. Thus θεσμός and χρησμός are neither of them
used actively. Φραγμός, ‘a fencing in,’ is also used like φράγμα,
‘afence.’ ᾿Αγιασμός is both ‘the act of consecration’ and ‘ sanctifi-
cation.’ (Comp. ὀνειδισμός, σωφρονισμός, and ἱλασμός.) There is
only one example of ἅρπαγμός in any class. author (Plut. AZorad.
p. 12 A) where the meaning is apparently active. It occurs in
two passages of Cyr. Alex., De Adorat. i. 25, and Cont. Jul. vi.,
both in a passive sense, and in Euseb. Comm. in Luc. vi., also
passive. Max. Conf. Schol/. in Lib. de divin. nom. 57 D, explains
οὐχ dpm. Hy. by οὐκ ἀπηξίωσεν ὡς ἄνθρωπος ὑπακοῦσαι. It should
also be observed that vapina, by which ἁρπαγμὸν is rendered in
the Lat. trans. of Origen and Theo. Mops., is used both actively
and passively, the latter in poetry and late Latin. In this condi-
tion of the evidence it is certainly straining a point, to say the
least, to insist on making the rendering of the passage turn on
the active meaning of ἁρπαγμὸν, as Mey. “Apraypa is often used
with ἡγεῖσθαι, as ἁρπαγμὸν here, in the sense of ‘to clutch greedily.’

ἡγήσατο: See on vs. 3. Weiss suggests that the phrase apz. 7y.
may have been chosen with reference to ἡγούμενοι of vs. 3, in order
to emphasise the disposition from which Christ’s self-humiliation
proceeded.

τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ : Εἶναι, ‘to exist’ ; not as the abstract substantive
verb ‘to be.’ “Ioa is adverbial, ‘in a manner of equality.’ (Comp.
Thue. iii. 14; Eurip. Oves¢. 882; and other examples in Win.
xxvii.) (See LXX; Job v. 14; Sap. vil. 3.) The phrase there-

IT. 6, 7| THE FORM OF A BONDSERVANT 59

fore does not mean ‘to be equal with God,’ but ‘ existence in the
way of equality with God’ (Mey., Ellic., Weiss, De W., K1.).

Others, as Lightf., take ἔσα predicatively, and εἶναι as ‘ to be.’

7. ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν : ‘but emptied himself.’ For the verb,
COMpeIOMa TAs TOCOr, 107, 1x 15 5 2 Cor, 1x: 3:3 LXX ; Jer.
xiv. 2, xv. 9. Not used or intended here in a metaphysical sense
to define the limitations of Christ’s incarnate state, but as a strong
and graphic expression of the completeness of his self-renuncia-
tion. It includes all the details of humiliation which follow, and
is defined by these. Further definition belongs to speculative
theology. On Baur’s attempt to show traces of Gnostic teaching
in these words, see Introd. vi.

μορφὴν δούλου λαβών : ‘having taken the form of a bondservant.’
Characterising ἕαυ. ἐκ. generally. The participle is explanatory,
‘by taking.’ (Comp. Eph.i.g; and see Burt. 145, and Win. xlv.)
Μορφὴν, as in vs. 6, an expression or manifestation essentially
characteristic of the subject. Christ assumed that form of being
which completely answered to and characteristically expressed the
being of a bondservant. Only μορφὴ δούλου must not be taken as
implying a slave-condition, but a condition of service as contrasted
with the condition of equality with God.

Some, as Mey., Ellic., supply θεοῦ, ‘servant of God.’ But this limits the
phrase unduly. He was not servant of God only, but of men also. (Comp.
Niltin 58, yp Aloe ΝΠ: Sey aig WU IL Vee Sahl, Be, [fe a ubl, το δ. shetty)

ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος : ‘having become (been made)
in the likeness of men.’ Defining pop. dov. AaB. more specifically.
Ὁμοιώματι does not imply the reality of Christ’s humanity as μορφὴ
θε. implied the reality of his deity. The former fact is stated in
ἐν pop. dov. As that phrase expressed the inmost reality of Christ’s
servantship, — the fact that he really became the servant of men,
— SO ἐν ou. ἀνθ. expresses the fact that his mode of manifestation
resembled what men are. ‘This leaves room for the other side of
his nature, the divine, in the likeness of which he did not appear.
His likeness to men was real, but it did not express his whole self.
The totality of his being could not appear to men, for that would
involve the pop. Ge. The apostle views him solely as he could
appear to men. All that was possible was a real and complete
likeness to humanity. (Comp. Rom. v. 14, vi. 5, vili. 3.) “To
affirm likeness is at once to assert similarity and to deny sameness”’
(Dickson, Baird Lect, 1883).

γενόμενος : Contrasted with ὑπάρχων. He entered into a new
Bitte (Compagnie i. 145 Gal. iv. 4; τ Tim. iii. 16.) For the
phrase γενόμενος ἐν, see Lk. xxii. 44; Acts xxii. 17; Rom. xvi. 7;
2 Cor. iii. 7.

καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος : ‘and being found in fashion

60 PHILIPPIANS [II. 7, 8

as aman.’ Ξχῆμα is the outward fashion which appeals to the
senses. The ‘form of a bondservant’ expresses the fact that the
manifestation as a servant corresponded to the real fact that Christ
came as a servant of men. In ἐν ὁμ. ἄνθ. the thought is still linked
with that of his essential nature, which rendered an absolute iden-
tity with men impossible. In σχῆμ. εὗρ. the thought is confined
to the outward guise as it appealed to human observation. Σχῆμα
denotes something changeable as well as external. It is an acci-
dent of being. (See 1 Cor. vii. 31.) The compounds of μορφὴ
and σχῆμα bring out the difference between the inward and the
outward. Thus συμμόρφους, Rom. viii. 29 ; συμμορφιζόμενος, Phil.
iii. 10; μεταμορφούμεθα (οὔσθε), 2 Cor. iil. 18 ; Rom. ΧΙ. 2 ; μορφω-
θῇ, Gal. iv. το ;—all of an inner, spiritual process, while συσχη-
ματίζεσθαι (Rom. xii. 2; 1 Pet. 1. 14) marks a process affecting
that which is outward. See the two together in Phil. ili. 21. See
Lightf.’s note on the synonyms μορφὴ and σχῆμα (Comm. p. 127).

Mey. and De W. take: καὶ cy. ... dv. with the preceding clause:
‘becoming in the likeness of men and (so) found in fashion,’ etc. This is
plausible, but it makes the next sentence very abrupt, and breaks the pro-
gression. Evpedeis introduces a new portion of the history. The laying
aside of the form of God — the self-emptying — consisted in his taking the
form of a servant and becoming in the likeness of men. In this condition
he is found. In this new guise he first becomes apprehensible to human
perception; and on this stage, where he is seen by men, other acts of
humiliation follow. (Comp. Is. lili. 2.)

EipeOeis is not a Hebraism, nor does it stand for εἶναι. Εἶναι
expresses the quality of a person or thing in itself; εὗρ. the quality
as it is discovered and recognised. (Comp. Mt. i. 18; Lk. xvii.
18; Acts v. 39; Rom. vii. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 12; and see Win. Ixv.)

ὡς : not what he was recognised to be, which would have been
expressed by ἄνθρωπος alone; but as, keeping up the idea of
semblance expressed in ὁμοιώματι.

8. ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν : ‘he humbled himself.’ The emphasis
is on the act, not on the subject. Not synonymous with éxevwoer.
(Gomp,. 2: Cor τ 7... -Philay. 12)

The more general ἐταπείνωσεν is now specifically defined.
γενόμενος ὑπήκοος : ‘becoming obedient or subject.’ He became
as a man; in that condition he humbled himself; his humiliation
appeared in his subjection. Γενόμ., with an explanatory force, ‘ by
becoming.’ Understand θεῷ. (Comp. Mt. xxvi. 39; Rom.v. 19 ;
ἘΠΕῚ vs 76.)

μέχρι θανάτου : ‘even unto death.’ To the extent of death.
(Gomp.Heb.,«i,4; 2 Tim: τ. Ὁ)

θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ : ‘yea, death of the cross.’

Aé introduces another and more striking detail of the humilia-
tion, and leads on to a climax: ‘ death, yea, the most ignominious
of deaths.’ For this force of δὲ, comp. Rom. iil. 22, 1x. 20.

11: 8, 9| HUMILIATION ISSUED IN EXALTATION OI

σταυροῦ: καὶ adds του. The close of the description leaves the
reader at the very lowest point of Christ’s humiliation, death as a
malefactor ; the mode of death to which a curse was attached in
ἸπῸ τς law.) (see; Ment. mx, 29 ;\.Gal. in, 152 : Heb. ΧΙ." 2:)
Paul, as a Roman citizen, was exempt from this disgrace.

The result of this humiliation was the highest exaltation.

9-11. On this account God exalted him above all creatures,
and bestowed on him the name which ts above every name; that in
the name of Jesus all beings in heaven, earth, and hades, should
bow the knee and acknowledge him as Lord, and by this confession
glorify God the Father.

9. διὸ Kal ὃ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν : ‘wherefore also God highly
exalted him.’

6:6: ‘in consequence of.which.’ (Comp. Heb. ii. 9, xii. 2.)
The idea of Christ’s receiving his exaltation as a reward was
repugnant to the Reformed theologians. Calvin attempts to
evade it by explaining διὸ as gvo facto, which is utterly untenable.
At the same time, it is not necessary to insist on the idea of rec-
ompense, since διὸ may express simply consequence ; and exalta-
tion is the logical result of humility in the N.T. economy (Mt.
Meise: ke MV Te ΣΥΝ LANs As: Mey. remarks, “Christ's
saying in Mt. xxii. 12 was gloriously fulfilled in his own case.”
“Die Erniedrigung ist nur die noch nicht eingetretene Herrlich-
keit,”’ says Schmidt (Art. “Stand, doppelter Christi,” Herz. 77.
Finc.). For διὸ καὶ introducing a result, see Lk. i. 35 ; Acts x. 29.
The consequence corresponding to the humiliation is expressed
by καὶ.

Different explanations of καὶ are given, however. Lightf. and ΚΙ]. main-

tain the sense of reciprocation, — ‘ God, on his part’; Ellic., contrast of the
exaltation with the previous humiliation.

ὑπερύψωσεν : Only here in N.T. In LXX; Ps. xcvil. (xcvi.) 9;
Dan. iv. 34. Not in class. Gk. Paul is: fond of ὑπὲρ in com-
pounds, and the compounds with ὑπὲρ are nearly all in his writ-
ings. (See Ellic. on Eph. iii. 20.) Its force here is not ‘more
than before,’ nor ‘above his previous state of humiliation,’ but ‘in
superlative measure.’ This exaltation took place through Christ’s
ascension (Rom. i. 3, 4, viii. 34; Eph. iv. 9, 10; Col. iii.1). But
the exaltation is viewed, not in respect of its mode, but as a state
of transcendent glory, including his sitting at God’s right hand
(Rom. viii. 34; Col. iii. 1) ; his lordship over the living and the
dead (Rom. xiv. g) ; and his reign in glory (1 Cor. xv. 25).

καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα TO ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα : ‘and gave unto
him the name which is above every name.’

62 PHILIPPIANS [1|. 9; 10

ἐχαρίσατο: See on i. 29. Christ obtained as a gift what he
renounced as a prize. (See Eph. 1. 21 ;~Heb. 1-4.)

τὸ ὄνομα : Possibly with a reference to the practice of giving a
new name to persons at important crises in their lives. (See Gen.
XVI. 5, XXxil. 28; -Apoc. 1. 17, 1,12.) ‘The name seomierred 1s
JESUS CHRIST, combining the human name, which points to
the conquest won in the flesh, and the Messianic name, ‘the
Anointed of God.’ ‘The two factors of the name are successively
taken up in vs. I0, II.

There is a great variety of explanations on this point: Κύριος (K1., Lips.,
Weiss), Inoois (Ellic., Ead.),’Incots Χριστὸς (De W., Mey.), Υἱὸς (Thdrt.,
Pelag., Aug.), Θεὸς (Theoph., (Ες.). Lightf. holds that ὄνομα means ‘title’
or ‘dignity,’ and must be taken in the same sense in both verses. (See on
next Vs. )

The reading 70 ovoua is acc. to 8 ABC 17. το is omitted by DFGKLP.

10. iva: Denotes the purpose of the exaltation.

ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ : ‘/n the name of Jesus’ ; not ‘a¢the name.’
Ὄνομα with τοῦ κυρ. ἣμ. IX, or τ. κυρ. L, or κυρ. Ἴ., or αὐτοῦ
(Cht.), occurs ten times in Paul. In none of these cases is the
word a mere title of address. Paul follows the Hebrew usage, in
which the name is used for everything which the name covers, so
that the name is equivalent to the person himself. (So Mt. vi. 9,
x. 41.) Τὸ baptize into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit is to put the subject of baptism symbolically into connection
and communion with all that those names represent. He who
believes on the name of the Lord believes on the Lord himself.
Hence, to bow the knee in the name of Jesus is to pay adoration
in that sphere of authority, grace, and glory for which the name
stands ; as being consciously within the kingdom of which he is
Lord, as recognising the rightfulness of the titles ‘Jesus,’ ‘Saviour,’
‘Lord,’ and as loyally accepting the obligations which those titles
imply.

πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ : Comp. Is. xlv. 23; Rom. xiv. 11. The mean-
ing can only be that Christ is presented as the object of worship ;
his claim to that honor being fixed by the previous declarations.
Before his incarnation he was on an equality with God. After
his incarnation he was exalted to God’s right hand as Messianic
sovereign.

ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων : The whole body οἱ
created intelligent beings in all departments of the universe.
(See Rom. viii. 21; 1 Cor. xv. 24; Eph. i. 20-22; Heb. u. 8;
Apoc. v. 13; and comp. Ign. Zrad.. ix.; Polyc. Phil. ii.) “Ezov-
ράνιοι are heavenly beings, angels, archangels, etc. (Eph. 1. 21,
iii. 10; Heb. i. 4-6; 1 Pet. iii. 23) ; Ἐπίγειοι, beings on earth
{τ Cor, xv): é

καταχθονίων : Only here in Bib. and Apocr. In class. of the
infernal gods. Chr., (Ες., Theoph., and the medieval expositors

rr LO; 11] JESUS CHRIST IS LORD 63

explain of the demons, citing Lk. iv. 34; Jas. 11- 19. These,
however, are not regarded by Paul as in Hades. (See Eph. ii. 2,
vi. 12.) Rather the departed in Hades. Nothing definite as to
Christ’s descent into Hades can be inferred from this.

Lightf. regards all the genitives as neuter, urging that the whole creation
is intended, and that the limitation to intelligent beings detracts from the
universality of the homage. This, however, seems to be over-subtilising.

11 ἐξομολογήσηται: ‘should confess.’ The LXX, Is. xlv. 23,
has ὀμεῖται, ‘shall swear,’ for which the seventh-century correctors
of 8 read ἐξομολογήσεται.

WH., Treg., R.T., Weiss. ( 7th. Unt.), read εξομολογησηται with δὶ B;

Tisch. ἐξομολογήσεται, with ACDFGKLP. It is possible that erac may have

been altered to nrac by transcribers in order to conform it to κάμψῃ.

Lightf. renders ‘confess with thanksgiving.’ He says that the
secondary sense of éfouod., ‘to offer thanks,’ has almost entirely
supplanted its primary meaning, ‘to declare openly.’ But out
of eleven instances in the N.T., four are used of confessing sins,
one of Christ’s confession of his servants before the Father, and
one of Judas’ ‘agreeing’ or ‘engaging’ with the chief priests.
He says, further, that ‘confess with thanksgiving’ is the meaning
in Is. xlv. 23. But the reading there is éuetrat.

Kvptos does not necessarily imply divinity. It is used in LXX
of Abranany (Gen. xvilly 12; comp. 1 Pet. i. 6); of Joseph
(Gen: xii. τῷ 32) ; of Elkanah (1 Sam.i. 8). In the Pauline
writings the master of slaves is styled both δεσπότης (1 Tim. vi. 1,
2; Tit. ii. g), and κύριος (Eph. vi. 9; Col. iv. 1). Often.in N.T.
in the general sense of ‘master,’ or in address, ‘sir.’ Of God,
Mt. i. 20, 22, 24, ii. 15; Acts xi. 16. Ὁ xvptos is used by Mt.
of Christ only once (xxi. 3) until after the resurrection (xxviii. 16).
In the other gospels much oftener. In the progress of Christian
thought in the N.T. the meaning develops towards a specific des-
ignation of the divine Saviour, as may be seen in the expressions
‘Jesus Christ our Lord,’ ‘Jesus our Lord,’ etc. Von Soden re-
marks: “God gave him the name Jesus Christ. It was necessary
that his human, Messianic character should be developed before
men would confess that Jesus is Lord. What God as Jehovah in
the old Covenant has determined and prepared, Christ shall now
carry out.”

εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός : ‘to the glory of God the Father.’ (Comp.
Jn. xii. 28, xiii. 31, 32, xiv. 13, xvii.1.) The words are dependent
upon ἐξομολ., not on ὅτι. It is “he confession that is to be to the
glory of God the Father, not the fact that Christ is Lord. (See
ome x¥2 920, Eph. i. 6) πε. 12; 2 Cor. i. 20.) .“ Everywhere
where the Son is glorified the Father is glorified. Where the Son
is dishonored the Father is dishonored” (Chr.). (See Lk. x. 16 ;
ie Va 27:)

64 PHILIPPIANS [II. 12

Some practical exhortations are now drawn from the divine
example just portrayed, especially from the spirit of subjection
exhibited by the incarnate Lord.

12-18. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, even as you have always
manifested a spirit of obedience, so now, not as though I were
present, but much more in my absence, carry out your own salva-
tion with conscientious caution and self-distrust, because you are
appointed to carry out God’s good pleasure; and it is for this that
God energises your will and stimulates you to work. That you
may thus carry the divine will into effect, perform all its dictates
without murmuring or criticising, that so you may show yourselves
blameless and guileless, true children of God in the midst of an
ungodly society, in which you are to appear, holding forth the gospel
as luminaries in a dark world. Thus I shall have good reason to
boast when Christ shall appear, that my labors for you have not
been in vain. Yes, even tf, along with the offering of your faith to
God, my own blood ts to be poured oui like a bation ata sacrifice,
7 rejoice in this, because my death will only promote the working
out of your salvation; and this will be a cause of Joy to you no
less than to me.

12.-oore? “so that’; '*so then”: © The μοιπ of sconneenon
through ὥστε with the preceding passage is ὑπήκοος in vs. 8. As
Christ obtained exaltation and heavenly glory through perfect
obedience to God, therefore do you, with like subjection to him,
carry out your own salvation. ‘The spirit of obedience is to be
shown in their godly fear, in the avoidance of murmuring and
skeptical criticism, and in their holy lives and their bold proclam-
ation of the gospel in the midst of ungodly men. For a similar
use of wore, comp. iv. 1; Rom. vii. 12; 1 Cor. xiv. 39, xv. 58.

ὑπηκούσατε : “Yraxovew is, properly, to obey as the result of list-
ening or hearkening (ἀκούειν). Πειθαρχεῖν, which is much less
frequent, is the only word which expresses the conception of obed-
ience absolutely —as to authority (ἀρχή). (See Acts v. 29, 32,
xxvil. 21; Tit. iil. 1.) The question whether #eo or pot is to be
supplied is quite superfluous, since tnx. is used absolutely. Ye
have always shown a spirit of obedience, whether to God or to me
as his apostle.

μὴ ὡς ἐν TH παρουσίᾳ μου μόνον : ‘not as in my presence only.’
Connect with κατεργάζεσθε, not with πάντ. ὕπηκ., which would
require ov instead of μὴ (see Win. lv, and Burt. 479), and would
imply that the readers, left to themselves, had been more obedient
than when Paul was with them.

ΙΙ 12] CARRY OUT YOUR OWN SALVATION 65

ὡς : Introduced because Paul could not give an admonition
for the time when he would be present. It points to an inward
motive by which the readers are not to suffer themselves to be
influenced. (Comp. Rom. ix. 32; 2 Cor. 1 τῇ; Philem. 14.)
They are not to work out their salvation as 7f they were doing it
in Paul’s presence merely, neglecting it in his absence.

ws omitted by Lat., Vet., Vulg., Syr.P, Cop., Arm., Aith., B, 17. WH.
bracket.

μόνον : with ἐν τῇ παρ. pov, on which the emphasis lies. For
its position after the emphatic word, comp. Rom. iv. 16, 23;
τ Thess. 1.5:

νῦν : Now that you are deprived of my personal presence.

ἀπουσίᾳ : Only here in Gk. Bib., and not common anywhere.

μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου THY ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν κατεργάζεσθε : ‘carry
out your own salvation with fear and trembling.’ (Comp. Heb.
ἘΠῚ 205)

Φόβος and τρόμος often occur together in LXX. (See Gen.
ice ye τὴν Ss) xix. ΓΟ In) No. sce τ Gor. 11.3 5 2*Cor-
vii. 15; Eph. vi. 5. Φόβος is godly fear, growing out of recogni-
tion of weakness and of the power of temptation ; filial dread of
offending God. (See Acts ix. 31; Rom. il. 18; 2 Cor. vi. 1;
τ Pet. i. 17, ili. 15.) Chr. justly observes that καὶ τρόμου only
strengthens the per. P68. Paul would say: ‘The work is great.
Failure is possible. Do not be over confident.’ “It is necessary
to fear and tremble in each one’s working out of his own salvation,
lest he be tripped up (ὑποσκελισθεῖς) and fail of this” (Cic.).

τὴν ἕαυτ. owt. Katepy.: Κατεργάζεσθαι is ‘to accomplish’ ;
‘achieve’; ‘carry out or through.’ So Beng., “usque ad
mmetam’: Calov:, “ad finem perducere”; Grot., “peragere.”
(See Romy τον 34 2 Cor. vy. 5; Jas. 1. 3; Eph. vi. 13; and
comp. especially 2 Cor. vii. 10.) There is no contradiction imphed
of the truth that salvation is the gift of God’s grace (Eph. u. 8).
That grace itself engenders moral faculties and stimulates moral
exertions. Aecause grace is given, man must work. The gift of
grace is exhibited in making man a co-worker with God (1 Cor.
iii. 9); the salvation bestowed by grace is to be carried out by
man with the aid of grace (Rom. vi. 8-19; 2 Cor. vi. 1). What
this carrying out includes and requires is seen in Phil. 11]. 10,
ivet—7 > Wp. ἐν πὶ τ 22. ; Col. ii. 6, 7. For these things the
believer is constantly strengthened by the Spirit. The possibility
of success appears in Paul’s prayer (Eph. iil. 16-20). (See a
good passage in Pfleiderer, Pawlinismus, Ὁ. 234.)

ἑαυτῶν : ‘your own’; not = ἀλλήλων, ‘one another’s,’ as some
earlier expositors, against which is the emphatic position of €avr.,
though the rendering would be grammatically justifiable. (See
Mt. xvi. 7, xxi. 38; Eph. iv. 32.) αυτών is emphatic as related

66 PHILIPPIANS [II. 12, 23

to the following θεὸς. God is working in you; do your part as
co-workers with God. .

13. θεὸς yap ἐστιν 6 ἐνεργῶν ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν
ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐδοκίας : ‘for it is God that worketh in you both the
willing and the working for his good pleasure.’ ‘The reason for
the exhortation xarepy. is that it is God’s own work which they
have to do. It is God’s good pleasure which they are to fulfil, as
did their great example, Jesus Christ ; and it is God who, to that
end, is energising their will and their working. (See 2 Cor. v. 18.)
This is a serious task, to be performed in no self-reliant spirit, but
with reverent caution and dependence on God.

Tap does not introduce the reason for the fear and trembling
especially, but only as these are attached to κατεργ. It gives the
reason for the entire clause, xatepy. . . . τρόμου.

ὃ ἐνεργῶν : “Evepyety is ‘to put forth power’; and the kindred
ἐνέργεια (always in N.T. of superhuman power) is ‘ power in exer-
cise.’ Paul invariably uses the active, ἐνεργεῖν, of the working of
God or of Satan, and the middle, ἐνεργεῖσθαι, in other cases, as
Rom. vii. 5 ; Gal. v. 6. Never the passive. The verb carries the
idea of effectual working, as here ; and the result is often specified.
(See Romivit.5 ; Gal. n.6,1.5; Epht 1.17.) (On the a@iierent
words for ‘ power’ in N.T., see W. SZ. on Jn. 1. 12.

ἐν ὑμῖν. “tm you,’ ds τ Cor. xi. 6372 Corin ΤΣ; Mpls ee
Col. i. 29. Not ‘among you.’

τὸ θέλειν : As between θέλειν and βούλεσθαι, the general distinct-
ion is that θέλ. expresses a determination or definite resolution of
the will; while BovA. expresses an inclination, disposition, or wish.
The two words are, however, often interchanged in N.T. when no
distinction is emphasised. (Comp. Mk. xv. 15 and LK. xxiii. 20;
Acts xxvii. 43 and Mt: xxvii. 17; Jn. Xxvill. 30 and Mt πες
Mk. vi. 48 and Acts xix..30.) (See WW. 52. on Mt. τ τοῦ) #iere
θέλειν, of a definite purpose or determination.

τὸ ἐνεργεῖν: The inward working in the soul, producing the
determination which is directed at the xarepy. (Comp. 1 Cor.
xii. 6; Gal. iii. 5; Eph. ii. 20.) The two substantive-infinitives
are used rather than nouns because active energy is emphasised ;
and the two καὶ 5. point to the fact that 60¢ —the willing and the
working alike—are of God. God so works upon the moral
nature that it not only intellectually and theoretically approves
what is good (Rom. vii. 14-23), but appropriates God’s will as its
own. ‘The willing wrought by God unfolds into all the positive
and determinate movements of the human will to carry God’s will
into effect.

ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐδοκίας : ‘ for the sake of his good pleasure.’ Different
connections have been proposed for this clause. That with the
succeeding verse, ‘for good will’s sake do all things,’ etc., may be
summarily dismissed. ‘The majority of interpreters rightly con-

II. 13-15 | SHUN MURMURINGS AND QUESTIONINGS 67

nect it with 6 ἐνεργῶν : ‘it is God who works in you the willing
and the working in order that he may carry out his good pleasure.’
Paul’s thought is this: Carry out your own salvation with holy
fear, and especially for the reason that it is God’s good pleasure
that you should achieve that result; and therefore he energises
your will and your activity in order that you may fulfil his good
pleasure in your completed salvation.

εὐδοκίας : See on i. 15. Not mere arbitrary preference, as if
Paul meant that God thus works because it suits him to do so.
Nor, as Weiss, the pleasure which he has in working. Rather
that his good pleasure is bound up with his fatherly love and
benevolence which find their satisfaction in his children’s accom-
plished salvation. Hence ὑπὲρ is ποῖ -- κατὰ, as if εὐδοκία were
the norm or standard of God’s working (however true that may
be abstractly), but expresses “ the interested cause of the action”’

‘(Ellic.), as Jn. xi. 4; Rom. xv. 8.

Certain elements of the owr. κατεργ.

14. πάντα ποιεῖτε χωρὶς γογγυσμῶν καὶ διαλογισμῶν : ‘do all
things without murmurings and questionings.’

πάντα: Everything that may fall to them to do. (Comp.
BOTs X35.)

γογγυσμῶν : Not elsewhere in Paul. (See Jn. v. 12; Acts vi. 1;
BEE Iv. [Osten > Ee tevie 7, 6,9, ΤΣ’ Num xvii. 5; 10)
Murmuring against the dictates of God’s will is meant. (See
i Cot. 10.)

διαλογισμῶν : Skeptical questionings or criticisms. (Comp.
1 Tim. 11. 8.) Usually by Paul in the sense of ‘ disputatious rea-
Some (See. ΠΟΙ 2h, Χῖν τ; 1 Cor. ΠΠ 20) So LXX;
Es. ΤΙ (iv.1G); τον (xen) 11; Is-lix. 7. -Vhe verb. διαλογιξ-
εσθαι, always to ‘reason’ or ‘discuss,’ either with another or in
one’s own mind.

Mey., De W., Lips., Ellic., Ead., render ‘doubtings.’ (é£c., Theoph.,
Ans., ‘hesitation’ whether to perform God’s commands. So De W. and
Mey. Weiss, ‘hesitation’ with reference to things which are to be done or

suffered for the sake of salvation. Others, ‘doubts’ about future reward,
or the divine promises.

15. ἵνα γένησθε ἄμεμπτοι καὶ ἀκέραιοι : ‘that ye may become

᾿ blameless and guileless.’

For γενησθε ADFG, Vet., Lat., Vulg., read nre.

γένησθε: ‘become,’ in the process of σωτ. κατεργ-

ἄμεμπτοι : Before both God and men.

ἀκέραιοι : lit. ‘unmixed,’ ‘ unadulterated,’ describing the inward
condition. (Comp. Mt. x. 16; Rom. xvi. 9.)

τέκνα θεοῦ ἄμωμα : ‘children of God without blemish.’

Both τέκνον and vids signify a relation based upon parentage.
It is usually said that τέκνον emphasises the natural relationship,

68 PHILIPPIANS [11. 15

while vids marks the legal or ethical status (Thay. Zex. sub τέκνον,
and Sanday on Rom. viii. 14, Comp. Westcott, Zps. of John,
p. 121) ; but this distinction must not be too closely pressed. In
LXX both τέκνα and vids are applied ethically to the people of
Israel as God’s peculiarly beloved people; so τέκνα (Is. xxx. I ;
Sap. xvi. 21) ; or so by implication as inhabitants of his favored
seat (Joel ii. 23; Zech. ix. 13, comp. Mt. xxii. 37); ares (15: ὙΠ
6; Deut. xiv. 1; Sap. 1x. 7, xii. 19, etc.), In thé ethical sense, in
which the distinctive character is indicated by its source, we find
τέκνα ἀδικίας (Hos. x. 9), σοφίας (Mt. xi. 19), ὑπακοῆς (τ Pet. 1. 14),
φωτὸς (Eph. v. 8), ὀργῆς (Eph. 11. 3). Similarly υἱοὶ, according
to the Hebrew use of ἴ3, "32 to mark characteristic quality as
conditioned by origin. Thus viol τῶν ἀνθρώπων, indicating change-
ableness, Num. xxili. 19 ; indicating people accursed, 1 Sam. xxvi.
19; vt. τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, φωτὸς, Lk. xvi. 8; ἀπειθίας, Eph. ii. 2 ;
διαβόλου, Acts xiii. 10; γεέννης, Mt. xiii. 15. It is true that John
never uses vids to describe the relation of Christians to God
(Apoc. xxi. 7 is a quotation) ; but both the ethical relation and
the relation of conferred privilege, as well as that of birth, attach
to τέκνα. See Jn. i. 12, where believers receive ἐξουσία or con-
ferred right to become τέκνα θεοῦ, on the ground of faith. Believ-
ers are τέκνα in virtue of the gift of divine love (1 Jn. ili. 1). The
τέκνα θεοῦ are manifest as such by their righteous deeds and their
brotherly love (1 Jn. iii. 10). On the other hand, those who
have the true filial disposition are described as ‘begotten’ or
‘born’ of God (γεγεννημένοι), Jn. 1. 13, 111. 3, 7; 1 Jn. il. 9, iv. 7,
v. 1, 4, 18. It is also true that Paul often regards the Christian
relation, from the legal point of view, as adoption. He alone
uses υἱοθεσία, (Rom. viii. 15, 23; Gal. ἵν. 5; Eph.i.5). But in
Rom. viii. 14, 17, we have both υἱοὶ and τέκνα. They who are
led by the Spirit are υἱοὶ ; the Spirit witnesses that they are τέκνα.
Both these are ethical. In vs. 21 the legal aspect appears in τὴν
ehevOepiav ... τ. rex. tT. Oe. (Comp. Eph. v. 1; Rom. ix. 8.)
ἄμωμα : ‘without blemish.’

apwua as § ABC,17. DFGKLP read αμωμητα.
auwunros never in LXX. The citn. is from Deut. xxxil. 5, and αμωμητα
is probably due to μωμητα there.

For ἄμωμα comp. Eph. i. 4, v. 27; Col. i. 22; ἀμώμητος, ‘ that
cannot be blamed,’ only in 2 Pet. ill. 14.

μέσον γενεᾶς σκολιᾶς καὶ διεστραμμένης : ‘in the midst of a crooked
and perverse generation.’ (See Deut. xxxii. 5, and comp. Mt. xii.
39, xvii. 17.)

Μέσον (TR ἐν μέσῳ) is adverbial, with the force of a preposition
(Win. liv.).

σκολίας : ‘indocile,’ ‘froward.’ Only here in Paul. (See Acts u.
40; τ Pet. ii. 18; LXX; Ps. Ixxyii. [ixxvit. 8.; Proving) cies

11. 15, 16] LIGHT-BEARERS IN A DARK WORLD 69

διεστραμμένης : ‘twisted’ or ‘distorted.’ Only here in Paul.
It denotes an abnormal moral condition. xoAcds is the result of
διαστρέφειν. Comp. στρεβλοῦν (2 Pet. iii. 16), ‘to twist or dislo-
cate on the rack.’

ἐν οἷς φαίνεσθε ws φωστῆρες ἐν κόσμῳ : ‘among whom ye are
seen (appear) as luminaries in the world.’

ois: For the plural after γενεᾶς comp. Acts xv. 36; 2 Pet. iii. αὶ ;
Gal. iv. 19; and see Blass, Gramm. p. 163.

φαίνεσθε: Not ‘shine,’ which would be φαίνετε. (Comp. Mt. ii.
7, XXIV. 27; Jas.iv.14.) The word is indicative, not imperative.
For the thought, comp. Mt. v. 14, 16; Eph. v. 8; 1 Thess. v. 5.

φωστῆρες : Only here and Apoc. xxi. τι. In LXX of the heav-
enly bodies, as Gen. i. 14, 16.

ἐν κόσμῳ: With φωστῆρες : luminaries in a dark world (Ellic.,
Mey., ΚΙ Lips.).

Lightf., De W., and Weiss connect with φαίνεσθε. Lightf.’s interpreta-
tion turns on his explanation of κόσμος, which, he says, has in the N.T. a
sense so dominantly ethical that it cannot well be used here of the physical
as distinguished from the moral world. An examination of the number of
instances in which κόσμος occurs in a physical sense will show that this
view is groundless. If taken with φαίνεσθε, ἐν κόσμῳ would be merely an
unmeaning expansion of ἐν οἷς; while with φωστῆρες we have a definite
image. For the omission of the article with κόσμῳ see Win. xix. La.

16. λόγον ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες : ‘holding forth the word of life.’

λόγον ζωῆς : the gospel: a word which has life in itself, and
which leads to life. The phrase not elsewhere in Paul. (Comp.
{πῆ 68; Acts. v2 20> τ 1 1) By ζωὴ is not to be under-
stood Christ himself, nor the eternal life, but the life which the
Christian possesses through faith in Christ, and leads in fellowship
with Christ (Rom. vi. 13, viii. 6, 10). The genitive is the genitive
of contents: not, ‘the word concerning life,’ but the word ‘ which
has in itself a principle as well as a message of life’; or, as Mey.,
‘the divinely efficacious vehicle of the spirit of life.’ (Comp.
Jn. vi. 68.) Life and light appear in correlation in Jn. i. 4;
Eph. ii. 1; and especially since heathenism is regarded as a state
alike of death and of darkness (Eph. ii. 1; Col. 11. 13). Ζωὴ is
the correlative of salvation. With quickening from the death of
sin the believer enters upon ‘newness of life’ (Rom. vi. 4, 11).
This life, as to its quality, is that which shall be lived with the
exalted Christ. Now it is hidden with Christ, because the exalted
Christ is still hidden (Col. iii. 3; comp. Col. 1. 5). But it will be
manifested in glory when Christ, who is our life, shall be mani-
fested (Col. 11. 4). Then will come the change into ‘ the likeness
of the body of his glory’ (Phil. iii. 21), and “ mortality” will be
“‘ swallowed up of life’? (2 Cor. v. 4).

ἐπέχοντες : ‘holding forth.’ In Paul only here and τ Tim. iv. 16.
In LXX only in the sense of ‘apply,’ as Job xviii. 2, xxx. 26; or

70 PHILIPPIANS [II. 16

‘forbear’ 5.“ refrain,’ as 1 Κα xxi. Ὁ; 15. 1 “to holdmupon or
‘apply.’ So ‘to fix the attention’ (Lk. xiv. 7; Acts ili. 5, xix. 22).
In the sense of ‘to hold out’ or ‘ present’ it occurs only in class.

‘Holding forth,’ as Ellic., Alf., Ead., Lightf.; ‘holding fast’ (Luth.,
Beng., De W.); ‘having in possession’ (ΚΙ., Lips., Mey., Weiss). Lightf.
regards ἐν ois . . . κόσμῳ as parenthetical, and connects λόγ. ζω. éréx. with
iva yév. ... διεστραμ. (vs. 15). He finds an incongruity in the images
φαίν. and émex. Surely this is hypercritical. ‘Ye appear holding forth
the word as a light.’ It is common to personify a luminary as a light-
bearer. Paul was not always so consistent in his metaphors as this criticism
would imply. See for inst. 2 Cor. ili. 2, 3, and Lightf. on 1 Thess. v. 4,
Notes on Eps. of St. P. from unpublished Commentaries. (See Mey.’s citn.
from Zest. x72. Patr.)

eis καύχημα ἐμοὶ: ‘for a matter of glorying unto me.’ For
καύχημα see on 1. 26. ‘Their success in working out their own
salvation and proclaiming the gospel to others will be a cause of
boasting ‘to Paul. (Comp.-2 ΘΟ Τὴ τ Wess: a. 10.) 8) Hic
καύχ. ἐμ. belongs to the whole passage ἵνα γεν. . . . ἐπέχ.; not
merely to Ady. ζω. ἐπέχ.

eis ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ : ‘against the day of Christ.’ (See on 1. ro,
and comp. Gal. ili. 23; Eph. iv. 30.) The day is the point with
reference to which the boasting is reserved. Not ‘an// the day,’
etc. The glorying is put in relation to the decisions and awards
of the pavousia, as 2 Cor. 1. 14.

Ὅτι may be taken as explicative either of the nature of the
glorying (‘that’), or of its ground (‘ because’).

‘eis xevov: ‘in vain’; ‘Zo no purpose.’ See for the phrase,
2 Cor: vi. τ; Gal. i. 2; 1/ThessSiit se ἸΕΧΧ τὶς κενὸν, τὸ ken
Key, Lev, Xxvi- 20; Job il. 0. Χὺ τῶ exxie, Τρ 5 τς
Jer. vi. 29. ‘In vain’ is the dominant thought here, as is shown
by the repetition.

ἔδραμον: Metaphor of the stadium, as Gal. 11. 2. (Comp.
Acts xx. 245 1 ‘Cor.ix. 243 2° Tim. iv. 7.) bie πο πιο 15. teed
from the point of view of the day of Christ.

ἐκοπίασα : ἹΚοπιᾷν, lit. ‘to labor to weariness’ ; κόπος, ‘ exhausting
toil.’ (See x Cor. xv. τὸ; Gall iv. rr ;Col.1. 20; 1 Uhers ΤΠ ἢ

Lightf. thinks that ἐκοπίωσα is a continuation of the metaphor in ἔδραμον,
—‘ labor such as is bestowed in training forthe race.’ In his note on Ign.
olyc. vi. he says that κοπιᾷν is used especially of such training, and cites
1 Cor. ix. 24-27; Col. i. 29; 1 Tim.iv. 10. I do not find any evidence of this

special sense of the verb either in classical or N.T. Greek. Certainly in the
athletic contests the wearisome labor was not confined to the preparation.

Paul does not shrink from these labors. He will rejoice even
in his martyrdom, since he believes that it will promote the work
of salvation among his Philippian brethren. The assumption that
vs. 16 implies his conviction that he will be alive at the pavousza,
and that vs. 17 is an admission of the contrary possibility, is entirely
gratuitous.

II. 17] THE LIBATION OF BLOOD a

17. ἀλλὰ εἰ καὶ : ‘but if even.’ The feebly supported reading
καὶ ei, Which does not appear elsewhere in Paul, would introduce
an improbable supposition. Καὶ refers to the whole clause σπένδ.

. πίστ., putting the case as possible (Win. liii.).

σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν : “1 am
poured out (as ἃ libation) in addition to the sacrifice and service
of your faith.’

*Ezt may mean ‘at,’ ‘upon,’ or ‘in addition to.’ Better the
last (Ellic., De W., Weiss, ΚΙ, Lips.). ‘At’ (Mey.) would give
an active meaning to @voia. ‘Upon’ is precluded by λειτουργία.

θυσίᾳ : Not the act of sacrificing, but the thing sacrificed. So
aiways im ΠΝ (9:6 bk. xi py Acts’ vil. 41; Roni. xi. τὶ;
τον κ᾿ τϑ: Eqgh.:v:.2:)

ΔΕ πο Ὁ ΤΠ ΘΠ OF Service. . (see Lk. 1.22; 2 Cor, ix:
12; Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21.) From an old adjective λεῖτος or λέϊτος,
found only in this compound, ‘belonging to the people,’ and
epyov, ‘work.’ Hence, originally, ‘service of the state in a public
office.’ In LXX the verb λειτουργεῖν, of the performance of priestly
functions (Neh. x. 36) ; λειτουργεῖν and λειτουργὸς, of service ren-
ered fo Men (mk. i, Ake en So KK iv. 43, vi. 15). ΤῈ ΝΕ,
of sacetdotal ministry (Acts xi. 25 Heb. Χο τι; Lk. 1 27; Heb.
ix. 21; Rom. xiii. 6, xv. 16; Heb. vill. 2). Also of human, non-
Saemleministry (Rom. xv. 27 .)2'Cor. 1x. 125. Phil. ii 25,20):
In the general sense of ‘servants of God’ (λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ),
Heb. i. 7. Here metaphorically in the priestly sense. Θυσ. and
Aer. have the article in common, and form one conception (not a
hendiadys), a sacrifice ministered.

τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν : The objective genitive common to Ovo. and
λειτ. ; a sacrifice which consists of your faith; a ministry which
offers faith as a sacrifice.

According to Paul’s metaphor, therefore, the Philippians as
priests offer their faith to God in the midst of an ungodly genera-
tion who had already shed Paul’s blood at Philippi, had impris-
oned him at Rome, and would probably put him to death. If
they should do this, Paul’s blood would be the libation which
would be added to the Philippians’ offering.

This explanation, in which Lightf. stands almost alone among modern
expositors, is preferable because it accords better with the course of thought
from vs. 12, in which the Philippians are the agents, and distinctly corre-
sponds with Rom. xii. 2, where the Romans are exhorted to present their
bodies as a sacrifice (θυσίαν), which is further described as λατρεία, ‘a
service rendered to God.’ See note on λατρεύοντες (iii. 3). In iv. 8, the
gift of the Philippians is described as a sacrifice to God. The other and
favorite interpretation makes Paul the priest, the Philippians’ faith the
sacrifice, and Paul’s apostolic activity the ministry offering the sacrifice.
Then the blood of the priest is poured out upon the sacrifice which he is
offering. This explanation is urged principally upon the ground of Rom.
xv. 16, 17, where Paul represents himself as λειτουργὸς, ministering the
gospel in sacrifice, and presenting the Gentiles as an offering to God. But

72 ΒΕΠΓΙΡΡΙΆΝΥΘ [II. 17,18

in that passage Paul is specially exhibiting his apostolic office as a priestly
service of offering ordained by Christ, who was himself made a minister
that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy-(vs. 8). That is the only
instance of the figure, and in view of the great variety of Paul’s metaphors
cannot be regarded as decisive.

The fact that Paul is writing from Rome and to a Gentile church
seems to indicate that the metaphor is cast in the mould of heathen
rather than of Jewish sacrificial usage. Comp. 2 Cor. 11. 14, where
the picture of a Roman triumph is suggested, with the clouds of
incense rising from the altars.

χαίρω καὶ συνχαίρω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν : “1 joy and rejoice with you all.’
Comp. μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ (1. 25). ‘The natural connection is with
εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι as the subject of congratulation, not in itself, but
as a means of promoting their salvation—that cause of boasting
which he desires to have in them. ‘Thus his joy will be fulfilled
in them (vs. 2).

συνχαίρω : “1 rejoice with.’ This is the natural and appropriate
meaning in every N.T. passage in which the word occurs. ‘The
rendering ‘congratulate’ (Lightf., Mey.) is admissible in Lk.
i. 58, xv. 6, 9, but the other is equally good. ‘Congratulate’
does not suit vs. 18.

‘Rejoice with’ is the rendering of the Gk. Fathers, Luth., Calv., De W.,
Wies., Weiss, Weizs., Lips., von Sod. Mey.’s objection, repeated by Lightf.,
that the apostle would thus summon his readers to a joy which, according to
vs. 17, they already possessed, requires no notice beyond a reminder of the
informal and familiar style of the epistle.

Paul therefore says: Even if I should be poured out as a liba-
tion in addition to the sacrifice of faith which you are offering to
God, I rejoice, and rejoice with you, because such a result will
promote your salvation, and that will be a cause of joy to us both
alike. (Comp. Eph. Tits 3; )

18. τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ καὶ ὑμεῖς χαίρετε καὶ συνχαίρετέ μοι: ‘for the same
reason do ye also joy and rejoice with me.’

τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ : ‘for the same reason’; to wit, the advancement of
the work of your salvation. For the grammatical construction,
see Win. xxxil. 4@; -and-comp. Rom. vi. 10. The verbs xaip.
and συνχαίρ. acquire a giasi-transitive force.

Rill., Weiss, Lightf., Weizs., R.V., render ‘in the same manner.’

χαίρετε kal συνχαίρετέ μοι: Comp. the striking figure of the
Romans forming a chorus and singing a sacrificial hymn round
the martyr Ignatius. (Ign. Rom. ii. ; see also Ζγαζ. 1.)

He hopes soon to send Timothy to them.

19-24. But, though the worst may come to the worst, yet I hope
Jor such a favorable tissue in my case as will enable me to dispense

|
|
|

II. 19, 20] HE HOPES TO SEND TIMOTHY 73

with the services of Timothy here and to send him to you, tn order
that I may be comforted by hearing of your condition. For besides
him I have no one likeminded with myself who will care for you
with the same fatherly care. For they all are occupied with their
own interests, not with the things of Jesus Christ. But Timothy
you yourselves have proved, for you know with what filial devotion
he served me in the work of promoting the gospel. I hope therefore
to send him shortly, as soon as I shall have learned something defin-
tle about my own case, but 7 trust in the Lord that 7 shall soon be
with you in person,

19. ἐλπίζω δὲ : The δὲ, ‘ but,’ offsets the possibility at which he
has hinted in σπένδομαι, and which he knows is disturbing the
minds of his faithful friends at Philippi. Mey.’s statement that
there is an immediate change from a presentiment of death to a
confidence of being preserved in life and liberated, is too strong.
‘The εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι, etc., on its face, at least, merely contemplates
a possibility. ‘The words rather revert to i. 25.

Lightf. and Lips. connect with vs. 12: ‘I urged you to work out your
salvation in my absence, éz¢ I do not mean to leave you without personal
superintendence, and therefore I propose to send Timothy. The connec-
tion, however, seems too remote and labored. According to Weiss the δὲ
offsets the joy to which he has exhorted them with the means which he pro-
poses to employ to obtain joyful news from them.

ἐν κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ: The sphere or element in which his hope
moves) (Comp 1 04, it. τ; Rom, 1x, τὶ xiv. 14; 1 Cor, i. 31,
Vile 308 tC.)

iva κἀγὼ εὐψυχῶ : ‘that I also may be of good heart.’

κἀγὼ: ‘I αὐτο, by the tidings which I shall hear from you, as
you by the accounts of me.

εὐψυχῶ : Not elsewhere in Bib. Gk. Εὔψυχος, -ws, -ία, in LXX;
1 Macc. ix. 14; 2 Macc. vii. 20, xiv. 18.

20. οὐδένα yap ἔχω ἰσόψυχον : ‘for I have no one likeminded.’

γὰρ : reason for sending ‘Timothy.

ἰσόψυχον : Only here in N.T. (See LXX, Ps. lv. [liv-] 13 [14].)
Supply pol, not Τιμοθέῳ. Timothy was to be sent to minister to
them in Paul’s stead. Moreover, the quality of Timothy’s care
for them is just that which marks Paul’s care — γνησίως, ‘ naturally,’
‘by birth-relation,’ and therefore ‘truly’ or ‘genuinely’ ; with such
a care as springs from a za¢ura/, parental relation. In other words,
there is no one who will care for them in a fatherly way as Paul
does. (See 1 Cor. iv. 15; 1 Thess. ii. 11; Philem. 10; 1 Tim.
1.2; Tit.i. 4.) Timothy would have such a feeling for the Philip-
pian Christians, since he was associated with Paul in founding

74 PHILIPPIANS [II. 20-24

their church. For yvyotos,. see iv. 35° 2¢Cor..vill, 8am, Σ᾿
{ΠῚ 1 ἢ: ΐ

Lightf., Lips., Weiss, and others refer ἰσόψυχον to Timothy.

21. οἱ πάντες yap τὰ ἑαυτῶν ζητοῦσιν, οὐ τὰ Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ; ‘ for
they all seek their own, not the things of Christ Jesus.’

ot πάντες : Collective ; the whole number ina body. (See Acts
xix..75 Rom. xi. 32; 1 ὍΣ. τ; ΠΡ τὴ) Dhesttemennr
is very sweeping, especially in view of the high commendation of
Epaphroditus which follows. ‘The common explanations are that
all who were likeminded with himself, as Luke, were absent at
the time of his writing; or that those about him were interested
in promoting party interests, Gentile or Jewish-Christian. The
Fathers attempted various explanations,—as that no one was
willing to sacrifice his own quiet and security by undertaking the
journey to Macedonia; that they were unwilling to sacrifice their
own honor and profit to the welfare of the church; or that the
words were used only in comparison with Timothy’s exceptional
zeal and fidelity. None of these help the case. Augustine and
Anselm held to the full severity of the charge, maintaining that
all the apostle’s companions were mercenary. Without more
information a satisfactory explanation seems impossible.

22. τὴν δοκιμὴν : ‘the proof” or ‘approvedness.’ Used only by
Paul, and meaning both ‘the process of trial’ (2 Cor. viii. 2) and
‘the result of trial,’ asshere, Rom. v.45 2 (ΩἹ. 1 Ὁ ΙΧ 15. You
know that he has approved himself to you.

γινώσκετε: Not imperat., for they had known Timothy in
Philippi (Acts xvi., xvii.).

ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον σὺν ἐμοὶ ἐδούλευσεν : ‘as a child a father so he
served with me.’ Paul began the sentence as if he were going to
write, ‘Timothy served me as a child serves a father’; but he was
checked by the thought that both himself and ‘Timothy were alike
servants of Jesus Christ (i. 1), and also by that of his intimate
and affectionate relations with Timothy. Accordingly he wrote
‘with me’ instead of ‘me.’

εἰς TO εὐαγγέλιον : NS 1 Ἐ-

23. οὖν : Resuming vs. 19; he being thus qualified.

ὡς av ἀφίδω : W henever he shall have definite reports to send
them concerning his own fate. The ἀπὸ implies looking away
from the present circumstances to what is going to happen, which
will decide the question of his sending Timothy.

24. πέποιθα δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ : See on i. 14; and with Paul’s language
here Comp. Cor, dy. 10} 19:

OTL καὶ αὐτὸς ταχέως ἐλεύσομαι : Expectation of speedy release.
(Comp, 122555)

s* ACP with several minusc. add προς ὑμᾶς to ελευσομαι.

II. 25] HE SENDS EPAPHRODITUS 75

How soon Timothy or Paul himself may be able to visit them
is uncertain, but he is sending them a messenger at once.

25-30. Aleanwhile, whether Timothy and 7 come to you or not,
I send you a messenger at once —my brother and fellow-worker
and fellow-soldier Epaphroditus, who came as the bearer of your
gift to me. 7 thought it necessary to send him because he was really
homesick, longing to see you, since he feared that you would be dis-
tressed by the report of his sickness. And very sick he was, so
much so that it seemed as though he would die. But God was
merciful to both him and me, and restored him and spared me the
additional sorrow of his death. I send him therefore in order
that his return to you may restore your cheerfulness, and that the
sorrow of my captivity may be mitigated by your joy. Jorfully
receive him therefore in the Lord. Such as he are to be honored;
Jor he wellnigh died through his seal for the work of Christ, hasz-
arding his life tn order that he might render to me that sacrificial
service of love which, of it had been possible, you would gladly have
performed in your own persons.

25. ἀναγκαῖον : Comp. 2 Cor. ix. 5. Emphatic as contrasted
with the possible visits of Timothy and of himself. I ofe to
send Timothy and to come in person, but I think it mecessary to
send Epaphroditus at once.

ἡγησάμην : See onvs. 6. If this is the epistolary aorist, as is
probable, it points to Epaphroditus as the bearer of the letter.
(See Introd. v.)

᾿Επαφρόδιτον : Mentioned only in this letter. Examples of the
name are common in both Greek and Latin inscriptions. (See
Wetst.) It is not probable that "Ezadpas (Col. i. 7, iv. 12) is a
contraction of "Ezadpodiros. (See Thay. Lex. sub ’Ezad¢pas.)
Win. xvi. says “ probable”; Schmiedel, Rev. of Win. xvi. 9,
“possible.” (See Lightf. Zztvod. and Comm.ad loc.) Even if
the names can be shown to be the same, it is unlikely that the
persons were the same. Eadie justly remarks that it is scarcely
supposable that the Asiatic Epaphras, a pastor at Colossee and a
native of that city, could be Epaphroditus, a messenger delegated
to Paul with a special gift from the distant European church of
Philippi, and by him sent back to it with lofty eulogy, and as
having a special interest in its affairs and members. From two
allusions in Suetonius (Vero, 49 ; Domitian, 14), a tradition arose
that Epaphroditus was Nero’s secretary.

ἀδελφὸν, συνεργὸν, συνστρατιώτην : ‘a brother,’ as a Christian ;
‘a fellow-worker,’ in the cause of the gospel; ‘a fellow-soldier,’

76 PHILIPPIANS [II. 25-28

in the conflict with the adversaries of the faith. (Comp. Rom.
xvi. 3,90. Philem-2;. Phil1..28, 30; 2 alma

ὑμῶν δὲ ἀπόστολον Kai λειτουργὸν τῆς χρείας μου : * your Messenger
and minister to my need.’

ὑμῶν: With both ἀπόστ. and λειτ. A messenger from you and
ministering on your behalf.

ἀπόστολον : Not in the official sense, but a messenger sent on a
special commission. So 2 Cor. vill. 23.

λειτουργὸν : See on vs. 17, and comp. vs. 30. The explanation
‘sacrificial minister’ (Mey., Lightf.), regarding the gift of the
Philippians as an offering to God, is favored by iv. 18. Westcott,
on Heb. i. 7, observes that the word seems always to retain some-
thing of its original force, as expressing a public, social service.
(35: ἘΠΕ ΌΤΙ xe 2 73.2 On. 1. 120)

26. ἐπειδὴ ἐπιποθῶν ἢν πάντας ὑμᾶς : ‘Since he was longing after
you all.’ Giving the reason for vs. 25. The participle with the
substantive verb indicates a continued state. For ἐπιποθεῖν, see
Ona: ὃ: :

s* ACD add céevv after tuas. WH. bracket ιδειν,

ἀδημονῶν : Also with ἦν. Only here in Paul. (See Mt. xxvi.
37; Mk. xiv. 33.) In LXX only in second-century revisions
(Symm. Eccl. vi. 175 Ps. cxvi. 11 ὉΣν ἢ ΡΠ ΣΙ ἢ
Job xviii. 20). The etymology is uncertain. Commonly from 4,
δῆμος, ‘away from home.’ (See Lightf. ad loc.)

27. καὶ yap ἠσθένησεν : ‘and (you were correctly informed about
him) for he was sick.’

παραπλήσιον θανάτῳ : ἸΙαραπ. not elsewhere in Bib. The adv.
παραπλησίως, Heb. ii. 14. Here adverbially. Not precisely ‘nigh
unto death,’ but ‘in a way nearly resembling death.’

x* ACDFGKL read θανατω; so Tisch., R.T., Weiss, 7:xtk. Unt. δ BP,
31, 80, θανατου; so WH.

λύπην ἐπὶ λύπην : ‘sorrow upon sorrow,’ or ‘after’ sorrow, as we
say ‘wave upon wave,’ ἐπὶ having a sense of motion. (See LXX;
Ezek. vii. 26; Is. xxvitt. ro, 13; Ps. Ixix. [xvid 27 )eeen the
sorrow for Epaphroditus’ death following upon the sorrow for his
sickness, but the sorrow for Epaphroditus’ death following that of
Paul’s imprisonment.

Weiss prefers the former explanation, for the singular reason that i. 12-
24, ii. 16-18, do not indicate sorrow on Paul’s part for his captivity. (See
Mey.’s ingenious note. )

28. σπουδαιοτέρως : ‘with the greater despatch.’ (Comp. Lk.
vii. 43 Tit. iii. 13.) More hastily than I would have done other-
wise. For the comparative without statement of the standard of
comparison, see on μᾶλλον (1. 12),

II. 28-30] HAZARD OF LIFE FOR CHRIST’S WORK 77

The older commentators render ‘ studiosius,’ ‘ sollicitius.’? So A.V., ‘ care-
fully’; R.V., ‘diligently’; Lightf., ‘with increased eagerness’; Ellic., ‘more
diligently.’ Our rendering as Thay. Zex., Ead., Lips., Hack., Weiss, Weizs.,
Mey., v. Sod.
ἔπεμψα: “1 send.’ Epistolary aorist.
iva ἰδόντες αὐτὸν πάλιν χαρῆτε: ‘that when ye see him ye may
rejoice again.’ Construe πάλιν with χαρῆτε, not with ἰδόντες (as
R.V.). Paul’s habit is to place πάλιν before the verb which it
qualifies. The Philippians’ joy had been clouded by Epaphro-
ditus’ sickness. They would rejoice agazn when he should arrive.

ἀλυπότερος : ‘the less sorrowful.’ The sorrow of captivity still
remains. ‘The word only here.

29. ovv: Since I sent him that you might rejoice, ‘ therefore’
receive him with joy.

πασῆς χαρᾶς : Every kind of joy. (Comp. i. 20; Eph. vi. 18;
1 ΒΕ iit’ tr)

τοὺς τοιούτους : The article marks Epaphroditus as belonging to
the class designated by τοιούσ. (Comp. Mk. ix. 37; Rom. xvi. 18 ;
5 Cor. ΣΙ £35 eile Ὁ; Gali Va2aevi, Ὁ andi see: Will. Xvili.. 4.)

ἐντίμους ἔχετε : ‘The only occurrence of the phrase in N.T. In
class. usually ἐντίμως ἔχ.

30. ἔργον Χριστοῦ : All his exertions in forwarding Paul’s work
in Rome, and the risk and hardship of the journey thither.

Χριστου, BEG, 80, Tisch., Weiss.

του Χριστου, DEKL, Vulg., Goth., Syr.sc, four Lat. verss. (d, e, f, g).

For Χριστου, 8 AP, 17, 31, 47, Cop., Syr.?, Arm., Aéth., WH., read κυριου.

To epyov without addn. C.

Lightf. reads διὰ τὸ ἔργον on the sole authority of C, and says it must be
the correct reading. He cites Acts xv. 38; Ign. 221. xiv., Rom. 111., and
the analogy of ἡ ὁδός, τὸ θέλημα, and τὸ ὄνομα for the absolute use of τὸ
ἔργον. But while τὸ ἔργον is used absolutely in these cases, it is too much
to assert, in the face of such strong MS. authority, that Χτοῦ, τοῦ Xrod, or
κυρίου are mere “ insertions to explain τὸ ἔργον." Κυρίου might be substi-
tuted for Xrov in order to assimilate to 1 Cor. xv. 58, xvi. 10; and XY or
KY might easily be overlooked and omitted in transcription, as by C.

ες μέχρι θανάτου ἤγγισεν : ‘he came nigh unto death.’ (Comp.
XX, ΡΞ ρου" ΠΟΥ} τι lbexxvin. 3 [ixxxvi. 4]5 Job xxxili. 22.)
παραβολευσάμενος : Only here. A gambler’s word, from zapa-
βολος, ‘ venturesome,’ ‘reckless.’ He gambled with his life ; reck-
lessly hazarded it. (Comp. Rom. xvi. 4.) A most generous and
appreciative recognition of Epaphroditus’ services. The voluntary
visitors of the sick, who, in the ancient church, formed a kind of
brotherhood under the supervision of the bishop, were styled
‘Parabolani.’ The graphic description of these in Kingsley’s
ffypatia is familiar. The word might have been suggested to
Paul by seeing the soldiers throwing dice. Comp. κυβία, ‘ dicing’
(Eph. iv. 14).
TR with CKLP and several Fath. reads παραβουλευσαμενος, ‘ having con-
sulted amiss.’

78 . PHILIPPIANS [II. 30

iva ἀναπληρώσῃ τὸ ὑμῶν ὑστέρημα τῆς πρὺς με λειτουργίας : ‘ that
he might supply that which was lacking in your service toward
me.’ (ΟΡ οι Cor. ΧΥ Τὴ; 2 Corax, 12)

ἀναπληρώσῃ : Not synonymous with the simple verb πληροῦν,
‘to fill up a total vacancy,’ but denoting the making up of what is
lacking to perfect fulness; the filling up of a partial void. So
Erasm.: “ Accessione implere quod plenitudini perfectae deerat.”
For double compounds of the verb, see 2 Cor. ix. 12, xi. 9;
Cal, τ 27: :

ὑμῶν : Genitive of the subject, with ὑστέρημα, not with λειτουργίας:
‘the lack which was yours.’

λειτουργίας : See on vs. 17. It describes the service as the act
of the Philippian community, and as a sacrificial act. So far from
implying a censure in τὸ ὑμῶν ὑστέρημα, that clause is a most deli-
cate, courteous, and sympathetic tribute to both Epaphroditus and
the Philippians. ‘The gift to Paul was the gift of the church as a
body. It was a sacrificial offering of love. What was lacking, and
what would have been grateful to Paul and to the church alike,
was the church’s presentation of this offering in person. ‘This was
impossible, and Paul represents Epaphroditus as supplying this
lack by his affectionate and zealous ministry. He thus, in this
single sentence, recognises the devotion of Epaphroditus and the
good-will of the Philippians, and expresses the pleasure which he
himself would have had in their personal presence and ministry.
Withal there is a touch of tender sympathy for Epaphroditus. Τί
would have been a great thing if you could, as a body, have offered
this sacrifice of love here in my prison; and poor Epaphroditus
made himself sick unto death in his efforts to supply this want.

πρός με: Πρός combines with the sense of direction that of rela-
tion with, intercourse. (Comp. Mt. xiii. 56; Mk. ix. 16; Jn.i.1;
Acts ii./25, xxvill. 25 5.2 Uhess.av.. τῶ; Col νὴ; ΠΙΈΡ
Their gift to Paul was a sacrificial offering to God, in which the
spirits of Paul and of the Philippians communed.

EXCURSUS ON VS. 6-11

Much of the difficulty which appears to attach to this passage
arises from the assumption'‘that in it Paul is aiming to formulate a
statement of the character of Christ’s mode of existence before
and during his incarnation. ‘This is inconsistent with the informal
and familiar tone of the letter, and with the obviously practical
character of this passage, the principal object of which is to enforce
the duty of humility. As the supreme illustration of this virtue,
the apostle adduces the example of Jesus Christ in his voluntary
renunciation of his preincarnate majesty, and his identification

II. 6-11] ON II. 6-11 | 79

with the conditions of humanity. The points of the illustration
are thrown out in rapid succession, merely stated and not elabo-
rated, and are all brought to bear upon the exhortation, ‘‘ Look
not every one at his own things, but every one also on the things
of others.” Paul does, indeed, rise here above the level of epis-
tolary colloquialism ; but the impulse to the higher flight is emo-
tional rather than philosophical.

I think that Lightfoot has fallen into the error just mentioned
in his excursus on the synonyms σχῆμα and μορφὴ ( Commentary,
Ρ. 127 ff.). Prior to the philosophical period of Greek litera-
ture, the predominant sense of μορφὴ was “ shape” or “ figure.”
Schmidt (Sywon. 182, 4) says it is distinguished from εἶδος and
ἰδέα as the outward appearance of a thing considered in and for
itself, and partially contrasted with the inner and spiritual being.
It includes the coloring and the whole outward appearance — the
body itself with no reference to other than outward peculiarities.
This sense is retained to some extent in philosophical usage.
Both Plato and Aristotle employ μορφὴ with this meaning (Plat.
ΡΣ i. asi. Precis. 278s Aust. Fist, An. 15 1. 7, 11: 10,
1, 2):

But the word has also a far wider meaning in Plato and Aristotle.
Both apply it to immaterial things, and it is especially from Aris-
totle’s usage that Lightfoot draws the meaning specific character
for μορφὴ. That Aristotle uses it in this sense may be granted,
though there are three things to be said on that point without
entering into discussion: (1) Yat Aristotle, as has been said
already, uses the word in the external and earlier sense also.
(2) That his more abstract conception of μορφὴ is not uniform
throughout, being more purely intellectual in his logic than in his
physics. And (3) that even in his most abstract and immaterial
conception of “ form”’ the abstract is brought into concrete real-
isation. His doctrine is familiar that sensible objects consist of
matter and form; matter being simply the potentiality of becom-
ing, while form makes this potentiality actual, so that matter is
not intelligible without form, though the form is not necessarily
external or material.

I do not, however, believe that Paul’s use of the term was
derived from this source, or applied in the sense of “specific
character.” ‘The starting-point of his conception lay nearer to
the anthropomorphic than to the philosophic: not necessarily
that he definitely conceived God as invested with a human form,
but that he conceived of the essential personality of God as exter-
nalising itself and expressing itself in some mode apprehensible
by pure spiritual intelligences if not apprehensible by the human
mind. But it seems probable that Paul’s mind touched the con-
ception of “the form of God” very slightly and incidentally,
and only on its outskirts, and that the application of the term

80 PHILIPPIANS [II. 6-11

μορφὴ to God was principally a reflection of its application to a
bondservant. Christ’s Awmeliaton was the dominant thought in
Paul’s mind, and the μορφὴ of a bondservant therefore came first
in the order of thought. The idea of some embodiment of the
divine personality was not altogether absent from his mind, but
μορφὴ θεοῦ was chiefly a rhetorical antithesis to μορφὴ δούλου.

Still, there is evidence that Paul uses μορφὴ with a recognition
of a peculiar relation of the word to the essential and permanent
nature of that which is expressed or embodied, so that μορφὴ is
purposely selected instead of σχῆμα, which signifies merely the
outward and transient configuration without regard to that which
is behind it. This has been clearly shown by Lightfoot in his
examination of the compounds into which the two words severally
enter.’ (See Rom. xii, 23 2 Cor. 108) xi 12 πὸ; eh ae)
It is possible that in illustrating this legitimate distinction, Light-
foot, in one or two instances, may have refined too much. His
remarks on μεταμορφοῦσθαι in Mt. xvii. 2; Mk. ix. 2, are just,
since a compound of σχῆμα, denoting merely a change in the
outward aspect of Christ’s person and garments, would not have
expressed the fact that this change acquired its real character and
meaning from the divineness which was essential in Christ’s per-
sonality. A foreshadowing or prophecy of his real ‘ form” —the
proper expression of his essential being — comes out in the trans-
figuration. He passes for the moment into the form prophetic of
his revelation in the glory which he had with the Father before
the world was.

The case is more doubtful in Mk. xvi. 12, where it is said that
Jesus, after his resurrection, appeared ἐν ἑτέρᾳ poppy. It is pos-
sible that μορφὴ may have been selected with conscious recogni-
tion of the fact that, though the accidents of figure, face, and
pierced hands and feet were the same as before, yet the indefin-
able change which had passed upon Jesus prefigured his transition
to the conditions of his heavenly life ; but it is quite as probable
that the writer used μορφὴ in its earlier sense of ‘ shape.”

However that may be, I cannot accept Lightfoot’s explanation
of μόρφωσις in Rom. ii. 20 as signifying an azming after or affect-
ing the true μορφὴ of knowledge and truth. There was actually
a truthful embodiment of knowledge and truth in the law. The
law was “holy and just and good,” and Paul habitually recognised
in it the impress of the divine character and will. It was this
fact which aggravated the culpability of the Jew, to whom had
been committed the oracles of God (Rom. iii. 2).

Thus it is quite legitimate to define μορφὴ in this passage as
that “‘ form,” whatever it be, which carries in itself and expresses
or embodies the essential nature of the being to whom it belongs.
(See note on vs. 6.)

Μορφὴ, however, applied to God, is not to be identified with

II. 6-11] ON II. 6-11 81

δόξα, as by Weiss (Bid. Theol. § 103 ¢, αἱ, Clarks’ Trans.). Weiss
reaches this conclusion by a very circuitous and inconclusive pro-
cess. He says: “The identification of the μορφὴ θεοῦ with the
δόξα depends on this; that here also the δόξα, which the perfected
attain to and which belongs to the glorified body of Christ (Phil.
iii. 21), belongs originally to God, who is called (Eph. 1. 17) the
πατὴρ τῆς δύξης, and therefore, on that account, it belongs to
the Son of his love in his original heavenly existence.” Δόξα is the
manifestation, the “ unfolded fulness,” of the divine attributes and
perfections, while μορφὴ θεοῦ is the immediate, proper, and per-
sonal investiture of the divine essence. Δόξα attaches to Deity ;
μορφὴ is identified with the inmost being of Deity. Δόξα is and
must be included in μορφὴ θεοῦ, but δόξα is not μορφὴ. Indeed,
the difference may be roughly represented by the English words
“slory” and “form.” Glory may belong to one in virtue of
birth, natural endowment, achievement, and the possession of
great qualities ; but it does not belong to him in the immediate
and intimate sense that his form does.

A study of the usage, both in the Old and in the New Testament,
will confirm this distinction. In the Old Testament 7:23 applied
to God occurs often in connection with theophanies, where, if
anywhere, we might expect the peculiar sense of μορφὴ to appear.’
The passage which seems most to favor this view is Ex. xxxiil. 18—
23, xxxiv. 5-7. But it will be observed that in answer to Moses’
prayer that God will show him his g/ory, God promises to reveal
his goodness, and to proclaim his zame, with the reservation, how-
ever, which is put anthropomorphically, that Moses cannot bear
that revelation in its fulness, and that therefore it will be tempered
for him. In the sequel the Lord descends and proclaims “the
Lord God, merciful, gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in
goodness and truth.” This was what Moses desired, not, like
Semele, to behold Deity clothed in outward splendor, but to
behold the true glory of God as revealed in his moral attributes.

The phrase “glory of the Lord” (a1 i355) is used of the
voice and fire on Sinai (Ex. xxiv. 17; Deut. v. 24) ; of the splen-
dor which, on different occasions, filled the tabernacle and the
temples (Mixa a NUM. xiv. τὸ, XV. 10, ΤΣ, ΣΧ. 6; 2 Chron. v.
τ Vilas 2) sn bizeks Xe 4, lil. 4,5, xliv.4).. It appears’as ἃ
bow in the cloud (Ezek. i. 28); as the glory which the prophet
saw by Chebar (Ezek. iii. 23 ; comp. i. 4-28) ; in the fire which
consumes the sacrifice on the altar (Lev. ix. 23). In the last three
instances the mode or form of the revelation of divine glory is
distinctly specified. It appears over the cherubim (Ezek. x. 19,
xi. 22); on the threshold of the house and on the mountain

1 am under obligation to my colleague, Dr. Briggs, for kindly furnishing me
with a proof of the article 13> from the new Hebrew Lexicon.

82 PHILIPPIANS [II. 6-11

(Ezek. x. 4, xi. 23). The earth shined with it (Ezek. xliii. 2).
None of these exhibitions answer to the definition of μορφὴ θεοῦ.
They are mostly symbolical. Again, the glory of the Lord will be
revealed in a march through the wilderness to the Holy Land
(Is. xl. 5) ; it will be the “rearward” of Israel (Is. lviii. 8) ; the
resting-place of the Messiah will be glory (Is. xi.10). The impos-
sibility of identifying such expressions with μορφὴ θεοῦ will be
seen if we attempt to substitute this for δόξα. Shall we say “the
heavens declare the form of God” (Ps. xix. 1) ; ‘the form of God
shall dwell in the land” (Ps. Ixxxv. 9) ; “‘the rest of the Messiah
shall be the form of God” (Is. xi. 10) ? These instances are fairly
representative ; and the Old Testament furnishes no others which,
any more than these, warrant the identification of μορφὴ θεοῦ with
δόξα.

In the New Testament the following may be specially noted :
Jn. xvii. 5, 22, 24. In vs. 5, 24, Jesus speaks of his preincarnate
glory which he laid aside in his incarnation. In vs. 22 he speaks
of a glory which he had hot relinquished, but had retained in his
incarnation, and had imparted to his disciples. ‘The two concep-
tions cannot be identical. The μορφὴ θεοῦ was laid aside, and could
not be imparted (Jn. i. 14). Δόξα was something which Jesus
possessed in the flesh, and which the disciples beheld. It could
not be identical with μορφὴ θεοῦ (2 Cor. 11]. 18). Εἰκὼν approxi-
mates more closely to μορφὴ θεοῦ than perhaps any other word
in the New Testament. But δόξα here is not the same as εἰκὼν.
The zmage of the Lord is attained by a process, through successive
stages or grades of glory. (See Heinrici, Comm. ad loc.; 1 Cor.
xi. 7.) Man is the image (εἰκὼν) and glory of God. ‘The pre-
incarnate Son of God was the effulgence of God’s glory, avd the
very impress (χαρακτὴρ) of his substance (Heb. i. 3).

In short, it is apparent that δόξα is used with too large a range
and variety of meaning to warrant its identification with an expres-
sion which is unique in the New Testament, and entirely wanting
in the Old Testament, and which, if the definition given be cor-
rect, 15 strictly limited in its meaning.

A common error of the Greek Fathers, adopted by Calvin,
Beza, and others, was the identification οἵ. μορφὴ with οὐσία,
‘essence,’ and φύσις, ‘nature.’ Μορφὴ is identified with οὐσία,
not identical with it. It is the perfect expression of the essence,
proceeding from the inmost depths of the perfect being, and into
which that being spontaneously and perfectly unfolds, as light
from fire. If the two were identical, the parting with the μορφὴ
in the incarnation would have involved parting with the ovova.
But Jesus did not surrender the divine essence in his incarnation,
nor did he surrender the divine nature, which is the οὐσία clothed
with its appropriate attributes. Μορφὴ expresses both οὐσία and
φύσις, but neither is surrendered in the surrender of the μορφὴ.

Ὧ

II. 6-11] ON II. 6-11 83

The Greek Fathers and Augustine, followed by the Catholic
and most of the Reformed expositors, held that vs. 6 referred to
Jesus in his preincarnate state; while vs. 7 and 8 referred to the
incarnate Saviour. According to this view, Christ exchanged the
divine mode of existence for the human, not insisting for the time
on holding fast to his divine majesty. ‘The form of God was
voluntarily exchanged for the form of a bondservant.

The majority of the Lutheran and rationalistic expositors, on
the other hand, explained vs. 6 of the incarnate Son. According
to this view, the form of God was retained by him in his incarnate
state, and was displayed in his miracles and words of power. He
retained the μορφὴ θεοῦ as his right, not regarding it an act of
robbery when he claimed equality with God. ‘Thus the statement
was used to vindicate the divinity of our Lord in the flesh. This
view shaped the rendering of King James’ Bible.

But this is contrary to the entire structure and drift of the
passage, the main point of which is Christ’s example of humility
in renouncing his divine dignity and becoming man. ‘The em-
phasis is upon the humanity, not upon the deity, of our Lord.
‘The prominent thought is “ thought it not a thing to be grasped.”
Moreover, this interpretation utterly destroys the manifest antith-
esis Of οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο, etc., and ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν, which is
indicated by ἀλλὰ. It makes the writer say, he maintained the
form of God, duf emptied himself. It also weakens the sharp
contrast between μορφὴ θεοῦ and μορφὴ δούλου. It would imply
the contemporaneous existence of the same subject in two oppo-
site forms, both having reference to the outward condition. (See
Klopper, Comm. ad loc.)

The doctrine of the preincarnate existence of Christ I assume.
matements like those of 1 Cor. 1. 24, vill. 6, x1. 5; Ἐ: 3, 4: 2 Cor.
vill. 9, show that Paul held a real and not a merely ideal preéxist-
ence of the Son of God, —a unique position of the preincarnate
Christ with God. ‘The truth is well stated by Professor Bruce
(St Paul's Conception of Christianity, p. 330): “To make the
conception of Christ’s earthly experience as a humiliation com-
plete, is it not necessary to view it as a whole, and regard it as
resulting from a foregoing resolve on the part of Christ to enter
into such a state? If so, then the necessary presupposition of the
Pauline doctrine of redemption is the preéxistence of Christ, not
merely in the foreknowledge of God, as the Jews conceived all
important persons and things to preéxist, or in the form of an
ideal in heaven answering to an imperfect earthly reality, in
accordance with the Greek way of thinking, but as a moral
personality capable of forming a conscious purpose.” Similarly
Weizsacker (Ap. Zeit. p. 122), to whom Professor Bruce refers :
“He had a personal existence before his human birth, and his
earlier life was divine, and absolutely opposed to the dependent

84 PHILIPPIANS [II. 6-11

life of man upon earth. . . . Christ becomes man by a personal
act. τς. Precisely because of this the conception is perfectly
consistent with the notion of ‘the second man’ who comes from
heaven. For the heavenly descent is equivalent to the thought
that he was in the form of God, and Paul can therefore say with-
out hesitation, that it was Jesus, the Christ, who first existed in
the divine form and then humbled himself, just as he says of him
that he was rich and voluntarily submitted to poverty. Had he
not given his doctrine of Christ this backward extension, the
human life of Christ would have become for him a sort of imper-
sonal event, and Jesus a mere instrument. His doctrine of the
preéxistence accordingly enables him to look upon Christ’s work
as a personal act, and to preserve the bond between him and
humanity.”

The phrase ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων is then to be understood of
Christ’s preincarnate state. ‘To say that he was ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ is
to say that he existed before his incarnation as essentially one with
God, and that objectively, and not merely in God’s self-conscious-
ness as the not yet incarnate Son — the ideal man. (See Beyschlag,
Die Christologie des neuen Testaments, and Leutestamentliche The-
ologie, 2 Aufl. vol. il. p. 77 ἴεν; Pfleiderer, Paudinismus, 2 Aufl.
p- 126;. Bruce’s discussion of Beyschlag’s view, Awmzlation of
Christ, De 23%.)

Do ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων and τὸ εἶναι ἴσα signify the same
thing ὃ --- “ No,” it is said. Equality with God did not inhere in
Christ’s preincarnate being. He received it first at his exaltation
and as a reward for his perfect obedience. ‘Thus Dorner ( Chris¢-
liche Glaubenslehre, ii. Ὁ. 286 f.) says: ‘His manhood is raised
to a full share in the divine majesty as a reward of its maintaining
true obedience. He could not have been exalted if he had not
exhibited a faultless development in a true human existence and
obedience.”

Along with this view goes an assumed antithesis between Christ
and Adam. Dorner says: “While the first Adam grasped at
equality with God, the second obtained exaltation to the divine
majesty, since not only would he not assume the divine dignity,
but, though himself elevated in dignity, humbled himself and
became obedient even unto death.” The parallel is developed
by Ernesti (Stud. τ. Krit. Hft. 4, p. 858, 1848). Adam would
be God; Christ renounces his godlikeness. Adam suffered death
as a doom ; Christ voluntarily. Adam incurred the divine curse ;
Christ won the approval of God, and the reward of exaltation to
equality with God.

The same view is held by my friend and colleague Dr. Briggs
(Messiah of the Apostles, p. 180). He says: “It was indeed
involved in his existing in the form of God that he should be
equal in rank with God. From that point of view it might be

IL 6-11 | ON II. 6-11 85

said that he would not grasp after his own rank to which he was
entitled as the Son of God ; but it is probable that the apostle had
in mind the antithesis between the first and the second Adam
which is so characteristic of his theology. He is thinking of the
sinful grasping of the first Adam after equality with God under
the instigation of the serpent. As the second Adam, he will not
grasp after equality with God, even though it is his birthright.
He will receive it from the hands of God as a gift of love, after he
has earned it by obedience, just as the first Adam ought to have
done.” Similarly Beyschlag, V. 7. Zheo/. 2 Aufl. Bd. 11. p. 88.

Setting aside for the moment the question of the two Adams, I
do not quite see the consistency of Dr. Briggs’ first statement —
that equality in rank with God was involved in Christ’s existence
in the form of God, and his last statement, that equality with God
was something which Christ earned, and received as a recompense
for his obedience. The inconsistency is not reconciled by the
antithesis between the two Adams. But passing this, these state-
ments can mean only that the status of the preincarnate Christ
was inferior to that in which he was after his incarnation; that
the being whom Paul describes as existing in the form of God was
something less than the being whom God highly exalted. This is
clearly stated by Beyschlag (ΔΛ Z. Zheo/. 11. p. 86): “The subject
of this passage is not Son of God as in the so-called Athanasian
symbol, but one sharply distinguished from God. The μορφὴ θεοῦ
in which he preéxisted is not a μορφὴ τοῦ θεοῦ, and the ἴσα θεῴ
εἶναι is not an ἴσα τῷ θεῷ εἶναι. There remains between him and
the one God who is the Father (vs. 11) so decided a difference
that the incomparable glory which Christ won through his self-
emptying and obedience unto death does not belong to him as
his eternal, natural possession, but is given to him by God’s free
grace, and must redound only to the honor of the Father. Hence
ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν Cannot signify a laying aside of his divine being,
but only the laying aside of his mode of manifestation.”

Such statements cannot be reconciled with passages like Col. 1.
15-17. Speaking of the Epistle to the Colossians, Dr. Briggs
justly says: “It unfolds the doctrine of the preéxistent Messiah
beyond anything that we could be prepared to expect from our
study of the other epistles. ΤῸ the doctrine of the form of God
in the Epistle to the Philippians, we have added the doctrine that
the preéxistent Son of God was the mediator between God and
the creature, in creation, in providence, and in redemption”? (JZes-
siah of the Apostles, p. 215). Add to this Jn. i. 1, 2, v. 21, Vi.,
x. 18, and especially Heb. i. 2, 3. In this last passage we have a
more technical and formal statement, after the manner of the
Alexandrian school, and according to this statement the preéxist-
ent Christ was the very impress of God’s substance.

Beyschlag, as Philo (De Somm. i. 39, 41), insists on the distinc-

86 PHILIPPIANS [11. 6-11

tion between 6 θεός and θεός, claiming that this distinction is
observed in Jn. i. 1. But in that passage, θεός, predicated of the
λόγος, is used attributively, with a notion of kind, and is thus
necessarily anarthrous. It excludes identity of person, but em-
phasises unity of essence and nature. Accordingly, what John
says is, that the λόγος was with God, and that with no lower nature
than God himself. Philo, on the contrary, claims that the anarth-
rous θεός describes the λόγος as of subordinate nature — “ δεύτερος
eos.”

Dorner cites Rom. i. 4 to show that Christ was constituted the
Son of God wth power, only after his resurrection. ‘Therefore,
before this, he was not ‘the Son of God with power,’ though he
was already the Son (Chr. Glaubens/. ii. p. 284). But this infer-
ence rests on a misinterpretation. “Ev δυνάμει does not belong
with υἱοῦ θεοῦ, but is adverbial and qualifies δρισθέντος. Paul’s
statement is that Christ was designated as Son of God in a power-
ful, impressive, efficient manner, by his resurrection from the dead
as a work of divine power. So Sanday, Mey., Godet, Alf., Moule,
Gifford. (Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 4 and Eph. i. 19.)

Besides all this, how can equality with God be conferred or
superinduced? ‘The words are τὸ εἶναι ἴσα. It is a matter of
essential de7ng. Equality with God can belong only to essence.
Equality of power or of rank can be conferred, but not equality
of being.

As to the antithesis of the two Adams. It seems forced at the
best, but is there any real antithesis? According to the narrative
in Gen. iii., Satan declared that the eating of the fruit would confer
a knowledge which would make the eaters as gods, knowing good
and evil; and the woman saw that the tree was to be desired to
make one wise. Nothing is said of a desire to be equal with God
in the absolute and general sense. ‘The temptation and the desire
turned on forbidden knowledge. The words “as gods” are defined
and limited by the words “knowing good and evil”; and it is
nowhere asserted or hinted in Scripture that Adam desired equality
with God in the comprehensive sense of that expression. More-
over, if Adam had proved obedient, his reward would not have
been equality with God.

Yet something was obtained by Christ as the result of his
incarnation and of his perfect obedience therein, which he did
not possess before his incarnation, and which he could not have
possessed without it. Equality with God he had as his birthright,
but his Messianic lordship was something which could come only
through his incarnation and its attendant humiliation ; and it was
this, and not equality with God, that he received in his exaltation.
The διὸ of vs. 9 is not to be taken as if God bestowed exaltation
as a reward for perfect obedience, but rather, as Meyer correctly
says, as ‘the accession of the corresponding consequence.” ‘The

II. 6-11] ON Il. 6-11 87

sequence is logical rather than ethical. Out of the human life,
death, and resurrection of Christ comes a type of sovereignty
which could pertain to him only through his triumph over human
sin (Heb. 1. 3), through his identification with men as their
brother. Messianic lordship could not pertain to his preincarnate
state. As Messianic lord he could be inaugurated only after his
human experience (Acts ii. 36). Messianic lordship is a matter
of function, not of inherent power and majesty. The phrase
“seated at the right hand of God” is Messianic, and expresses
Christ’s Messianic triumph, but not to the detriment of any essen-
tial dignity possessed before his incarnation. But the incarnation
places him, in a new sense, in actual, kingly relation to the col-
lective life of the universe. ‘There cannot be the bowing of every
knee and the confession of every tongue so long as Christ merely
remains Jezzg in the form of God,—until he has made _purifica-
tion of sins, redeemed creation, and been manifested to earth,
heaven, and hades as the Saviour of men.

Thus new elements enter into the life and sovereignty of the
exalted Christ. He exists no less as Son of God, but now also as
Son of Man, which he could be only through being born of woman
and made in the likeness of men. ‘The glory of God shines through
the bodily form which he carried into heaven with him (Col. i. 9),
yet in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead. He is what
he was not before his incarnation, the Great High Priest. Having
begun the high-priestly work in his death and sacrifice, he now
carries it on in the heavenly places by his work of intervention
(ἐντυγχάνειν, Heb. vil. 25) in the lives of those who believe in
him. He is the minister of the resurrection-life to his redeemed,
ever bringing to bear on them through the Spirit the divine forces
which cause them to “walk in newness of life.” Thus lordship
won by conquest in incarnation is distinguished from inherent
lordship. ‘This is the lordship which Jesus preferred to that
which was merely inherent in him as the equal of God, — lordship
through self-renunciation, mastery through service.

And in this fact lies the answer to the much-discussed question,
What is the name which God gave him at his exaltation? As the
lordship is Messianic, as the Messianic lordship comes only through
the human experience and victory, the name will unite the human
experience and the Messianic dominion, —‘ Jesus’ the human
name, ‘Christ’ the Messianic name. Not ‘Lord,’ for lordship
was his inherent right and his prerogative before incarnation.
Not Jesus alone, for that represents only the human experience
of humiliation ; but JESUS CHRIST — Christ the Messiah only
as he was Jesus. Accordingly “Lord” in vs. 11 is defined by
“Jesus Christ.”

This whole statement in Phil. is, in a broad sense, parallel with
the words in Heb. i. 3, and the two passages should be studied

88 PHILIPPIANS [11. 6-11

together. In both the preincarnate Son’s conditions of being are
set forth. To these Heb. adds a statement of the preincarnate
activity of the Son. Φέρων is “bearing onward,” not simply
“upholding”’ or “sustaining”; for, as Westcott remarks, “the
Son is not an Atlas sustaining the dead weight of the world.”
(See Comm. on Heb, ad loc. and the striking parallels cited.)
The Son was persistently carrying on from eternal ages the uni-
verse of God towards its consummation. Incarnation and atone-
ment were not a break in the history of humanity, nor in the
eternal activity of God in Christ. They were in the line of the
eternal purpose of God. ‘The Lamb was “ slain from the founda-
tion of the world.” In pursuance of this purpose the Divine Son
assumed our humanity, purged our sins, and then “sat down on
the right hand of the majesty on high.”

In Phil. the parallel to this is found in the statement and detail
of Christ’s humiliation. In his human nature, in the form of a
servant, in the likeness of men, in humbling himself and enduring
the death of the cross, he is still bearing on all things, restoring
humanity to the divine archetype by making purification of sins
and inaugurating the High-Priestly function developed in Heb.
In Phil. the mediatorial aspect is not treated, but both passages
depict the exaltation which followed the humiliation.

Whether dpzaypov is active or passive is treated in the note.
If taken actively, —‘“‘an act of robbery,” “a seizing,’ —it ex-
presses Christ’s assertion of equality with God ; that is to say, he
did not think being equal with God an act of robbery, but claimed
it as his right in his incarnate state. ‘The awkwardness of regard-
ing a stave of being as an act of robbery needs no comment. Τῇ
taken passively, —“‘a prize, a thing to be snatched or clutched,”
— it expresses the surrender of the preincarnate state of majesty.
He did not think equality with God a prize to be eagerly grasped
(and held fast), but surrendered it, though it was his right.

Lightfoot’s citations from the Greek Fathers show that they
conceived the passage as carrying the idea of a surrender of
preincarnate glory, and a condescension from a higher estate.
(Note on ‘ Different Interpretations of οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο,"
Conn. ΡῈ 12,1.)

I am not convinced that Lightfoot’s interpretation is wrong by the
strictures of Mr. Beet in his Commentary, ad loc., and in the Expositor,
3d ser. vol. 5, p. 115, especially when I find him adopting Meyer’s explana-
tion. See below.

It may be observed that Lightfoot does not bring out the full
force of his first quotation, from the Letter of the Gallican church
(Euseb. /7. &. v. 2), which lies in the exhibition of the martyrs’
humility as shown in their refusal to accept the title of “ wit-
nesses,” which they had earned by their sufferings. Thus, in

II. 6-11] ON Il. 6-11 89

refusing to insist upon their rightful claim, they imitated Christ,
who refused to grasp at the majesty which was rightfully his.
Also it should be observed that in Origen on Romans (Lat. v.
§ 2), vapinam, which is given for ἁρπαγμὸν, occurs in both the
active and the passive sense, the latter in late Latin.

Meyer’s explanation should be noticed. He paraphrases:
“Jesus Christ, when he found himself in the heavenly mode of
existence of divine glory, did not permit himself the thought of
using his equality with God for the purpose of seizing possessions
and honor for himself on earth.’

He translates “‘ Nicht als ein Rauben betrachtete er das gott-
gleiche Sein” (Not as a robbing did he regard the being equal
with God), and then explains that he did not put being equal with
God under the point of view of gaining booty, as if it (being
equal with God) was, with respect to its expression in action, to
consist in seizing what did not belong to him.

According to this, τὸ εἶναι toa is not the object but the subject
of the seizing. Christ did not regard equality with God as a
means of grasping. ‘This interpretation is adopted by Beet. It
is an illustration of the excessive literalism which sometimes mars
Meyer’s splendid exegetical qualities. The interpretation turns
on the endeavor to preserve the active force of apmaypos, which,
in the very ragged condition of the evidence concerning that
word, seems desperate. If this had been Paul’s meaning, I can
conceive of no mode of expression which he would have been less
likely to choose. Moreover, the explanation misses Paul’s point,
which is to show the magnitude of the renunciation from the
preincarnate and heavenly point of view, and not from the earthly
and incarnate side. According to Meyer, Christ’s self-renuncia-
tion consisted in his refusal to grasp at earthly possessions and
honors by means of his equality with God. According to Paul, it
consisted in his relinquishment of heavenly glory and majesty.

As regards ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν, any attempt to commit Paul to a
precise theological statement of the limitations of Christ’s humanity
involves the reader in a hopeless maze. The word éxévwoev was
evidently selected as a peculiarly strong expression of the entire-
ness of Jesus’ self-renunciation, and in order to throw the pre-
- incarnate glory and the incarnate humiliation into sharp contrast :
to show that Christ utterly renounced and laid aside the majesty
which he possessed in his original state. Its most satisfactory
definition is found in the succeeding details which describe the
incidents of Christ’s humanity, and with these exegesis is com-
pelled to stop. The word does not indicate a surrender of deity,
nor a paralysis of deity, nor a change of personality, nor a break
in the continuity of self-consciousness. Christ’s consciousness of
deity was not suspended during his earthly life. He knew that

he came from God and went to God; that he had glory with the
N

90 PHILIPPIANS [III. 1

Father before the world was, and would receive it back. But he
was made in all things like unto his brethren. ‘‘ He took to him-
self all that belongs to the perfection of man’s being. He lived
according to the conditions of man’s life, and died under the cir-
cumstances of man’s mortality” (Westcott).

III. 1-3. A WARNING AGAINST FALSE TEACHERS

As for the rest, my brethren, whatever your trials, past, present,
or future, continue to rejoice in the Lord. I am not backward
about writing to you concerning a matter of which I have spoken
in former letters, but 7 am moved by my anxiety for your safety
to refer to tt again. Beware of those dogs; those evil workers ;
those whose boasted circumcision ts no better than a physical mut-
lation without any spiritual significance. It ts we Christians who
are the true ‘circumcision’; whose service ts prompted by the Spirit
of God; whose rejoicing is in Christ Jesus as the only source of
true righteousness, and who do not trust the flesh.

It is claimed by many that Paul is here about to close the
epistle, but that his attention is suddenly diverted, perhaps by
some new reports of the doings of his Judaistic adversaries ; and
that he is thus drawn on to add to his letter what he had not
originally intended. Nothing in the text warrants this conclusion.
It is, of course, possible that fresh thoughts may have come to the
apostle in the course of his writing; but, on the other hand, we
are not forced to conclude that the main topics were not in his
mind from the first. (See Introd. VII.)

1. τὸ λοιπόν : ‘as to what remains.’ It may mean ‘finally,’ as
2 Cor, xXill; 11; or “henceforth,” as, Mk. xiv. 41 =) τ σον ΤΠ 2;
Heb. x. 13 ; 2 Tim. ἵν: ὃ; or * for the rest,’ * besi@ies/seas to what
remains,’ as 1 Thess. iv. 1; 2 Thess. iii. 1. The formula is com-
mon with Paul in cases where he attaches, in a somewhat. loose
way, even in the midst of an epistle, a new subject to that which
he has been discussing. In 1 Thess. iv. 1 two entire chapters fol-
low the phrase, and here the special subject introduced by it is
followed by several others. If Paul had been intending to close
his letter, it is likely that he would have added his thanks for the
Philippians’ remittance before he reached τὸ λοιπόν. The formula
therefore merely introduces what follows. ‘The preceding topic is
closed, and he passes to another.

III. 1] A WARNING AGAINST FALSE TEACHERS gI

Ellic., Ead., Lightf., render ‘ finally,’ but as an introduction to what
remains. ‘For the rest,’ KI., De W., Lips., Weizs., Beet.

χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ : ‘rejoice in the Lord.’ (Comp. i. 18, ii. 18,
iv. 4, 10.)

Not as Lightf., ‘ farewell,’ for which there is no sufficient ground. In

class. the word is used as a salutation both at meeting and parting; but it

does not occur in N.T. in the sense of ‘farewell.’ 2 Cor. xiii. 11 is more
than doubtful.

The exhortation need not be specifically referred either to what
precedes or to what follows. There has been a reason for encour-
aging them to rejoice in the face of their former trials, as there is
a like reason in the prospect of coming trials of which he is about
to speak. The summons to rejoice is general, in view of all trials,
past, present, and future, as well as of the eternal consolations
of the gospel.

év kupiw : Comp. 1. 14, ll. 19, 24.. The sphere or element of
rejoicing.

Several of the older expositors found in ἐν x. a contrast of the joy in

God with the bitterness of the cross (Calv.); or with all worldly things

(Theo., Mop., v. Lyra); or with works of the flesh and fleshly renown

(Ans.); or with the Jewish errors treated in the following verses (Calov.,
Croc; isc.)

τὰ αὐτὰ γράφειν : The reference is probably to a former letter,
or to former letters to the Philippians, which are lost. (See
Lightf.’s excursus on ‘ Lost Epistles to the Philippians,” Comm.
p- 138.) This has been inferred from Polyc. ad Phil. 111. (Comp.
xill., and see Lightf.’s /enatius, ill. pp. 327, 348.) The question
turns on Polyc.’s use of ἐπιστολαὶ, whether it means one letter or
several.

Lightf. decides for the single letter, and collects in his excursus a large
number of passages to show the use of the plu. for ‘a letter.’ Mey. thinks
that the plu. in Polyc. indicates several letters, and affirms that doctrinal
epistles, both in N.T. and the Apost. Fath., are always described in the
sing. where only one letter is intended, and in the plu. where several are
meant. There can be no doubt that the plu. is used of a single letter in
individual cases; but the question of usage is not definitely enough settled
to warrant a decision.

Our conclusion rests rather on the antecedent probability of
lost letters. Considering Paul’s connection with so many churches
during at least twenty-five years, it is highly probable that he wrote
more than thirteen letters, and some of them important. Intima-
tions of such are found in 1 Cor. v. 9; 2. Cor. x. 10, 11; 2 Thess.
11. 15, 11.17. If what have come down to us are his only epistles,
we must suppose that he wrote several letters within a short time,
while at long intervals he wrote nothing. (See Jowett, “ps. of Sv.
Paul, 3, ed. i. p. 107.) Lightf. refers τὰ αὐτὰ to matter in this

ΟΖ PHILIPPIANS (IIE. 3,2

epistle concerning divisions or dissensions in the Philippian church ;
but intimations to that effect in i. 27, 11: 2, 3, 4, are too slight to
warrant this inference. ‘The reference is probably to the character
and work of the Judaising Christians. ‘To refer ra αὐτὰ to χαίρετε
(Alf., Weiss) would be to make Paul say: ‘It is not irksome for
me to write to you to rejoice, but it is safe for you.’ .

oxvypov : ‘irksome’; orig. ‘sluggish,’ ‘slothful.’ (See Mt. xxv.
26; Rom. xi. 11:) Frequent in xox in Prov,

ὑμῖν δὲ ἀσφαλές : ‘and for you it is safe.’ ᾿Ασφ. primarily
‘steadfast,’ ‘stable’; thence ‘trustworthy’; a thing zo Je refed
on as profitable. Notas Luth., Erasm., with an active meaning,
‘that which makes safe or confirms,’ which is contrary to usage.

2. βλέπετε τοὺς κύνας : ‘behold the dogs.’ Βλέπετε, not ‘ beware
of,’ which would be βλέπ. ἀπὸ ; but as τ Cor. x. 18. A caution,
however, is implied, ‘look to’; ‘look out for.’ The article with
κύν. indicates a well-known class. ‘Dog’ was a term of contempt
and loathing with both Jews and Gentiles. The dog was an unclean
animal according to the Levitical law. The price of a dog and the
hire of a courtesan were placed in the same category, and an Isra-
elite was forbidden to bring either into the house of God in fulfil-
ment of a vow (Deut. xxiii. 18). Gentiles were termed ‘ dogs’ by
Jews (Mt. xv. 27). Comp. Apoc. xxii. 15, of those whose impurity
excludes them from the heavenly city. In Hom. often of the auda-
cious or shameless, especially women. ‘The emphasis here is upon
the impurity, the profane character of the false teachers contrasted
with true Christians. ‘There is no subordinate reference to shame-
lessness, greediness, snappishness, disorderly wandering or howling.
So some earlier expositors, as Chr., Aug., Calov., Calv., Croc., etc.

τοὺς κακοὺς ἐργάτας : ‘the evil workers.’ The same persons
regarded on the side of their activity and its moral quality; as
proselytisers; as ‘huckstering’ (καπηλεύοντες) the word of God
(2 Cor. il. 17) ; as opposing the doctrine of justification by faith.
(Comp. Mt. xxii 15.5 )2\@or x2, 17)

τὴν κατατομήν : ‘the concision.’ Not elsewhere in Bib. The
word directs attention to the fact that these persons had no right
to claim circumcision in the true sense. Unaccompanied by faith,
love, and obedience, it was nothing more than physical mutilation.
Thus they belonged in the category of those against whom the
legal prohibition of mutilation was directed (Lev. xxi. 5). Comp.
Paul’s bitter sarcasm in Gal. v. 12.

Reasons have been given for not identifying the persons charac-
terised here with those referred to ini. 15-17. (See note oni. 15.)
The reference here is to Judaising Christians. In view of their
habit of keeping an eye on the Pauline churches and of introduc-
ing their emissaries into them, it is not likely that they had over-
looked Philippi; and it is quite probable that Paul had previously
found it necessary to warn the church against their designs. Some

II. 2, 3] THE TRUE CIRCUMCISION 93

fresh intelligence of their operations may have prompted him to
repeat those cautions.

Against the reference to Jews it may be said that Paul’s dealing with the
Jews in 1 Thess. ii. 14-16 would lead us to expect something similar here if
the parties had been Jews, since their proceedings against the Christians
would probably have been marked by the open violence which they prac-
tised against the other Macedonian churches. Here Paul’s warning is
directed at the misleading of his converts by false teaching, which was quite
according to the Judaising method. Moreover his expressions here are simi-
lar to those in 2 Cor. and Gal. as respects the motive, object, and methods
of these agitators, and the way in which he meets them. That the Judaisers
were referred to in those epistles is not questioned. Their object was the
overthrow of Paul’s form of Christian doctrine and the establishment of a
Christianity in which the Mosaic law should continue in full force, especially
in the matter of circumcision. The Messiah was regarded by them solely
in his relation to the Jewish law. The attempt of Croc. to show that Paul
here designates three classes, — κύνας, Libertine Christians or backsliders to
Judaism; «ak. épy., those who would combine Christianity with Gentile wis-
dom or Jewish superstition; κατατ., unbelieving Jews, —is one of the curi-
osities of exegesis. Weiss also thinks that three classes are intended: kvr.,
heathen; kak. épy., those mentioned ini. 15; κατατ.; Jews.

3. ἡμεῖς yap ἐσμεν ἡ περιτομή : ‘for we are the circumcision.’
I call them κατατομή, and not περιτομή, for it is we who are the
περιτομή. ‘The contemptuous κατατομή suggests the first point of
contrast between the Judaisers and the true Israel of God. ‘The
abstract περιτομή, ‘circumcision,’ stands for the concrete, ‘the
eireumuised... (sec ΟΠ ἵν Ὁ; Gals 11. Ὁ: Eph. i. rreand
the phrase oi εἰς περιτομῆς; Acts x. 45, xl. 2.) We are the true
circumcision as compared with them, for their circumcision is
only outward, in the flesh, while the true circumcision is that of
the heart 9 (see Kom: 25-29); Eph. 11: πὶ > Col. ii: 11 5) comp.
ees Vie τ Weiie x, TO. kes. Oy (eT. Υἱ τὸ; 1x. 25, 26; Ezek.
liven 588 Also |Ust Me 7. Prox. ΕΙΣ. Χ 1111.)

For this claim three reasons are given:

(1) οἱ πνεύματι θεοῦ λατρεύοντες : ‘who serve by the spirit of
God.’ A.V. ‘who worship God in the Spirit’ follows TR, which
reads θεῴ for θεοῦ.

πνεύματι : Instrumental dat. (See Rom. viii. 14; Gal. v. 5, 18.)
Who serve under the impulse and direction of the divine Spirit.
(Comp. Rom. ii. 29.)

λατρεύοντες : The verb originally means ‘to serve for hire,’ then
simply ‘to serve.’ In N.T. both of ritual service, as Heb. viii. 5,
ΙΧ. 9, X. 2, ΧΙ]. 10, and of worship or service generally, as Lk.
i. 74; Rom.i.g. Especially of the service rendered to God by
Israelites as his peculiar people, as Acts xxvi. 7; λατρεία, Rom.
ix. 44; Heb. ix. 1,6. In LXX always of the service of God or of
heathen divinities. A Jew would be scandalised by the applica-
tion of this term to Christian service. It is purposely chosen with
reference to 7 περιτομή.

94 PHILIPPIANS [III. 3, 4

(2) καὶ καυχώμενοι ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ : ‘and boast in Christ Jesus.’

καυχώμενοι: 566 Rom. i175 1 Cor. 1. amen 2 (Gone ἘΠ 1;
Galt vin 4"

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: As the only source of true righteousness
compared with the legal observance of the Jew.

(3) καὶ οὐκ ἐν σαρκὶ πεποιθότες : ‘and do not trust in the flesh.’
Not the same conception as the preceding (so Chr., Theoph.,
Calv., De W.), nor is it a more precise definition, to express the
purport of καυχ. (Weiss). It indicates and repudiates the dispo-
sition out of which the false boasting of the Judaiser proceeds.
For πεποιθ., see 1. 14.

ἐν σαρκὺ: Comp. 2 Cor. xi. 18; Gal. vi. 13, 14. dp is the
human nature without the divine Spirit; the state of man before
or in contrast with his reception of the divine element whereby
he becomes a new creature ; the whole being of man as it exists
and acts apart from the influence of the Spirit. It properly char-
acterises, therefore, not merely the lower forms of sensual gratifi-
cation, but all,—the highest developments of the life estranged
from God, whether physical, intellectual, or esthetic. So here it
covers legal observances, circumcision, descent, ritual strictness,
as they exist without the spirit of loyalty to God. (See W. Sz
on Rom. vii. 5.)

In illustration of the statement that Christians have no confi-
dence in the flesh, he adduces his own case, showing what excep-
tional ancestral and ecclesiastical advantages as a Jew he renounced
for Christ’s sake.

4-7. [fany man may think himself warranted in trusting in the
fiesh, tt ts myself. For I was circumcised when eight days old, as
a genuine Israelite. Iwas not a proselyte, but of direct [srachtish
descent. I belonged to the honored tribe of Benjamin. I was a

child of Hebrew ancestors who spoke the Hebrew tongue. As a
member of the sect of the Pharisees, 7 was a strict legalist. I was
zealous for my religion, even to the extent of persecuting Christians,
and I was blameless in my legal righteousness. But all these advan-
tages 7 counted as a loss, and renounced them for Christ’s sake.

4. καίπερ ἐγὼ ἔχων πεποίθησιν καὶ ἐν σαρκί: ‘although having
myself confidence in the flesh also.’ It might be urged that Paul,
in his conversion from Judaism, had renounced and contemned
that which he did not himself possess, and of which he did not
know the value. He anticipates this by saying that he has
renounced advantages which he possessed in an eminent degree,
and the value of which no one knew better than himself. This is

EET 4] CONFIDENCE IN THE FLESH 95

not urged as an attack upon the Judaisers, but only to show that
he had already possessed all that upon which the Jews especially
prided themselves. He puts himself for the moment at the Jew-
ish point of view. If the true ground of confidence is the flesh, he
has stronger ground than even his Judaising adversaries. (Comp.
2 Cor. xi. 21 ff.) ‘The apparent awkwardness of construction is
owing to the quick transition from the plu. πεποιθότες to a similar
participial construction in the singular (ἔχων). The ἐγὼ of vs. 4
really lies in the ἐσμεν of vs. 3, since Paul reckons himself among
the ἡμεῖς. He is separated by ἐγὼ. The sentence proceeds from
καίπερ ἐγὼ, as if the previous clause had been, ‘/ have no confidence
in the flesh.’

καίπερ: Only here in Paul, and, as usual, with the participle.
(Comp. Heb. v. 8, vii. 5, xii. 17.) It may be correctly rendered
‘although’ if it is remembered that that sense lies in the parti-
ciple and not in καίπερ, which literally means ‘ even very much.’

ἔχων : Not to be rendered ‘I might have,’ as A.V. and R.V., a
translation which grew out of the fear of the older interpreters of
seeming to commit Paul to a declaration of his confidence in the
flesh. Paul actually possessed these advantages, and, from the
Jewish point of view, declares that he had confidence in them.

πεποίθησιν : ‘confidence’ or ‘ ground of confidence.’ The noun
only in Paul. For the phrase πεποίθ. ἔχ., comp. 2 Cor. 11]. 4.

καὶ : In the flesh ‘a@éso.’ As well as in Christ.
Not only have I ground of confidence, but I have more than
they.

εἴ τις δοκεῖ ἄλλος πεποιθέναι ἐν σαρκί: ‘If any one is disposed to
think that he has ground of confidence in the flesh.’ The indefin-
ite εἴ τις is not introduced for the sake of policy, or in a concilia-
tory way, as if Paul were avoiding reference to any particular
case, since this assumes a polemic bearing of the words. Nor
does δοκεῖ imply that the advantage was only apparent (Chrys.,
Theoph.), or that they had only arrogated it to themselves
(Thdrt.) ; for Paul uses δοκεῖν of himself. He merely says that
he possessed advantages on which any Jew might have congratu-
lated himself.

Δοκεῖ may be rendered ‘seems’; so Vulg. zdetur; comp.
τ Cor. xi. 22) 2 Cor. x. 9 +, Gal. ii. Ὁ: of ‘ thinks,’.as 1 Cor. i.
18, viii. 2, x. 12. The latter is Paul’s more common usage. So
here, ‘if any one is disposed to think.’ (Comp. Mt. iii. 9 ; 1 Cor.
ὙΠ τὸ)

ἐγὼ μᾶλλον : Supply δοκῶ πεποιθέναι ἐν σαρκί. “1 think that 1
have reason for confidence in the flesh in a higher degree than
they.’

The grounds of this last, general statement are now given in
the enumeration of Paul’s advantages as a Jew, beginning with his

06 PHILIPPIANS [III. 4,5

inherited privileges. First is circumcision, the main point in a
Jew’s eyes, and that by which the whole nation was named.

5. περιτομῇ ὀκταήμερος : ‘eight days old in circumcision.’ *Oxray-
μερος not elsewhere in Bib. It denotes here not interval, but dura-
tion. ‘I was eight days old when circumcised.’ For the idiom,
‘an eight-day one,’ comp. τεταρταῖος, Jn. xi. 39; δευτεραῖοι, Acts
Xxvili. 13; and see Wetst. on Jn. xi. 39 for a long list of class.
parallels. The dative is the dat. of reference. (See ii..7; 1 Cor.
xiv. 20, etc. ; Win. xxxi. 6.) Paul was circumcised on the eighth
day as a genuine Israelite (Gen. xvii. 12; Lev. xii. 3). An Ish-
maelite was circumcised in his thirteenth year (Gen. xvii. 25).

He was not a proselyte, but of direct Israelitish descent: ἐκ
γένους ᾿Ισραήλ, ‘of the race of Israel.’ (Comp. Rom. xi. 1.) He
was descended from the patriarch Jacob, whose name of honor,
bestowed by God himself (Gen. xxxil. 28), was the sacred name
of the Jews as God’s covenant people (Rom. ix. 4; 2 Cor. xi. 22 ;
Eph. ii. 12), and was therefore the Jews’ especial badge and title
of honor. ‘Their descent from Abraham they shared with the
Ishmaelites ; their descent from Abraham and Isaac, with the
Edomites. The Israelite claimed descent from the patriarch, not
as Jacob ‘ the supplanter,’ but as Israel, ‘ wrestler with God.’ (See
Hos. xii. 3, 4.) Ἰσραήλ is the appositive genit., and is the name
of the race (yévos), as Gal. 1. 14; 2 Cor. xi. 26.

φυλῆς Βενιαμείν : Comp. Rom. xi. 1. Benjamin was the son of
the beloved wife of Jacob (Gen. xxxv. 17, 18). The tribe of Ben-
jamin gave Israel its first king (1 Sam. ix. 1, 2). ‘The tribe was
alone faithful to Judah at the separation under Rehoboam (1 K.
ΧΙ. 21). After the return from exile, it formed with Judah the
kernel of the new colony in Palestine (Ezra iv. 1). ‘The tribe
always held the post of honor in the army. Hence the battle-cry,
‘After thee Benjamin!’ (Jud. v. 14; Hos: 78). Οἱ thevtwelve
patriarchs, Benjamin only was born in the Land of Promise. ‘The
great national deliverance commemorated in the feast of Purim
was due to Mordecai, a Benjamite. Paul’s own name, Saul, was
probably from the son of Kish, the Benjamite king.

But Paul’s descent was not only from the choice race and tribe,
but from parents of the pure Hebrew stock. ‘There is a climax.

‘EBpaios ἐξ “EBpatwy : ‘a Hebrew sprung from Hebrews.’ (Comp.
2 Cor. xi.22.) The Greek Ἑβραῖος (Lat. Hebraeus) comes through
the Aramaic vernacular of Palestine (/febraja). Greek and Roman
writers, however, rarely used it instead of Ἰουδαῖος (/wdaeus) which
prevailed after the exile. In the O.T. ‘ Hebrew’ was used habitu-
ally and consistently to denote the descendants of Abraham as
designated by foreigners, or as applied by the Hebrews themselves
when addressing foreigners, or when speaking of themselves in
contrast with other nations. ‘The name by which the Hebrew

111: 5] A HEBREW OF HEBREWS 97

nation habitually called itself was ‘Israel’ or ‘the Children of
Israel.’ In the N.T.‘E®patos appears in Acts vi. 1, where the
native Palestinian Jewish-Christians are distinguished from the
Hellenists or Greek-speaking Jews. ‘This distinction marks a dif-
ference of language. The O.T. does not know the word ‘ Hebrew’
with reference to language. The old Hebrew is called ‘the lan-
guage of Canaan’ (Is. xix. 18), indicating the close relationship
of this Semitic tongue with that of the Canaanites, especially the
Pheenicians. In the Apocr. and N.T. the term ‘ Hebrew’ is used
almost exclusively of the Aramaic vernacular. (See Jn. v. 2, xix.
ἘΠ Ὁ; οι στι 40> Kil. 2) xxvii. 14.) Here the term
expresses the difference of language. ‘Though a Hellenist, Paul
was trained in the use of the Hebrew tongue by Hebrew-speaking
parents. Though born outside of the Holy Land, yet as a child
of Hebrew ancestors, and ‘the son of Pharisees’ (Acts xxii. 6),
in speech and habits of life he remained allied to the people of
Palestine. He might have been an Israelite and not a Hebrew
speaker; but he emphasises the fact that he was both a true
Israelite and one who used the language of his forefathers. He
was trained under a Hebrew teacher at Jerusalem (Acts xxii. 3) ;
he spoke Hebrew, 2.6. Aramaic (Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2) ; and he
quotes often from the Hebrew Scriptures. (See Riehm. Handw.
des bibl. Alterthums, sub “ Eber” and “ Hebraer” ; Trench, Syz.
XXXIX.)

Similar expressions, denoting position or character as resting upon birth
from parents of like position and character, are common in class. (See
Aristoph. Ran. 730; Soph. Zéect. 589; Philoc. 384; Eur. Alc. 677; Hat.
ἯΠῚ7. etc.)

These four specifications of inherited privilege are summed up
by Paul in Gal. ii.15. Matheson, Spiritual Development of St. Paul,
remarks that a man trained under such influences must, on every
side, have been repelled by the spectacle of the cross of Jesus.
He was required to accept him precisely at the point where his
national characteristics were assailed (pp. 36, 37).

He now passes to advantages of a distinctly personal character,
-relating to his theological and ecclesiastical position.

κατὰ νόμον Φαρισαῖος : ‘as touching the law a Pharisee.’ (Comp.
ACES XXL. 3;°XXIil. ὁ: XXVI.. 5.)

νόμον : The Mosaic law, the standing authority of which was the
principle on which the Judaisers insisted. ‘This is confirmed by
θρησκίας, Acts xxvi. 5 ; by the allusions here to concision and cir-
cumcision, and also by the fact that in all the words connected
with νόμον in vs. 5, there is an immediate reference to the Jewish
race and ideas. Moreover, δικαιοσ. τ. ἐν vow. corresponds with

98 PHILIPPIANS [111. 5,6

similar phrases in Rom. and Gal. where the Mosaic law is contem-
plated, as Gal. ili. 11,12. It was the righteousness of the Mosaic
system which Paul had abandoned for Christ.

These considerations do not seem to favor Lightf.’s explanation, “the
Mosaic law regarded in the abstract as a principle of action, being coér-
dinated with ζῆλος and δικαιοσύνην."

No sharp distinction can be fixed between vou. and ὁ vou. It is unquest-
ionable that véu. is used of the Mosaic law as well as ὁ vou. If Paul
sometimes uses νόμ. in a wider sense, — of law considered as a principle,
with the stress upon the conception of law itself, rather than upon its
historical and outward form,—the Mosaic law is habitually in the back-
ground of his thought as the great embodiment and representative of the
conception.

Φαρισαῖος : Belonging to the party of the most orthodox defend-
ers, observers, and expounders of the law. There may be a subtle
irony in these words. Paul never ceased to reverence the law
itself as the expression of God’s holiness (Rom. 11. 13, 20, ili. 31,
vil. 7, 12, 14, etc.) ; but the Pharisees’ treatment of the law struck
at its original dignity, since they made it void by the oral tradition
with which they overlaid it. (See Mt. xv. 2, 3,6; Mk. vil. 3, 5,
8, 9, 13; and comp. Jos. Avz#q. xiil. τὸ; 6.) Paul then may mean,
‘I kept the law with Pharisaic strictness, practically dishonoring
it; observing the traditions rather than the law itself.” From this
point of view comp. Gal. 1. 14.

6. κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν : Ironical. ‘1 was so very
zealous that I became a persecutor of the church of Christ.’ Zeal
for God, for his house, and for his law, was the highest praise of
an O17: saint. “(Sees Num, xxv. 11, 17,1 ie xix τῷ ΤΠ es alee
(Ixvitt.].9. Comp. Acts xxi. 20, xxi. 35 ΘΙ: πὴ ol hues,
comments: οὐ yap διὰ τὴν φιλοτιμίαν, οὐδὲ διὰ δόξαν κενήν, οὐδὲ
φθόνῳ βαλλόμενος, ὡς ᾿Ιουδαίων ἄρχοντες, ἀλλὰ THO ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου
φλεγόμενος ζήλῳ, τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐπορθοῦν. ---- “ Not because of ambi-
tion nor for empty renown, neither being smitten with envy like
the rulers of the Jews, but being inflamed with zeal for the law, I
persecuted the church.”

διώκων: Used adjectively, parallel with ἄμεμπτος. Not as a
substantive, as Mey., Weiss, Lips., which occurs with the article
(Win. xlv. 7).

δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐν νόμῳ : ‘righteousness which is in the law.’
Δικ. is used abstractly, and then concretely defined by τ. ἐν vom.
‘As regards righteousness —I mean that which is in the law’
which resides in the righteous law and consists in its strict observ-
ance. Δικαιοσύνη is used here in its objective sense of conformity
to an external rule of righteousness. ‘The righteousness is in (ἐν)
the law, not in the man: in the man only as he conforms to the
law. It is not regarded as an inward righteousness like the right-
eousness of faith. Comp. ἐκ νόμου (vs. 9), Where the righteousness

————————

III. 6, 7| ALL LOST FOR CHRIST 99

is treated as proceeding from the law. The reference need not be
confined to the ceremonial law, for the law is a whole (Gal. ili. ro).
γενόμενος : ‘having become’: in the course of my pursuit of
legal righteousness.
ἄμεμπτος : See on ii. 15. Not absolutely blameless, according
to God’s standard, but in human judgment. (Comp. Gal. 1. 14.)

On Holsten’s attempt to impugn the authenticity of the epistle by
endeavoring to show in this statement a contradiction of Paul’s teaching
elsewhere that man is unable perfectly to keep the law, see Introd. vi.
The blamelessness here asserted is according to human, Pharisaic standards,

7. ἀλλὰ ἅτινα ἣν μοι κέρδη : ‘but such things as were gains to
me.’

ἅτινα : instead of the simple a, because of κέρδη : ‘ things which
were of such a kind that they could be called κέρδη. It presents
a category of the things specified in vs. 5, 6. See for this usage
Galsiva 2460. τὸ: ἘΠ} ΠΡ 20. .Colyi 23.

por: dative of advantage ; not of judgment, ‘in my estimation.’

κέρδη : ‘ gains,’ taken separately ; the profits of descent, of legal
strictness, of zeal, etc., each attended with its own particular gain.

ταῦτα : defining and emphasising κέρδη.

ἥγημαι: “1 have counted’: with deliberate judgment. (See on
il. 6.)

ζημίαν : ‘a loss.’ The several gains are massed in one loss.
The word only in this epistle and Acts xxvii. 10, 21. See farther
on ἐζημιώθην (vs. 8).

From his former experience he now turns to his present Christ-
ian ideal and his efforts to attain it.

8-14. Since the hour of my conversion my estimate of the worth-
lessness of my legal righteousness and its profits has not changed.
I continue to count them all but loss as compared with the surpass-
ing worth of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord. To me they
are mere refuse, if I can but make Christ my own and may be

found living in him, not having a righteousness of my own, which

is of the law, but rather a righteousness which proceeds from God,
which is based upon faith, and which becomes mine through faith
in Christ: a righteousness which means such intimate and prac-
tical knowledge of Christ as that his risen life shall be a power in
my life, and his sufferings shall be mine, even unto death; and
that so, at last, if this may be, I may be raised from the dead as
he was. TI speak of my desire, not of my attainment, for I have
not yet realised my ideal; but Lam pressing on toward the attain-

100 PHILIPPIANS [III. 8

ment and fulfilment of that which Christ contemplated in my
conversion. No, 7 have not yet attained ; but one thing Ido. Not
encouraged to self-satisfaction or relaxaton of effort by what ts
past, I stretch forward, like a racer to the goal, toward that high
destiny to which God in Christ is ever summoning me from heaven.

8. ἀλλὰ pevodvye καὶ ἡγοῦμαι: ‘nay then I am indeed also
counting.’

BDFGKL read μεν ovv; μενουνγε 8 AP, 17, 37.

Mey confirms ἡγοῦμαι, and οὖν, strengthened by ye, recurs to
ἥγημαι and carries it forward, thus guarding against a possible
misunderstanding of the last statement. ‘ Nay then, if my ἥγημαι
be thought to have been a mere impulsive act of breaking with
the past,—I am, in truth, also counting all things as loss for
Christ’s sake.’ His break with legal righteousness perpetuates
itself. For μενοῦνγε see Rom. ix. 20, x. 18.

Πάντα corresponds with ἅτινα (vs. 7): all things which formed
the ground of my false confidence.

διὰ TO ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου pov: ‘ for
the surpassing worth of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord.’
This expands διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν, thus defining more clearly the
motive of ἥγημαι ζημίαν. The ἥγημαι was caused by an over-
powering impression of Christ; the ἡγοῦμαι by the knowledge of
Christ. The ov in the next clause gathers additional force from
γνώσεως. Τὸ ὑπ. τ. γνώσ. is not a hendiadys, ‘the excellent know-
ledge,’ as Vulg. ‘eminentem scientiam.’ ‘The neuter participle
with the article is more graphic than the noun ὑπεροχή. (See
Blass, p. 151.) On substantivised neuters see Win. xxxiv. 2, and
comp. Rom. ii. 4, vill. 3, 1x. 22. 1 Cora. 25 3 ΠΕΡ τ
is used in its original, simple sense, as Rom. ii. 20; 1 Cor. i. 5,
vill. 1. Not in the later, philosophic sense.

τοῦ κυρίου μου: κυρίου adds emphasis to τὸν Χριστὸν (vs. 7).
For μου, with its sense of personal appropriation, comp. 1. 3. The
knowledge is surpassing because its subject is Lord, to be con-
fessed and worshipped by the created universe (ii. 11). Christ,
as the subject of this knowledge, is regarded with reference to al!
that he is or becomes to a believer. So Croc.: “ Complectitur
personam, officium et beneficium, quae separari non possunt.”

The designations of Christ in the Epistles of the Captivity resemble
those in the earlier letters. ᾿Ιησοῦς alone occurs only in Eph. iv. 21;
Phil. ii, 10. Χριστός and ὁ Xp. are very frequent. ‘The title κύριος added
to the personal name occurs chiefly in the beginnings of the epistles, as
Eph. i, 2; Philem. 3; Phil. i. 2; but Christ is commonly styled κύριος or
ὁ κύριος simply, especially in the formula ἐν κυρίῳ. In Phil. ὁ κυρ. nu.’ IX
is not found. In Philem., which contains nearly all the formulas, the simple
Xrés occurs only in vs, 6,

III. 8, 9] ALL LOST FOR CHRIST ΤΟΙ

τὰ mwavta: collectively. (Comp. Rom. vill. 32, xi. 36; 1 Cor.
viii. 6.) Accusative of reference. ‘I became loser in respect of
all things.’

eCnurwOnv: ‘I became loser.’ The verb means ‘to fine,’ ‘to
amerce,’ ‘to mulct,’ and is to be taken in its passive sense; not
as middle or reflexive, ‘I have made myself lose,’ which is con-
inky to same. (ace Mil xvi. 26; Lk. ix. 25.3 1 Cor. iil. 15°;
5. Orsvil Op mee + Lae eel 2; Prov.’ xix. 19, ΧΧΙ 3.) The
middle sense would ascribe ἐζημ. as an act to Paul himself, whereas
the thought is that, having been grasped and possessed by Christ,
his former possessions fell away. ‘The aorist points to the defin-
ite period of his conversion. In that great crisis all his legal
possessions were lost.

καὶ ἡγοῦμαι : continuous present. (See above.) It may be
regarded as dependent on &’ ov (Mey., Ellic., Lightf.), or as a
new point, and parallel with ἡ γοῦμ. πάν. ζημ. (Weiss). ‘The latter
seems a little simpler, ἐζημ. having its motive in &’ ov, and ἵνα
xepd. being the motive of ἡγοῦμ. σκύβ., thus contrasting the gain
with what he threw away as worthless. On the other explanation,
ἵνα kepd. adds a motive to δι᾽ ov.

oxvBora: ‘refuse.’ Only here in N.T. (Comp. LXX; Sir.
xxvii. 4.) Belonging wholly to later Gk., as Plut., Jos. The
derivation cannot be certainly shown. Suidas says κυσιβαλόν ;
2.6. τὸ τοῖς κυσὶ βαλλόμενον, ‘that which is thrown to the dogs.’

’ More probably connected with σκώρ, ‘stercus.’ (See Curtius, Gé.

Etym. i. 167 [Eng.].) It signifies either ‘excrement’ or ‘the
leavings of the table.’ A strong expression from the man who
could write Gal. i. 14. Some of the patristic interpreters were
embarrassed by this passage because the apparent disparagement
of the law was seized upon by Antinomians, and used in their
own interest. Hence they tried to modify Paul’s meaning by
referring it to the comparative value of the law. The law was a
light, but unnecessary after the sun had arisen. It was a ladder,
useful to mount by, but useless after one had mounted. On the
same line σκύβαλα was explained by the chaff, which is part of the
ripening corn, but is thrown away in the threshing. (See Chr.)

Χριστὸν κερδήσω: Appropriate Christ and make him his own,
with all of grace and glory that attaches to him. Paul’s earnest-
ness is shown in his reiteration: κέρδη, ζημίαν, ἐζημιώθην, πάντα,
Χριστόν, etc.

He proceeds to show what is involved in winning Christ.

9. καὶ εὑρεθῶ ἐν αὐτῷ : For εὑρεθῶ, see on ii. 7. Often in the
passive in the sense of ‘to be seen, discovered, or proved to be.’
(See Acts v. 36; Ronn τ τὸ : © Corsiv. 2; 2 Cor. xi. 12; Gal.
ii. 17.) Here pointing to the recognition by others of Paul’s

102 PHILIPPIANS [III. 9

union with Christ. (Comp. Ign. Zp/. xi.; Zrad/. xiii.) By some
commentators it is referred to the last day, either wholly or in
part (see Lightf.) ; but the entire line of thought refers to union
with Christ in this life. The final result appears in vs. 11. Calv.
wrongly makes εὑρεθῶ active, and explains that Paul had renounced
all that he had in order that he might find it in Christ.

ἐν αὐτῷ : See on ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (i. 1). The same idea appears
ini, 21; Gal. ἢ. 20: the state of identification with Christ’s life
as the principle of salvation; the immanence of that principle in
the human life. Comp: also Jn. xiv. 20; mv: 2°) 5, 7, ΣΝ ΠΠ 51.
22. ‘The Christian,” says Weiss, “ exercises all the functions of
his life in Christ. In him, or in fellowship with him, are rooted
trust (Phil. ni. 19, 24), joy (Phily mm.) avs το boldness
(Philem. 8), Christian refreshment (Philem. 20). In him one
speaks (Eph. iv. 17) ; executes his ministry (Col. iv. 17) ; enter-
tains another (Phil. 11. 29) ; maintains unanimity with another
(Phil. iv. 2); obeys another (Eph. -vit a). 7 in “him sone mis
strengthened, and can do all things (Eph. vi. 10; Phil. iv. 13).”
— Bib. Theol. § 101. Christ, the personified revelation of the
divine love, is the ruling principle of the human personal life, so
that this life moves in Christ as in its own peculiar element. To
be in Christ is to have the Spirit of Christ and to be one Spirit
with him (Rom. viii. 9; 1 Cor. vi. 17). See note at the end of
this chapter on Paul’s conception of righteousness by faith.

μὴ ἔχων : Expressing the mode, not the condition of being in
Christ.

ἐμὴν δικαιοσύνην : ‘a righteousness of my own.’ Not ‘my own
righteousness,’ as A.V., for no such thing exists; but a righteous-
ness which might be described as my own. ‘ My own righteous-
ness’ would be τὴν ἐμὴν δικ. (Comp. Rom. x. 3.)

τὴν ἐκ νόμου: Defining ἐμ. duck. A righteousness which could
be called ‘mine’ would be a righteousness ‘ proceeding from (ἐκ)
the law.’ He lays down a general proposition: Human righteous-
ness is legal righteousness. It is contained in the law (vs. 6), and
passes from the law to the man as the man obeys the law (Rom.
x. 5). The man’s righteousness is generated by its precepts.

διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ : ‘through faith of (in) Christ.’ Aca marks
faith as the medium of attaining righteousness. (Comp. Rom.
i. 225 Gal. i. 16; Eph. 1.8.) For ‘ faith of Christ; —*taaen
Christ,’ comp. Mk. xi..22; Rom: ili. 22; 2 ΘΟ 95 2 Gel ie,
111: 22 Ὁ Ὁ ΠῈΞ5. Mlk se 15. alate

τὴν ἐκ θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει : ‘the righteousness which
is from God resting upon faith.’ A further definition of τὴν διὰ
mio. Xp., describing its source and its basis. It proceeds from
God, and is therefore in contrast with ἐμὴν duc. The phrase 15
not synonymous with δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ (Rom. 1. 17), which signifies
righteousness which is God’s; which resides in him as his attri-

“συν

III. 9, 10] THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH 103
bute ; not, as commonly explained, righteousness which is from
God, and is bestowed by him upon man. Δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ is of
course assumed in τ. ἐκ Ge. dx. ‘The ideal and the source of right-
eousness are,in God. God is the source of the atoning work of
Christ which contemplates man’s righteousness, and Christ is ‘the
image of his substance’ (Heb. 1. 3 ; see 2 Cor. v. 21, and Sanday
on Lom. p. 162). As related to man, the righteousness of God
rests upon (ἐπὶ) faith, “re (77) faith which each man exercises
towards God in Jesus Christ. This is the only instance of the
phrase ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει in N.T. It expresses διὰ πίστεως a little more
definitely, and sets forth the only true basis of all human righteous-
ness. It is, indeed, true that righteousness rests ultimately on
God, and not on faith ; but if that is an objection, the same would
lie against δικ. ἐκ πίστ. (Rom. ix. 30, x. 6). Lightf., following Ril.
and van Heng., renders ἐπὶ ‘on condition of.’ But Paul is here
speaking rather of the essential character of this righteousness
than of the terms on which it is received by men. It belongs to
the nature of God’s righteousness as imparted to man that it rests
upon faith (Rom. iv. 5).

Lightf. refers to Acts iii, 16, though ἐπὶ there is a doubtful reading.
WH. omit, with x* B. Tisch., R.T., and Weiss retain.

Mey. supplies ἔχων, repeated after ἀλλὰ; ‘having on the ground of faith
righteousness through faith,’ which is harsh and quite unnecessary. Equally
awkward is the connection of ἐπὲ τῇ πίστει with εὑρεθῶ, as Weiss. Rather
it is to be connected with δικαιοσύνην immediately preceding. The omission

of the article before ἐπὲ τ. rior. has numerous precedents in cases where
the whole expression represents one idea.

He goes on to show in what this righteousness by faith consists.

10. τοῦ γνῶναι αὐτὸν : ‘that I may come to know him.’ Taken
up from the γνώσεως of vs. ὃ, and explaining it. Tod γνῶναι is the
infinitive of design, setting forth the end contemplated in the
righteousness of faith. For this usage see Mt. xxiv. 45; Lk. ii.
5 Δ Nevin τ. 1 Con x, 17. Gal. ii. ro; and Burt. 307;
Win. xliv. 4 6.

Lips. and ΚΙ. codrdinate τοῦ yy. with ἵνα εὑρεθῶ, as representing, not
the purpose of being found in Christ, nor the object for which Paul pos-
sesses the righteousness of faith, but the wzode in which he desires to be
found in Christ. But the dependence on what immediately precedes is
most natural. In τὸν Χτὸν kepd. and εὑρεθῶ two elements are given which
do not furnish a parallel to τοῦ γνῶναι, and Paul’s habit is to join two
parallel clauses of design with a double ἵνα. (See Rom. vii. 13; 2 Cor. ix. 3;
Gal. 111. 14.) The difference, however, is not important. Calv., Grot.,
Beng., make τοῦ yv. dependent on τῇ πίστ., describing the power and the
nature of faith. But this construction with πίστ. has no parallel in N.T.
The change of construction from ἵνα in vs. 9 to the infin. of design is not
uncommon in Paul. (See Rom. vi. 6; Col. i. 9, 10.)

For γνῶναι, see on 1. 19. Paul’s end is, indeed, εἰδέναι, the
absolute knowledge ; but he is here speaking rather of his coming

104 PHILIPPIANS Babe 10

into a knowledge of the riches of Christ in the process of his
experience. See Lightf..on Gal. iv. 9; and comp. Jn. vii. 27;
1 Cor, n.11 5:Gal. iv. 8,195 Ephisvag> τὴ ἢ το τ ΠΤ ΤΟΣ
iv. τό. It should also be noted that, in N.T. Greek, γινώσκειν
often implies a personal relation between the knower and the
known, involving the influence of the object of knowledge upon
the knower. (See: [n- ti.024,.25¢° 0 Gor. i ὃ; τ Ss) eee
Jn. the relation itself is expressed by the verb (Jn. xvii. 3, 25;
I Jn. ii. 3, 4,V. 20). Here, therefore, ‘that I may come to know,’
appropriating with the increase of knowledge.

The two following details are involved in personal knowledge
of Christ :

καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ: ‘and the power of his
resurrection.’ Καὶ is more than a simple connective. It intro-
duces a definition and fuller explanation of αὐτὸν. Δύναμιν is not
the power by which Christ was raised from the dead (Chr., Céc.),
nor, as Theoph., ‘because to arise is great power’’; nor Christ’s
power to raise up believers. Like the preceding expressions, it
describes a subjective experience. It is the power of the risen
Christ as it becomes a subject of practical knowledge and a power
in Paul’s inner life. It is thus within the same circle of thought
as Rom. vi. 4-11. (Comp. Col. i. 1 ff.) The resurrection is
viewed, not only as something which Paul hopes to experience
after death, nor as a historical experience of Christ which is a
subject of grateful and inspiring remembrance, but as a present,
continuously active force in his Christian development. The
beginning of the life of faith is a moral resurrection, a rising with
Christ (Rom. vi. 5; Col. iil. 1), inaugurating ‘newness of life’
(Rom. vi. 4),—life in the Spirit (Rom. vii. 6), a life essentially
identical with the ζωὴ αἰώνιος and ἐπουράνιος of the glorified Jesus.
Comp. Eph. i. 19, 20, 1]. 5, 6 ; and see the very suggestive remarks
of Pfleiderer, Pawlinismus, ch. v. ‘The rising with Christ is put,
not as an object of hope, but as belonging to the present, from
the moment when ‘the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the
dead’ (Rom. vili. 11) takes up its abode in believers ; so that the
rising with Christ is so far a fact as that for them a new life is
opened (2 Cor. v. 15; Gal. ii. 19). Thus, equipped with the
death-overcoming, spiritual life-power of Christ, they enter upon
a condition in which they are enabled to overcome the power of
sin in their members, so that sin shall not have dominion over
them (Rom. vi. 13,14; Col. i. 5).” —A7oppe7.) hus. the
knowledge of the power of Christ’s resurrection appears as an
element of the righteousness of faith. ‘This explains Paul’s phrase
‘justification of χε’ (Rom. v. 18). This knowledge includes the
assurance of immortality.

sii

111. 10] FELLOWSHIP WITH CHRIST’S SUFFERINGS 105

καὶ κοινωνίαν παθημάτων αὐτοῦ: ‘and the fellowship of his
sufferings.’

DFGKLP τὴν before κοιν.

Comes Cor: 15,17) 10,00, Gal. vi,.17 ; (01:1. 22} 1 Pet.iv.
13. A participation in the sufferings which Christ endured in his
mortal life. (Comp. Heb. xii. 2, 3.) Such participation is involved
in the knowledge of Christ. It is not merely ethical. It does not
refer, except by implication, to the victorious power of suffering.
Nor is a mere likeness to the sufferings of Christ intended. Like
the knowledge of the power of the resurrection, the fellowship of
the sufferings is involved in the mystical union with Christ, and is
treated by Paul as a verification of this “at its hardest and most
decisive point”? (Weiss). Being in Christ involves fellowship with
Christ at all points, —his obedient life, his spirit, his sufferings,
his death, and his glory. The order of arrangement here is the
true one. ‘The fellowship of the sufferings follows the experience
of the power of the resurrection. For the power of the resurrec-
tion appears in justification of life ; and the new life in and with
Christ puts its subject where Christ was, — in that attitude towards
the world which engenders contradiction, reproach, and persecu-
tion. As Mey. truthfully observes: “The enthusiastic feeling of
drinking the cup of Christ is not possible unless a man bears in
his heart the mighty assurance of resurrection through the Lord.”
One who is not under the power of the resurrection will not share
Christ’s sufferings, because his moral attitude will not be such as
to call out the assaults of the world. (Comp. Jn. vil. 7.) How
this desire was fulfilied in Paul appears in the Acts, and in allusions
im his letters. (See 1 Cor. iv. 10-13, xv- 31 ;. 2 Cor. iv. 8-12;
Gal. vi. 17.) Christ had said of him, ‘I will show him how great
things he must suffer for my name’s sake’ (Acts ix. 16). ;

συμμορφιζόμενος TO θανάτῳ αὐτοῦ : ‘becoming conformed unto
his death.’

xe DOEKL συμμορφουμενος.
FG συνφορτειζομενος, ‘being burdened together.’

The conception of fellowship with Christ’s sufferings is further

_unfolded to its last point—even unto death. (Comp. ii. 8.)

Συμμορφίζεσθαι not elsewhere in Bib. The adj. σύμμορφος occurs
iii. 21; Rom. vill. 29. The participle is in apposition with the
subject of τοῦ γνῶναι. (Comp. Eph. iv. 2; Col. i. 10.) Not
middle, ‘conforming myself to,’ but passive. ‘The conformity is
not ethical, as Rom. vi. 3-11, but is a conformity with the suffer-
ings of Christ’s earthly life, even unto death. It does not necessa-
rily indicate, as Mey., a distinct contemplation of Paul’s martyrdom.
(Comp. i. 25, 26, il. 23, 24.) The thought is rather that of 1 Cor.
xv. 31; 2 Cor. iv. 10. (Comp. Rom. viii. 17.) The suffering of
Ρ

106 PHILIPPIANS [III. 10, 11

this present time works together with all things for the good of
those who love God (Rom. vii. 28) ; and such God ordained to
be ‘ conformed [συμμόρφους | to the image of his Son’ (Rom. viii.
29). ‘The participle indicates the process of development.

11. εἴ πως καταντήσω εἰς THY ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν : ‘if Ρο5-
sibly I may attain unto the resurrection from the dead.’ The words
connect themselves most naturally with συμμορφ. τῷ θαν. αὐ., ac-
cording to Paul’s habitual association of resurrection with death.
Resurrection, physical or ethical, is attained only through death.

Lips., without assigning any reason, and Kl. for reasons which seem
fanciful, connect with γνῶναι.

For εἴ πως see Acts xxvii. 12; Rom.i. 10, xi.14. Much unnec-
essary difficulty has been made over the apparent uncertainty
expressed in these words, and the fancied inconsistency with the
certainty elsewhere expressed by Paul, as Rom. viii. 38, 39, v. 17,
18, 215 2 Cor, v. εἴ, Phil. 1.22, 22. ΠΕ velsewhereminocomuac
necessity of caution against a possible lapse from faith (11. 12 ;
τ Cor. x. 12; Gal. lil. 3, v. 4), and he takes the same caution to
himself (1 Cor. ix. 27). His words here are an expression of
humility and self-distrust, not of doubt. Weiss remarks that while,
on the human side, the attainment of the goal may be regarded
as doubtful, or at least conditioned upon humble self-estimate, on
the side of the working of divine grace it appears certain.

καταντᾷάν : Only in Paul and Acts. In Paul, of persons, 1 Cor.
x. 11, xiv. 36; of ethical relations, Eph. iv. 13. In Acts always
of places, except xxvi. ἢ

καταντήσω is aor. subj., as καταλάβω (vs. 12). Εἰ with the subj. is rare
in good class. prose, but occurs in LXX, and is common in later Greek.
(See Burt. 253, 276.)

‘ > ’ a 5 Lal
τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν :
KL, Arm., Cop., read ἐξαν. των νεκρων. So TR.

*E£avdoracts occurs only here in Bib. The verb ἐξανιστάναι is
found Mk. xii.9; Lk. xx. 28; Acts xv. 5, but in neither of the
passages of the rising of the dead. Why the compound word was
selected instead of the simple ἀνάστασις, we cannot explain. Pos-
sibly, as Mey., in order to give greater vividness to the image ;
but this is far from satisfactory. Beng.’s explanation, that it is
intended to mark the resurrection of believers as distinguished
from that of Christ, is arbitrary and fanciful. ᾿Ανάστ. or ἐξανάστ.
ἐκ is found only three’ times in .N.T. (Lk ax: 355 8Acis vee,
ret. ἘΠ 9)

Lightf. says: “The general resurrection of the dead, whether good or
bad, is ἡ ἀνάστ. τῶν vex. (4.5. 1 Cor. xv. 42); on the other hand, the resur-
rection of Christ and of those who rise with Christ is generally [7] ἀνάστ.

TIL. 11, 15] NOT YET PERFECTED 107

[7] ἐκ vex.” This can hardly be borne out. See Rom. i. 4, ἀνάστ. vex., of
Christ, —so Acts xxvi. 23; 1 Cor. xv. 42, 43, ἀνάστ. τ. vex., of a resurrection
which is in incorruption, glory, and power; Acts xvii. 31, ἐκ vex., of Christ;
VS. 32, dvdor. vex, It is true that in every case where ἐκ occurs the reference
is to the resurrection of the just, but three instances are not enough to build
such a distinction upon.

The reference here is clearly to the resurrection of believers.
The question of the resurrection of the wicked is irrelevant ; and
the idea of a reference to a spiritual resurrection while still in the
body is entirely without support.

12. οὐχ ὅτι: See on iv. 11. Supply λέγω, ‘I say not that.’
(comp. nvieae, 2 Cort, 240.5 2 Phil. 10. 172. 2° Thess. 111. 0.)

non ἔλαβον : Ἔδη ‘now,’ marks the point of time at which all the
past experience has arrived. “EAafov covers Paul’s entire past up
to the time of writing. Its object is not expressed, but is all that
is included in vs. 8-11.

Lightf. is wrong in insisting that the aorist points to a definite past
epoch, and translating ‘Not as though by my conversion I did at once
attain.’ The aorist is frequently used to express duration extending to the
present. See Ellic. on 1 Thess. ii. 16, and comp. Lk. xiv. 18; Rom. iii. 2;
Gal. v. 24; Eph. iii. 5; 1 Thess. ii.16. See also Beet, Zxposzzor, Ist ser.

i. Ps 375» 6.

The Pete of objects suggested for ἔλαβον is bewildering. A favorite
one is βραβεῖον from vs. 14. So Chr., Céc., Theoph., Beng., Ellic., Mey.,
Ead., Beet, Ril. Meyer says that βραβεῖον is the bliss of Messiah’s king-
dom, and that ἔλαβον is to be explained of his having attained in ideal
anticipation(!); Beet, “the full blessedness of the kingdom of Christ for
which he must wait till the resurrection from the dead.” But who could
possibly have imagined that he #ad attained this? There is no reason for
anticipating βραβεῖον.

non τετελείωμαι : ‘am already made perfect.’

DFG add 7 767 δεδικαιωμαι.

Τετελ. explains ἔλαβον more definitely, or puts literally what ἐλ.
had put figuratively. ”EX. regards the whole past as a completed
act; rer. the whole past gathered up in its relation to the pres-
ent. The perfection referred to is moral and spiritual perfection.
(Comp. Eph. iii. 17-19, 1 iv. 13-16; Col. i. 28; and Ign. ZPz2. iii.
Οὐ διατάσσομαι ὑ ὑμῖν, ὡς ov τι" εἰ ne Kal AIRE εν τῷ ὀνόματι, οὔπω
ἀπήρτισμαι ἐν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ : ‘I do not command you as though
I were somewhat, for even though I am in bonds for the Name’s
sake, I am not yet perfected in Jesus Christ.’ Comp. “λα. v.)
The verb is used by Paul only here, but is common in Heb.

διώκω δὲ : ‘but I pursue,’ or as A.V., ‘ follow after’ ; better than
R.V., ‘press on.’ The eagerness of Paul to attain his ideal is
emulated by that of some of the commentators to bring βραβεῖον
up into this verse. There is no need of supplying it with διώκω,
nor need διώκω be taken absolutely. Its object lies in ἐφ᾽ @ καὶ

108 PHILIPPIANS [ III. 12

κατελήμφθην, etc., and is the same as that of ἔλαβον. ‘The pursuit
is no groping after something undefined, nor is it prosecuted with
any feeling of doubt as to the attainment of its end. Though he
had zealously pursued the ‘law of righteousness’ (Rom. ix. 31)
as a son of Israel, he was now pursuing the righteousness of faith
with even greater zeal, under a mightier impulse, and with a
clearer view of his goal. It is doubtful whether the metaphor of
the race comes in here (as Ellic., Mey., Alf., Ead.) : κατελήμφθην
does not suit it. Διώκειν is often used by Paul, without that refer-
ence, for striving after the blessings and virtues of the Christian
life:’ (See Rom. 1x. 30, 37, x0. 13) xiv. 19,01 (ΘΟ ἘΝ ΠΝ ΠΕ:
v.15.) Instead of the idea of the race giving color to διώκω, it
is quite as likely that διώκω suggested the metaphor in vs. 14.
For διώκειν with καταλαμβάνειν, see Rom. ix. 30; LXX; Sir. x1.
EO, ΧΧΥΙΙ. ὃ.

εἰ καὶ καταλάβω ἐφ᾽ ᾧ καὶ κατελήμφθην : ‘if I may also grasp that
for which I was grasped.’

Tisch. omits καὶ before καταλάβω with x* DFG, Syr., Cop., Arm., Goth.,
f8th. καὶ is found in xe ABDKLP, Syr.P. So WH., R.T., Weiss.

kal: ‘if I may not only pursue but a@éZso attain.’ For εἰ καὶ,
see on li. 17. For the progression from διώκειν to καταλαμβάνειν,
comp. Rom. ix. 30. From λαμβάνειν to καταλαμ., and from τρέ-
xere to καταλαμ., 1 Cor. ix. 24. Καταλαβεῖν is ‘to overtake and
seize.” | (See τ τ χη 35 Rom: ix) 205) ΤΟΝ ax 5)

ἐφ᾽ ᾧ καὶ κατελήμφθην : The divine grace in Paul’s conversion
is the moving power of his Christian development. The fulfil-
ment of the ideal contemplated by Christ when he transformed
him from a persecutor to an apostle is the goal which invites him.
He desires to grasp that for which he was grasped by Christ.
The aorist marks the time of his conversion, which was literally a
seizure. Not, however, as Chr. and Thdrt., that Paul is conceived
as running to destruction and pursued and seized by Christ.

To view his conversion as a seizure is not to deny the work of previous
influences upon his mind preparing the way for the crisis of the journey to
Damascus. (See Pfleiderer, Paulinismus, Hinl.; Bruce, St. Paul’s Con-
ception of Christiantty, ch.ii.; Matheson, Spi itual Dew velopment of St. Paul,
ch. ii., ili., —see especially pp. 46, 47.)

Ed’ ᾧ is relative to a suppressed antecedent, ἐκεῖνο, as Lk. v. 25,

‘ that for which I was grasped.’
Weiss refers the relative to καταλάβω simply, and renders ‘ wherefore.’
So Lightf. Others, as Chr., Thdrt., Mey., Lips., make ἐφ᾽ 6 = ἐπὶ τουτῷ

ὅτι, and render ‘because,’ taking KUEN e absolutely. Calv.. .» §quemad-
modum, just as.’

Kai refers to ἐφ᾽ ᾧ, adding the purpose of his being grasped to
the assertion of his effort to grasp: ‘which I not only strive to
grasp, but for which aéso I was grasped.’

EE EE eee

III. 13] FORGETTING WHAT IS BEHIND 109

The next two verses substantially repeat the assertions of
vs. 12—the disavowal of satisfaction with his attainment, and
the declaration of his strenuous pursuit of his spiritual ideal.

13. ἐγὼ ἐμαυτὸν οὔπω λογίζομαι κατειληφέναι : ‘I count not
myself yet to have grasped.’

οὕπω, WH. [], Tisch., R.T., with s ADP, 17, 31, 47, 80, Cop., Syr.?, AEth. ;
BDFGKL, Vulg., Goth., Arm., read ov.

Both ἐγὼ and ἐμαυτὸν are emphatic, expressing strongly his own
estimate of himself. (Comp. Lk. vii. 7; Jn. vill. 54; 1 Cor. iv. 3.)
It is quite superfluous to introduce an implied comparison with
the judgment of others, either of those who think too highly of
him, or of those who think too highly of themselves. Such an
estimate, in itself, is in strong contrast with self-righteousness and
religious conceit. :

λογίζομαι : “1 count’ or ‘reckon,’ very often in Paul, and almost
confined to his epistles. Only four times elsewhere in N.T. The
idea of a process of reasoning always underlies it.

ἕν δέ: Supply ποιῶ, not λογίζομαι, as Mey., for ev refers to what
follows, which is a matter of doing, not of reckoning.

Others supply φροντίζω, μεριμνῶ, διώκω, οἶδα, λέγω. Such ellipses of
the verb are common in Paul; ey. ii. 3,5; Rom. iv. 9, v. 18; Gal. iii. 5;
2 Cor. vi. 13. (See Win. Ixvi. 1 0.)

τὰ μὲν ὀπίσω : ‘the things which are behind.’ The portion of
his Christian course already traversed. Not his experience as a
persecutor of the church. With τὰ ὀπίσω, comp. τοῦ νῦν (i. 5);
τὰ κατ᾽ ἐμὲ (1. 12); τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν (1. 27, ll. 19, 20); τὰ περὶ ἐμέ
(ii. 22). ᾿Οπίσω only here by Paul.

The metaphor of the race now first enters.

ἐπιλανθανόμενος : ‘forgetting.’ The word nowhere else in Paul ;
sparingly in Synop., Heb., and Jas.; often in LXX. No special
emphasis attaches to the compound. In class. it occurs some-

times, but rarely, in the sense of ‘forgetting zz/fud/y’ (Hdt. in.

147, lv. 43). But so also does the simple verb (Hom. //. 1x. 537 ;
Esch. Ag. 39). Not to be understood as if Paul were ashamed
of what lay behind him in his Christian career, or as if he did not
emphasise it as exhibiting the grace of God. (See 1 Cor. iv. 11—
16, xv. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 23-xii. 6.) Rather that he does not use
the memory of what God has wrought in him and through him to
encourage self-satisfaction and relaxation of effort. He is stimu-
lated by the past to renewed energy in Christian self-development
and in the building-up of Christ’s church. (See 1 Cor. ix. 19-27.)

IIO PHILIPPIANS [III. 13, 14

τοῖς δὲ ἔμπροσθεν : ‘The higher attainments in the Christian life.
Only here.

ἐπεκτεινόμενος : ‘stretching forward.’ A graphic word from the
arena. ‘The body of the racer is bent forward, his hand is out-
stretched towards the goal, and his eye is fastened uponit. ‘The
eye outstrips and draws onward the hand, and the hand the foot”
(Beng.). The metaphor is from the foot-race, not from the
chariot-race. Lightf. observes that of looking back would be
fatal to the charioteer. The word has passed into sporting lan-
guage — ‘the home-stretch.’ *Ezex., nowhere else in Bib. ᾿Ἐκτεί
νειν, Often in Synop. with χείρ. (Comp. ἐκτένεια, Acts xxvi. 7;
ἐκτενής, I Pet. iv. 8; ἐκτενῶς, Acts xii. 5 ; 1 Pet. i. 22.)

14. κατὰ σκοπὸν διώκω : ‘I press on towards the mark.’

κατὰ : Bearing down upon. Skomov, only here in N.T. That
on which one fixes his ook. (Comp. σκοποῦντες, ii. 4.) In class.
a mark for shooting at; also a moral or intellectual end (Plat.
Gorg.507 Ὁ; Piules. GOA). In LXX; Job κυ τὸ; Lam diene,
of an archer’s mark. It is not used in a technical sense of an
appliance of the race course, as R.V. ‘ goal.’

διώκω : “ εὐφαντικώτατα δὲ τὸ διώκειν εἶπεν. Ὃ yap διώκων οὐδὲν
ἄλλο ὁρᾷ ἡ πρὸς ὃ σπεύδει, πάντα δὲ παρέρχεται, καὶ τὰ φίλτατα καὶ
τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα." ““Μοβῖί appropriately did he say διώκειν ; for he
who pursues sees nothing but that towards which he is hastening,
and passes by all things, the dearest and the most necessary”
(Theoph.). ‘

eis τὸ βραβεῖον : Bpaf., only here and 1 Cor. ix. 24. The kin-
dred verbs, βραβεύειν, ‘to be umpire,’ and καταβραβεύειν, ‘to be
umpire against,’ ‘to defraud of a prize,’ are peculiar to the Colos-
sian letter. (See ill. 15, ii. 18.) paf. is not used technically of
the prize in the games, the technical word being a@Aov. Here the
heavenly reward; the ‘crown of righteousness’ (1 Cor. ix. 24-
27; 2 Tim. iv. ὃ; Apoc. 1; 10); a shareaim the) len or the
exalted Christ (Rom. vii. τὴ; 2 -Tim-ou. Τῷ, a@m)p 1 Camp:
π Chess; isa 2 5a aim: aviet 2.)

τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: ‘of the upward
calling of God in Christ Jesus.’

The expression 7 ἄνω κλῆσις is unique. The only analogous
phrase in N.T. to βραβ. τ. ἄνω κλ. 15 ἐλπὶς τῆς κλήσεως (Eph. i.
18, iv. 4). The genitive of κλ. is the genitive of belonging. The
prize is attached to the calling and involved in it.

Lips.and De W. make the genitive appositional: ‘the prize which is the
high calling.’ This would identify the calling with the heavenly reward, and
would leave βραβ. without definition.

”Avw means both ‘ above,’ local, as Gal. iv. 26, and ‘ upwards,’ as
Jn. xi. 41; Heb, xii. 15. Here the datter. “(Compimthe sinking

III. 14] THE HEAVENWARD CALLING HAW

parall. in Philo, De Plant. Noe. § 6. The whole passage is full of
movement, onward and upward. (Comp. Col. ill. 2.)

Most comms., however, make ἄνω = ἐπουράνιος, describing the guality
of the calling as heavenly. (Comp. Heb. 111. 1.) Mey. and Weiss say,
‘because it issues from God in heaven.’ Why not then ἄνωθεν ὃ

κλήσεως : The act of calling. Not that to which he is called
(De W., Lips.). The word does not lose its active sense in N.T.
It may include the original call of God to Paul, but it is not to be
limited to that. God is continually summoning men upward in
various ways. Nor does the expression suggest God as the judge
of the contest, summoning the runners to the race (so some earlier
comms. as Wolf, Rosenm., am E., Hoel., van Heng.). ‘The geni-
tive is that of the subject, that which offers the prize. God, in
calling men upward, calls them to a heavenly reward. ‘The prize
is the object of ‘the hope of the calling’ (Eph. i. 18).

τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ : Connect with κλήσεως. The calling
is ‘of God,’ because God is its author, and ‘in Christ Jesus’ as
the sphere or element in which it is issued and prosecuted. For
te, expression “ called®in, @hrist Jesus; comp. 1 ‘Cor. vil. 22;
τ οι Vi TO:

Mey. and Weiss connect with διώκω; but the position is against this.

15-21. Let us, therefore, who, by our profession, are committed
to this high Christian tdeal of perfection, cherish this spirit of
humble dissatisfaction with past attainments and of earnest striv-
ing after all that is involved in our heavenward calling. And tf,
in any particular, your ideal of the possibilities of Christan attain-
ment and of your proper attitude towards these differs from that
which I have held up to you, God will correct this by future revela-
tions; but only on the condition that you act up to the ideal which
you already have, and follow the rule which it imposes. Brethren,
unite in imitating me, and carefully observe those whose conduct
resembles mine. For there are many, of whom I have told you

often, and now tell you, even weeping, that their conduct marks

them as the enemies of the cross of Christ. The end of such ts
destruction. Their god ts their belly. Their minds are set upon
earthly things. They glory in that which is their shame. Je, on
the other hand, are citizens of a commonwealth which is in heaven,
whence we await the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ as
Saviour; and when he shall appear, he will, by that power which
enables him to subject all things to himself, refashion this body

112 PHILIPPIANS [III. 15

which belongs to our mortal state of humiliation, and fashion it
after the likeness of that body which belongs to him in his heavenly
glory. :

The exhortation of vs. 15, 16 shows the effect of the strong
emotion which pervades the preceding passage. The general
sense is clear, and becomes embarrassing only when the attempt
is made to adjust all its parts and their connection according to
rigid rhetorical rules. ‘The apostle has just held up his own lofty
ideal of Christian character. He has disclaimed the having at-*
tained it, because its transcendent greatness will not allow him to
be satisfied with past attainments, and only stimulates him to more
strenuous effort. In this attitude of humility and aspiring exer-
tion, he exhorts his readers to imitate him. At the same time, he
recognises the possibility that their ideal of Christian perfection
may differ from his own in some particulars, and be lower than
his own, in which case God will correct the defect by future reve-
lations. But the condition of such revelations is, that they practi-
cally carry out their own ideals, such as they are, and live strictly
according to the rule of conduct which they impose.

15. ὅσοι οὖν τέλειοι, τοῦτο φρονῶμεν : ‘ Let as many of us there-
fore as’ are perfect be thus minded.’ Paul here includes himself
among the τέλειοι, although in vs. 12 he has said οὐχ ἤδη τετελεί--
wpa. Evidently the two expressions are not used in the same
sense. In vs. 12 he is speaking of absolute perfection, such as
would relieve him of the necessity of further striving. In τέλειοι
he is speaking of relative perfection. (Comp. Mt. v. 48.) Τέλειος
has two senses in the N.T.: 1. ‘ full-grown,’ ‘ mature,’ in contrast
with childish ignorance and weakness, as 1 Cor. il. 6, xiv. 20;
Heb. v. τὰ. 2. Absolutely,-as Mt. v. 248; Jas 1 ἢ ὑπ en,
in this absolute usage, there is a distinction which is illustrated in
Mt. v. 48. As used there of the absolute perfection of God, it
cannot be used of the perfection which is enjoined by Jesus upon
men. ‘That perfection is relative. Similarly here, the ideal con-
dition is ascribed to those who are, by their profession, committed
to it as their own ideal, just as ἅγιοι is used of those who are,
though not absolutely holy, yet consecrated to the holy God. As
Rilliet remarks, “The word meaning what ought to be is taken by
concession to mean what is, evidently with the intention of attach-
ing the reality to the ideal, and of recalling to believers the obli-
gations involved in the title.’ Τέλειοι here is, therefore, a general
designation of the Christian condition in all its aspects, not, as

TIT. 15] DO NOT CEASE TO STRIVE 113

Lips., with reference only to Christian knowledge. It is the same,
practically, as πνευματικοί (1 Cor. iii. 1; Gal. vi. 1). It does not
imply any special contrast, as with weaker brethren, Judaisers,
indifferentists, etc., nor is there any reason for attributing to it an
ironical sense, as Lightf., who compares 1 Cor. vill. 1.

Alf., Mey., Lightf., Ead., Beet, explain τέλειοι as ‘ mature,’ ‘advanced in
Christian experience.’

τοῦτο φρονῶμεν : For dpov., see on i. 7. A more delicate quality
is given to the exhortation by Paul’s associating himself with his
readers. (Comp. Rom. v. 1.)

The zmmediate reference of τοῦτο is to vs. 13, 14. Let us
beware of thinking that our attainment is such as to make further
striving unnecessary. ‘Let us rather cherish that humble self-
estimate which shall stimulate us to press toward the mark for
the prize of our heavenward calling.’ Nevertheless we cannot
entirely separate these two verses from the whole representation
of the Christian ideal from vs. 7. ‘To have such an estimate of
the greatness of the future as to forget the past, to have such a
sense of the magnitude of the prize as to be constantly dissatisfied
with former attainments and to be ever pressing on to something
higher, to have such an ideal of Christ as to make one constantly
feel his own littleness and insufficiency, — implies knowing Christ,
being found in Christ, the casting aside of human righteousness,
and such knowledge of the eternal possibilities of life in Christ as
can be obtained only through mystical union with him.

καὶ εἴ τι ἑτέρως φρονεῖτε: Ei with the indicative implies a case
which is quite supposable. “Erépws, only here in N.T. ‘ Other-
wise’ than what? The point of comparison must not be too
rigidly fixed at any detail of the context, such as the humble self-
estimate and the earnest striving, or the great fundamental ele-
ments of Christian life, such as having the righteousness of faith,
or being found in Christ; for ἑτέρως would express too feebly
differences on points so vital, and Paul would have met such with
something more than the promise of further revelations. ‘The
reference is loose, and concerns minor points in the character-
istics of the τέλειοι generally considered. It was entirely possible
that many of his readers, although having a genuine faith in Christ,
and fully accepting the doctrine of justification by faith, might
not have apprehended his profound views of mystical union, or
have had the same clear ideas as himself concerning certain prac-
tical applications of doctrine ; even that they might not have felt
the impulse to higher spiritual attainment in its full stringency,
and might have been inclined to regard his conduct and senti-
ments in certain particulars as exaggerated. Such facts are famil-
iar to every Christian pastor. In the first Corinthian letter Paul
insists on the unity of the body of Christ and the sin and danger

ΠῚ PHILIPPIANS [III. 15, 16

of breaking it. Yet there were those in that church, many of
them, no doubt, sincere and earnest believers, who did not grasp
the application of this truth to the question of eating idol-meats.
The force of φρονεῖτε should be carefully noted. It has been
shown (ch. i. 7) that φρονεῖν signifies the general disposition of
mind rather than the specific act of thought; and its use here
shows that the apostle is not dealing specially, if at all, with differ-
ences of opinion, but rather with dispositions which underlie the
spiritual life. The differences concern form, point of emphasis,
extent of application, rather than substance or subject-matter.

Lightf. explains, ‘if progress be your rule, though you are a¢ fault on
any subject, God will reveal this also to you’; translating ἑτέρως ‘amiss.’
So Ril. and Lum. There is classical precedent for this meaning, but it is
entirely unknown in N.T.

kat τοῦτο: ‘this also’; in addition to what God has already
revealed. Τοῦτο refers to τι ; ‘this,’ whatever it be, in which you
may be otherwise minded. Not, ‘shall reveal that you are wrong,
and that I am right’ (Céc., Calv., Grot.), nor ‘shall show whether
you are right or I’ (Ew.), nor identical with the preceding τοῦτο
(Beng.).

ἀποκαλύψει : ᾿Αποκαλύπτειν is to wnveil something that is hidden,
thus giving light and knowledge. (See Gal. i. 16, ili. 23; Eph.
ill. 5.) Hence, of God’s giving to his servants insight into divine
truth (Mt. xi. 25,27, %Vl. 1753/1 Cor. ii. τὸ σιν. Ὁ... ΞΕ Mest
cott, /utrod. to the Study of the Gospels, p. 9 ; Trench, Syz. xciv.).
Paul here means a revelation by the indwelling Spirit of God
(comp. 1 Cor. ii. 10-16), either directly or through apostolic
teaching, experience, or other means.

16. πλὴν : ‘nevertheless’; ‘notwithstanding.’ (Comp. i. 18.)
Though there may be things concerning which you need further
revelation, ‘nevertheless,’ the condition of your receiving this is
your walking according to your present attainment of light and
knowledge.

eis ὃ: ‘whereunto’; to whatever divinely revealed knowledge.
Thus ὃ carries on the thought of ἀποκαλύψει. You need further
revelation, nevertheless, walk according to such revelation as you
have received. Notice the καὶ before τοῦτο (vs. 15), implying
previous revelation.

ἐφθάσαμεν : ‘we have attained.’ The verb means, primarily,
‘to come before,’ “to ‘anticipate,’ as x Thess. jv; a5. sm ie τ
mostly loses the sense of anticipation, and signifies simply ‘to
come’ or ‘arrive at,’ though occasionally with a sense of sudden-
ness or surprise, as Mt. xii. 28; 1 Thess. 11. 16.

τῷ αὐτῷ στοιχεῖν : ‘by that same walk.’ That same knowledge
already revealed. For the dative of the norm or standard, see
Acts xv. 15 (Gal. v. 16, 25, vi. τὸ ἢ xxx ey

III. 16, 17] IMITATE HOLY EXAMPLES 11

Στοιχεῖν from στοίχος, ‘arow.’ Hence ‘to walk zz Zine.’ (Comp.
Acts xxi. 24; Gal. vi. 16.) ‘To march in battle-order’ (Xen.
Cyr. vi. 3, 34). Comp. συνστοιχεῖ (Gal. iv. 25), ‘answereth to ;’
2.6. belongs to the same row or column with. Hence the letters
of the alphabet were called στοιχεία, and also the elements or
ΠΟΤΕ ΟΝ a system. . (see Gal. iv. 3, Ὁ; Col. ii. 8; 2 Pet. iii, το.)

The infin. here for the imperat., as Rom. ΧΙ]. 15.

TR. after στοίχειν adds kavove To αὐτο Ppovey with Νὸ KLP, Syr."; this
was inserted from Gal. vi. 16; DEFG, 31, 37, 80, It., Vulg., Goth., Arm., read
το αὐτο ppovey τω avTw στοιχειν; DE, Vulg., Goth., Arm., add κανονι.

Alf., Mey., Dw., refer εἰς ὃ to the grade of moral and spiritual progress
already attained. But this involves an awkwardness in the correlation of
eis ὃ and τῷ αὐτῷ. ‘Eis ὃ in that case would imply a common point of
attainment which it is impossible to determine, and which does not agree
with ἑτέρως φρονεῖτε. Lightf. explains τῷ αὐτῷ as the rule of faith opposed
to works, and thinks that the words were added as a parting caution against
‘the dogs,’ ‘the concision,’ etc. He renders, ‘let us walk by the same rule
whereunto we attained.’ But the rule is not the point of attainment, but
only the way to it. KI. explains ἐφ᾽ ὃ of a potential attainment in the
possession of the law of righteousness which Israel had not attained in its
pursuit (Rom. ix. 30). This norm, in virtue of which they are new creatures,
is the rule by which they are to walk. ‘This seems forced.

17. Στοιχεῖν marks an advance of thought, from the principle
and spirit of Christian life (fpov@pev) to its practice (περιπατεῖν).
The following clause is awkwardly constructed, and lends itself to
different interpretations.

Συνμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, etc.: Render, ‘ Brethren, be ye unitedly
imitators of me, and carefully observe those who walk as ye have
us for an example.’ The exhortation consists of two parts:
τ. Unite in imitating me. 2. Observe those whose conduct
resembles mine. Thus οὕτω and καθὼς are correlative, ‘who
walk so, as ye have,’ etc. “The awkwardness is in éyere where
we should expect ἔχουσι: ‘observe those who walk as “ey have
us,’ etc. The phrase, however, is compressed, and means ‘ walk
as you do who have me for an example.’

ἡμᾶς : Paul and his associates, as Timothy, Epaphroditus, and
others known to the Philippians. Paul, in speaking of himself,
occasionally uses the plural for the singular, as in 2 Cor. 1. 23, 24,
xl. 21; but the instances are not as numerous as is sometimes
supposed. (See Lightf. on 1 Thess. ii. 4.)

Mey., Weiss, Ellic., render ‘ Be imitators wzth others (σὺν) who imitate
me (viz. those described in the next clause), and mark those who walk z7
this way (οὕτω absol. and not correl. with καθὼς) : zzasmuch as (καθὼς) ye
have ws (2.6. both myself and those who thus walk) as an example.’ This
relieves the awkwardness of ἔχετε, but: 1. It lays unnecessary emphasis
on Paul’s calling attention to his own example. 2. It shifts σὺν from its
emphatic position in an independent clause to the next clause, from which
it is separated by καὶ and another verb. 3. It makes οὕτω περιπ. refer to

116 PHILIPPIANS [Ea 27,26

συνμίμ. γίν., in which, indeed, it may be implied; but by the other con-
struction it is directly and naturally related to what follows by περιπ. of
vs. 18.

συνμιμηταί μου : Σὺν signifies the union of the subjects of γίνεσθε :
‘be μητέραν imitators of me.’ Notas Beng., ‘be imitators along
with me in imitating Christ.’ ‘There is no reference to Christ in
the context. Συνμιμ. only here in Bib. No self-conceit is implied
in μοῦ. (Comp, τ Corciv. 16, Στ ΤΟ Thess) 136. Σ nessa
7» 9.)

σκοπεῖτε: See on ii. 4, and comp. Rom. xvi. 17; 2 Cor. iv. 18.

τοὺς περιπατοῦντας : Paul often uses περιπατεῖν to describe con-
duct. (See Rom. vi. 4, viti. 1; 1 Cor. ii. 3; Gal. vy. 16; Eph-ii.2:)
Never in the literal sense. In the Synop., on the other hand, it
never occurs in the metaphorical sense, and but once in Acts
(xxi. 21). The metaphorical sense appears in John, especially in
the ‘Epistles. (See Jn. Cv.) vill. 12) x0 45609 Jno 1G) Ge,
ΤΠ Εἰ.

τύπον : Frequent in Paul; as Rom. v. 14, vi. 17; 1 Cor. x. 6,
11; 1 Thess.i. 7. Originally ‘the impression left by a stroke’
(τύπτειν). (See Jn. xx. 25.) Generally, ‘image,’ ‘form,’ always
with a statement of the object which it represents. Hence ‘ pat-
tern,’ ‘example.’ ι

The exhortation is enforced by the contrast presented by those
who follow a different example.

18. πολλοὶ : Precisely who are meant cannot be determined.
According to most of the earlier expositors, the Judaisers de-
scribed in vs. 2. So Lips. Some later authorities, as Weiss and
Ril., the heathen. The majority of modern comms., antinomian
Libertines of Epicurean tendencies: nominal Christians of im-
moral life. So Lightf., Mey., ΚΙ., De W., Ellic., Alf., Beet.

Weiss (Am. Journ. of Theol. April, 1897, p. 391) is very severe upon
this explanation. He reasons that it is impossible to conceive of such
nominal Christians in the beloved Philippian church, and identifies the
πολλοὶ with the κύνες of vs. 2, who, according to him, are the heathen. He
cites Apoc. xxii. 15 for κύνες, and in his latest commentary, 2 Pet. 11, 22.
But the latter passage is distinctly of apostate Christians.

περιπατοῦσιν : ‘conduct themselves’ ; ‘ behave,’ as vs. 17. It is
unnecessary to supply a qualifying word, as κακῶς,

πολλάκις ἔλεγον : When he was at Philippi, or possibly in former
letters. (See on VS. 1.)

νῦν : Contrasted with πολλ. ἐλ.

κλαίων : This deep emotion would more probably be excited by
recreant Christians than by heathen whose sensuality and worldli-
ness were familiar to the Apostle. He would be most sorrowfully

III. 18, 19] ENEMIES OF THE CROSS OF CHRIST ΤΠ

affected by the reproach and injury to the church wrought by
professing Christians, and by their own unhappy and _ perilous
condition.

τοὺς ἐχθροὺς : In apposition with the preceding relative ots. (See
Win. lix. 7.) The article marks the class which they represent.

Tov σταυροῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ: Comp. Gal. vi. 12. Σταυρὸς is the
usual N.T. word for Christ’s cross. In Acts v. 30, x. 39, both
quotations, ξύλον occurs ; also int Pet. 11. 24. Paul uses ξύλον in
quotation, Gal. iii. 13, and in his speech at Pisidian Antioch as
reported in Acts xiii. 29. (Comp. Ign. Smyz.i.; Zrad/. xi.) Differ-
ent surmises (for they are little more) have been offered as to the
particular point at which Paul conceives this enmity to be directed,
such as the preaching of the law against the cross (Theo. Mop.,
Thdrt.) ; the hatred of the cross through fear of persecution
(Grot., Beng.) ; the hatred of the gospel because the cross is its
central truth (Calv., Weiss); hatred of the cross through reluc-
tance to crucify self or to suffer with Christ (Chr., Mey.). Such
limitations of the Apostle’s thought are uncalled for. Enmity to
the cross might include any or all of these particulars. Assuredly
the title ‘enemies of the cross’ was justly applied to such as are
described in vs. 19.

These enemies are more specifically described as to their char-
acter and destiny. ‘Their destiny is significantly treated first.

19. ὧν τὸ τέλος ἀπώλεια : ‘whose end is destruction.’

To marks the definiteness of the point to which their conduct
tends. Τέλος is more than mere termination. Rather consumma-
tion ; the point into which the whole series of transgressions finally
gathers itself up. (Comp. Rom. vi. 21; 2 Cor. xi.15 ; Heb. vi. 8.)
᾿Απώλεια occurs in N.T. both in the physical and in the moral
sense. For the former see Mt. xxvi. 8; Acts villi. 20. The latter
is the more common, and Paul always uses it thus.

ὧν 6 Oeds ἡ κοιλία: Comp. Rom. xvi. 18; 2 Pet. ii. 13. The
rare word κοιλιοδαίμων, ‘one who makes a god of his belly,’ occurs
in the Κόλακες of the comic poet Eupolis, and in Atheneus.
(Compe Munpeeye/aps, 235.) Xen. Alem. 1 6; 8, i. 1, 2, has
δουλεύειν γαστρί, ‘to be the slave of the belly’; and Alciphro, 1]. 4,
γαστρομαντεύομαι, ‘to divine by the belly.’ The contrast appears
in Rom. xiv. 17. The suggestion of Lips. (so Theo. Mop.) that
the reference may be to Jewish laws about meats, is fanciful.

καὶ ἡ δόξα ἐν τῇ αἰσχύνῃ αὐτῶν : That in which they glory is their
disgrace. Their so-called liberty is bondage to slavish lusts. For
doa, see On i. Ir. With ἐπ supply ἐστι; ‘consists in.’ Beng.,
Mich., Storr, with Lips., refer αἰσχύνη to ‘the concision’ (vs. 2),
and explain ‘ pudenda.’

οἱ τὰ ἐπίγεια φρονοῦντες : ‘who mind earthly things.’ ‘Their

118 PHILIPPIANS [III. 19, 20

general disposition and moral tendency are worldly. (See oni. 7.)
This is the root of their depravity. A contrast is suggested, prob-
ably intended, with τοῦτο φρονῶμεν, vs. 15. (Comp. Col. ili. 2.)
The change of construction to the nominative of φρονοῦντες is variously
explained. Win. xxix. 2, takes of @pov. as a disconnected nominative with
an exclamatory force. So De W., Lightf. Mey. and Hack. refer it to the
logical subject of what precedes. Ellic. and Alf. regard it as a return to
the primary construction, πολλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν. Of these explanations Win.
is the least probable. The two others have grammatical precedent, but it
is better to place the construction in the category of those instances which
are not uncommon in N.T. and in class., where the nominative is introduced
in a kind of apposition with what precedes. This is especially frequent in
Apoc. (See Mk. vii. 19; Acts x. 37; Apoc. 1. 5, vil. 4, xx. 2; Blass, § 31,
6; Jelf, 477.)

Ta ἐπίγ. φρον. is the basis of a new contrast. Their character
and conduct mark them as belonging to this world; but we are
citizens of a heavenly commonwealth.

20. ἡμῶν : Emphatic as contrasted with ot τὰ ἐπίγ. ppov. (vs. 19).

yap: As in Gal. il. το, v. 5, confirming the statement concern-
ing the one party by showing the opposite course or character of
the other. The connection is with ἐπίγ. @pov. Their course is the
opposite of ours ; for, while they mind earthly things, our mind is
set upon the interests of the heavenly commonwealth to which we
belong. The repetition of φρονεῖν as marking the general moral
tendency or disposition is noticeable.

τὸ πολίτευμα : ‘commonwealth.’ (Comp. πολιτεύεσθε, 1. 27,
note.)

No sharp distinction can be drawn between πολίτευμα and πολιτεία.
Arist. makes πολίτευμα the concrete of πολιτεία, ‘the government’ as the
expression of citizenship (Pol. ili. 6, I, ili. 7, 2), and also identifies the two
(Pol. iii. 13, ὃ, iv. 6,8). He defines πολιτεία as ‘commonwealth’ (Pol. iii.
7, 3, iv. 8, I, ἵν. 4, 19). In 2 Mace. iv. II, vill. 17, modtrela is ‘ govern-
ment’; in xiii. 14, apparently, ‘state’ or ‘commonwealth.’ Lightf. gives
only two meanings of πολίτευμα, ‘the state,’ and ‘ the functions of citizens.’
But it also means ‘an act of administration’; ‘a measure of government’;
and ‘a form of government.’ In the absence of any permanent distinction,
the rendering ‘ citizenship’ (R.V. ‘commonwealth’ in marg.) is justifiable.
The rendering of the A.V., ‘conversation,’ is founded on the original sense
of that word, ‘conduct or behaviour in intercourse with society.’

ὑπάρχει : ‘is.’ (See on ii. 6.) Due emphasis must be laid on
the use of the present tense. The believer wow zs, in this present
world, a citizen of the heavenly commonwealth. The πολίτευμα is
not, therefore, as Mey., to be explained as Messiah’s kingdom
which has not yet appeared, and of which Christians are citizens
only in an ideal or proleptic sense which is to be completely
realised at the pavousia. While it is true that the full realisation
of the heavenly commonwealth will come with the favousia, it is
no less true that those who are in Christ, whose ‘life is hid with
Christ in God? (Col. iii. 3), for whom ‘to live is Christ’ (Phil. 1.

III. 20] THE HEAVENLY COMMONWEALTH I19

21), who are ‘crucified with Christ’ and live their present life by
faith in him (Gal. 11. 20), are oz members of the heavenly com-
monwealth, and live and act under its laws. Their allegiance is
rendered to it. They receive their impulses to action and conduct
from it. Their connection with it is the basis of their life of
‘righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost’ (Rom. xiv.
17), as distinguished from the life of belly-worship and worldliness.
They ave ‘ fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of
God (Eph. ii. 19). The commonwealth of believers zs an actual
fact on earth, because it is one with ‘ the Jerusalem that is above’
(Gal. iv. 26). Comp. 22. το Diognetus, 5, which describes Christ-
lans: ἐπὶ γῆς διατρίβουσιν ἀλλ᾽ ἐν οὐρανῷ πολιτεύονται ; apparently
a reminiscence of this passage. See also Plat. Repub. 592, and
the remarkable parall., Philo, De Confus. i. 416.

The consummation of this citizenship, however, is yet to come.
As members of the heavenly commonwealth they are still pressing
on in obedience to the upward call (vs. 14). Hence they are in
an attitude of expectation.

ἐξ οὗ: ‘whence’: from heaven. Not from the πολίτευμα as
Beng., Lips. The phrase is adverbial. (See Win. xxi. 3.)

Kai marks the correspondence of the expectation with the fact
of the πολίτ. ἐν οὐρ.

ἀπεκδεχόμεθα : ‘we await.’ (Comp. τ Thess. i. ro.) The word
occurs but twice outside of Paul’s letters (Heb. ix. 28; 1 Pet. iii.
20; comp. Rom. villi. 19, 23, 25; Gal. v. 5). It denotes earnest
expectation. (See on ἀποκαραδοκία [1. 20].) Used habitually in
N.T. with reference to the future manifestation of the glory of
Christ or of his followers.

σωτῆρα: ‘as Saviour.’ Without the article, and predicative.
Notice the emphatic position. The Lord is also to come as
Judge; but they come not into judgment (Jn. ili. 18, v. 24).
Among the privileges of Christians described in Heb. xii. 22-24,
is that of drawing near to the Judge who is God of all. It is in
the capacity of Saviour that they await him—the same capacity
in which they have already received and known him. ‘They look
-for him to complete their salvation, and therewith to deliver them
from the sufferings which they have shared with him, and from the
infirmities and limitations of the flesh. (Comp. Rom. viii. το ff. ;
2 COE. Vi 4.)

To await him as Saviour from ἀπώλεια (Weiss) is quite out of
place in a Christian’s expectation of his Redeemer. Σωτήρ is
found often in 2 Pet. and in the Pastorals. In the other Pauline
epistles only Eph. v. 23. In six cases in the Pastorals and one in
Jude, it is applied to God.

κύριον : See on il. 11. Answering to the idea of πολίτευμα.

120 PHILIPPIANS [III. 21

The special aspect in which the expected Saviour is viewed is
that of a transformer, changing the mortal body of the believer
into the likeness of his own glorified body.

21. ὃς μετασχηματίσει : ‘who shall refashion.’ For the verb
see 1 Cor. iv. 6; 2 Cor. xi. 13-15. (S€€ On a /oeand Jcome:
ἀλλαγησόμεθα [τ Cor. xv. 51].) The verb signifies the change of
the outward fashion (σχῆμα), the sensible vesture in which the
human spirit is clothed. See Just. M. Dia/. Zry. i., where σχῆμα
is used of the philosopher’s dress.

The Jews looked merely for the restoration of the present body.
Paul’s idea includes an organic connection with the present body,
but not its resuscitation. ‘The new body is not identical with the
present body. ‘There is a change of σχῆμα, but not a destruction
of personal identity. ‘There is a real connection or some corre-
lation between the present and the future embodiment, but not
identity of substance. ‘The life, the principle of life, the individu-
ality of it, shall remain unbroken, but ‘the matter of life,’ as the |
physiologists say, shall be changed”? (Newman Smyth, Old Faiths
in New Light, p. 364). Paul’s conception is developed under the
figure of the seed-corn in 1 Cor. xv.

τὸ σῶμα τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν: ‘the body of our humiliation.’
Not as A.V. ‘vile body.’ ‘To construe the phrase as a hendiadys
is grammatically wrong (see on ili. 8), and the apostle is far from
characterising the body which Christ honored by his tenancy as
base in itself. Such a sense, moreover, would lend countenance
to the Stoic contempt for the body. ‘The meaning is, the body in
which our mortal state of humiliation is clothed. ‘This body is
called ‘ the body of our humiliation,’ primarily in order to emphas-
ise the contrast between it and the glorified body of the Lord,
but also with a subordinate reference to its weakness, its subjection
to vanity, corruption, and death, —its sufferings, and the hin-
drances which it offers to Christian striving and spiritual attain-
ment. (Comp. Rom. vill. 20-24.)

There may possibly be an implied contrast of the glory of the transformed
body with that glory of the sensualists which is their shame (Ellic., Mey.,
Weiss), but this must not be pressed. Nor do I find in the expression the
hortative element which Ellic. thinks that he detects, and likewise K1., who

says it is an exhortation to preserve their bodies as temples of the Holy
Ghost.

σύμμορφον : “ that it may be conformed.’

TR. adds es τὸ γενεσθαι αὐτὸ with Dbande EKLP, Syr.utt. Probably
supplied to meet the apparent difficulty of the appositional accusative.

The adjective denoting the effect of the transformation is added
appositionally instead of forming an independent sentence with
cis τὸ γενέσθαι αὐτο. (Comp. Mt. xii. 13; 1 Thess. iii. 13; and

III. 21| Dik BODY OF CHRIS’ Ss GEORY ΤΟΙ

see Win. Ixvi. 3.9.) As μετασχ. denoted change of outward fash-
ion, σύμμορφ. denotes conformation to what is essential, per-
manent, and characteristic in a body which is the appropriate
investiture of Christ’s glorified condition—a ‘spiritual body’:
a conformity which is inward and thorough, and not merely
superficial On the union of Christians with the spiritual life
of Christ which belongs to the heavenly world (Rom. vi. 5), rests
their hope that they shall be saved in his life and conformed to
its heavenly investiture. (See Rom. v. 9, 10, vili. 10, 11.)

σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ: ‘to the body of his glory.’ Not as
A.V. ‘glorious body,’ by hendiadys, which dilutes and weakens
the conception. See on vs. 8, and for other misapplications of
the figure hendiadys, comp. A.V. Rom. vill. 21, ‘ glorious liberty’ ;
2 Cor. iv. 4, ‘glorious gospel’; Eph. i. 19, ‘mighty power’;
© Pet. ἢ τ Obedient..children.’ | Vhe resurrection in the N.T.
is habitually conceived in connection with corporeity, but a cor-
poreity in keeping with the heavenly life. (See Weiss, 47d. Theol.
Eng. §§ 19, 34.) The phrase ‘body of his glory’ signifies the
body in which he is clothed in his glorified state, and which is the
proper investiture of his heavenly glory ; the form in which his
perfect spiritual being is manifest. This glory is peculiarly and
originally the glory of the incorruptible God, and therefore be-
longs to an embodiment which retains no trace of earthly materi-
ality or corruption, but is altogether informed and determined by
the higher vital principle (πνεῦμα) and is its appropriate organ
(σῶμα πνευματικόν, τ Cor. xv. 44). Accordingly this glorified
body is no longer in antithesis to the πνεῦμα. It is the investiture
which the πνεῦμα forms for itself, and which perfectly reveals it.
In the resurrection, through which, as completed by the ascension,
Christ received this body, he became wholly πνευματικός --- a πνεῦμα
ζωοποιοῦν (1 Cor. xv. 45), and therefore is called τὸ πνεῦμα (2 Cor.
li. 17). A foreshadowing of this appeared in his bodily mani-
festation between the resurrection and the ascension. His body
appeared as πνευματικόν though not in its full manifestation as the
σῶμα τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ. (See Newman Smyth, Old Faiths in New
Light, p. 358; Westcott, Gospel of the Resurrection, ch. 11. p. 19-
21; J. Oswald Dykes, Expositor, ist ser. iii. p. 161; Mey. on
i Cor. xv. 458)

The change into the body of Christ’s glory is the consumma-
tion of the believer’s life in him. (Comp. vs. 9-11.) The entire
passage (vs. gQ—21) is acomplete statement of the Pauline doctrine
of salvation :

1. The beginning, the intermediate stages, and the sum of all
are Christ (vs. 9).

2. Justification by faith and mystical union with Christ form
one conception — righteousness of God by faith and being found
in Christ (vs. 9).

122 PHILIPPIANS [III. 21

3. This conception is carried out on the line of mystical union
with Christ: to know him, the power of his resurrection, and the
fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable to his death.
Notice the repetition of αὐτοῦ, keeping Christ continually before
the eye (vs. 10).

4. The life in Christ is marked by earnest striving to realise the
ends for which the believer was grasped by Christ. He follows
the beckoning of God which ever summons him heavenward, in
order that he may at last win the heavenly prize (12-16).

5. Vital communion with Christ constitutes him a member of a
heavenly commonwealth. ‘To this his allegiance is rendered ; by
its laws his life is regulated ; its members are his brethren. Asa
citizen of this commonwealth he eagerly awaits its consummation
in the final triumph and eternal establishment of the Messianic
kingdom (vs. 20).

6. Therefore, living in the power of Christ’s resurrection, he
awaits in hope the actual resurrection from the dead, wherein the
saving power of Christ will be displayed in the change of the mortal
bodies of all believers into the likeness of Christ’s glorified body,
and which will inaugurate the absolute and eternal dominion of
the commonwealth of God (vs. 21).

The warrant for this confident expectation is the divine power
of Christ to subject all things to himself.

κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν τοῦ δύνασθαι αὐτὸν : ‘according to the working
whereby he is able’; or, more literally, ‘according to the energy
of his ability.’

κατὰ: The change is ‘in accordance with’ or ‘appropriate to’
Christ’s power of universal subjection. ‘The statement both as to
the change itself and the power which effects it, is in accordance
with 1 Cor. Vi. τ κ᾿ τ 55, ΡΠ τῷ,

"Evépyea occurs only in Paul. It is power in exercise; “ po-
tentia in actu exserens” (Calv.), and is used in N.T. only of
superhuman power. (See Col. i. 29, ii. 12; 2 Thess. 11. 9.) It
is the active energy in which δύναμις displays itself. (Comp. Eph.
iii. 7, and see on ὃ ἐνεργῶν, ii. 13.) The power or virtue which
was in Christ when the woman touched the hem of his garment
(Mk. v. 30; Lk. viii. 46) was δύναμις. In the healing of the
woman it became ἐνέργεια.

καὶ : ‘also’ or ‘even,’ marking the measure of the power. Able
not only to transform the body but a@éso to subject all things to
himself.

ὑπόταξαι : Originally ‘to arrange’ or ‘marshal under.’ Often
simply ‘to subject.’ (See 1 Cor. xv. 27, 28; Eph. 1. 22; Efe eit.
δ... 785: 10...

τὰ πάντα : ‘all things,’ collectively, as vs. 8.

ὙΤΤ. 8-10] RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH 123

PAUL'S CONCEPTION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BY
PALTH.

M. Ménégoz, in his treatise Le Péché οὐ la Rédemption, says
that Phil. 1. 8-10 contains the most precise statement of the
Pauline doctrine of justification by faith. Without assenting to
his view that Christ was justified by his own death and resurrec-
tion, I agree with him as to the importance of the statement
contained in these verses. It does not contradict any previous
utterance of Paul, nor does it present any new feature; but it
combines and exhibits as a single conception what are commonly
regarded as two distinct elements of the righteousness of faith.
These two elements are assumed to be separately treated in the
Epistle to the Romans. ‘They are, the initial, objective, judicial
act of declaring righteous, whereby a believer is placed in a state
of reconciliation with God, and the establishment, through faith,
of a vital union with Christ; or, to put the matter more briefly,
the righteousness of faith viewed as objective justification and
as subjective sanctification. I say ‘regarded’ and ‘assumed,’
because, both on the ground of this passage and of the Epistle
to the Romans, I do not regard this separation as justifiable.
For I think that these two elements are inseparably united in
the Apostle’s conception of righteousness by faith. ‘The distinc-
tion between justification and sanctification I regard as largely
technical. ‘They represent, it is true, respectively, the initiation
and the consummation of the work of salvation; but Paul uses
ἁγιασμός both of the state and of the process of sanctification ;
and that word, in Rom. vi. 19, is associated with the ‘walk in
newness of life’ rather than with the consummation of subjection
to righteousness. Having become servants of righteousness, the
readers stand committed to an economy of sanctification, in which
they are to ‘ perfect holiness in the fear of the Lord’ (2 Cor. vii. τ.
See Sanday on Rom. vi. 19). The point is well stated by Liddon
in his Analysis of Romans, pp. 17, 18: “The δικαιοσύνη which
God gives includes these two elements, — acquittal of the guilt of
sin, Or justification in the narrower sense of the word, and the
communication of a new moral life, ‘that the ordinance of the
law might be fulfilled in us’ (Rom. viii. 4). These two sides of
the gift of δικαιοσύνη can only be separated in thought: in fact
they are inseparable.... The true righteousness is one, not two
or more. The maxim ‘justitia alia justificationis, sanctificationis
alia’ is not Paul’s. Paul knows nothing of an external righteous-
ness which is reckoned without being given to man; and the
righteousness which faith receives is not external only, but inter-
nal; not imputed only, but imparted to the believer. Justification

ipl PHILIPPIANS [III. 8-10

and sanctification may be distinguished by the student as are the
arterial and nervous systems in the human body ; but in the living
body they are coincident and inseparable.”

I think that, so far as justification is a judicial act following upon
repentance and faith, it is regarded by Paul as the initial stage of
a condition of actual inward righteousness, which is to develop
itself in the believer’s experience as fruit from seed. (Comp.
Lips. Hand-Com. Ep. to Rom. Kini. p. 82.) Hence I differ from
Professor Bruce (82 Paul’s Conception of Christianity, p. 158 ff.,
Amer. ed.), who claims that the two aspects of justification are
separately treated by Paul in Romans. He says: “ He does not
refer to the subjective aspect of faith as a renewing power till he
has finished his exposition of the doctrine of justification. He
takes up faith’s function in establishing a vital union with Christ
in the sixth chapter.... Does not this amount to the exclusion
of faith’s sanctifying function from the grounds of justification?”
I think not. For, as Professor Bruce admits, Paul already alludes
to the subjective aspect of justification in the opening of the fifth
chapter. Being justified, we have peace with God, joy in hope of
glory, in tribulation, and in God himself. But, what is more to
the point, Paul, in the third and fourth chapters, does not treat
of the oferaton of justification. His main point is the essential
guatty of justification, as being by faith and not by works of the
law. When he does take up the operation of justification in ch. vi.,
he treats the two aspects in combination. He does not confine
himself to what follows justification. He begins with the death to
sin. With Christ we die to sin; we are raised up with him unto a
walk in newness of life. Union with him by the likeness of his
death implies union with him by the likeness of his resurrection.
Our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might
be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to
sin. ‘‘ But if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also
live with him (here, not only hereafter) ; knowing that Christ,
being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death no more
hath dominion over him. For the death that he died, he died
unto sin once for all: but the life that he liveth, he liveth unto
God. Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin,
but alive unto God in Christ Jesus.”” Comp. “ be found in him”
(Phil. ὉΠ Ὁ"

(1) In our passage Paul represents the righteousness of faith
as a veal righteousness in the believer. It is not founded upon
human merit; it is not a righteousness of legal obedience. It
proceeds from God and comes to man through faith in Christ
(vs. 9). It is not perfect (vs. 12-14). None the less it is an
actual righteousness in the man. Justification contemplates right-
ness — right living, feeling, and thinking. Faith is not a substi-
tute for this rightness. It is its generative principle; its informing

IAN fs 8-10] RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH 125

quality. God’s plan of salvation is not intended to effect, by a
mere legal adjustment, something which cannot be an actual fact.
It is not true that God practically gives up the possibility of right-
eous men, and merely allows the perfect righteousness of Jesus
Christ to stand for it. God’s intent is to make men personally
righteous. Paul does not teach, nor is it anywhere taught in
Scripture, that the requirement of personal righteousness is ful-
filled for man by some one else, and that man has only to accept
this substitute by faith. Rather Paul declares explicitly that God
predestined his children ‘to be conformed to the image of his
Son’ (Rom. vill. 29).

I shall not enter upon the discussion of the meaning of δικαιοῦν,
since the question does not turn upon that. It may be conceded
that the dominant sense of that word is forensic, ‘to declare or
pronounce righteous.’ That that sense can be vindicated in every
instance, I very much doubt. (See E. P. Gould on “ Paul’s Use
of dixaotv,” Amer. Journ. of Theol. vol. i. No. 1, and W. A. Stevens
in vol. i. No. 2.) But, that question apart, it should be noted that
the sense of a declared or imputed righteousness, if it belong to
δικαιοσύνη at all, is peculiar to Paul. Elsewhere it has the meaning
of personal rightness, or righteous quality. In the LXX it occurs
in nine instances as the translation of “on, ‘kindness’; while
M278, ‘justice,’ usually translated by δικαιοσύνη, is, in nine cases,
rendered by ἐλεημοσύνη, and three times by ἔλεος. In Mt. vi. 1,
the TR, with the later uncials and most cursives, read ἐλεημοσύνην
for δικαιοσύνην ; while Ν᾿ gives δόσιν. (See Hatch, Zssays in Bib-
lical Greek, Ὁ. 49 ff.)

(2) This conception of a real righteousness in the believer is
opposed to the familiar dogmatic explanation that δικαιοσύνη
πίστεως is Not a personal but an imputed quality. According to
this, the righteousness is not in the man, but in Christ; and
Christ’s righteousness is imputed, or reckoned, or set down to his
account through his faith. ‘This imputation works no subjective
change in the man. It is merely placing to his account the right-
eousness of another. He is, though not actually righteous, judi-
cially declared to be righteous. Thus Dr. Hodge (Syst Zheol.
il. p. 144 ff.) : The imputation of the righteousness of Christ to
~ a believer for his justification “does not and cannot mean that
the righteousness of Christ is infused into the believer, or in any
way so imparted to him as to change or constitute his moral char-
acter. Imputation never changes the inward, subjective state of
the person to whom the imputation is made. . .. When right-
eousness is imputed to the believer, he does not thereby become
subjectively righteous.” Thus justification, having its foundation
in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, is only a declarative
act whereby a man is pronounced righteous without any actual
righteousness in him answering to the declaration, but solely on

126 PHILIPPIANS [III. 8-10

the ground of another’s righteousness, which, in some inexplicable
way, is transferred to his credit. ‘This is simply a legal fiction
which reflects upon the truthfulness of God. God declares a man
righteous when he is not righteous. “To Paul,” says Sabatier,
“the word of God is always creative and full of power. It always
produces an actual effect. In declaring a man justified, therefore,
it actually and directly creates in him a new beginning of right-
eousness’’ (Apostle Paul, Eng. ‘Trans. p. 300).

(3) This is clearly not the conception expressed in this passage.
The righteousness of faith which Paul here desires for himself is
a winning Christ and a being in Christ. ‘This righteousness is first
described generally as knowing Christ, and then, more specifically,
as knowing the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of
his sufferings, and being made conformable unto his death; that
is to say, the righteousness of God by faith is a being and dwell-
ing in Christ in such wise as that his resurrection, his sufferings,
his death, become actual parts of Paul’s experience and active
forces in it. Christ is not merely apprehended as an object of
trust. He is not merely known as an objective personality. The
believer is taken up into his life ; and his life in turn possesses the
believer, and becomes his informing principle and prime motor.
(See Gal. 1: 29.)

In short, the conception of the righteousness of faith here pre-
sented is not that of an external righteousness made over to the
believer by a legal declaration, but that of a righteousness which is
a real fact in the man, springing from union with the personal
Christ. In this mystical union the life and power of Christ are
transfused into the believer’s life, so that, in a sense, the person-
ality of Christ becomes his; so that he can say, ‘ for me to live is
Christ,’ and ‘not I live but Christ liveth in me.’ The old man,
the natural ego, is crucified with Christ ; the new man is raised up,
and, in the power of Christ’s risen life, walks in newness of life,
in fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. All
the righteousness which inheres in that perfect personality becomes
potentially his from the moment that faith puts him into living
connection with it. All the experience of Christ’s life becomes a
fact and a power in his experience. Did Christ die to sin? He
also dies to sin. Was Christ justified from sin by death? So
likewise is he. Did Christ rise from the dead? He rises from
the death of sin, besides sharing finally in Christ’s physical resur-
rection. ‘The knowledge of Christ’s death and resurrection is not
merely an insight into the historical meaning of those facts. Did
Christ suffer? The heavenly nature which he receives from Christ
insures for him, as it did for Christ, the contradiction of sinners
against himself. Was Christ perfected through suffering? He
attains perfection by the same road. Does Christ live unto God?
He is alive unto God through Jesus Christ, and all the powers of

ITI. 8-10] RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH 127

that divine life descend upon him and work in him to conform
him to the image of the Son of God.

Says Calvin (/vsz iii. 1): “ First, it is to be held that, so long
as Christ is outside of us and we are separated from him, what-
ever he has suffered and done for the salvation of the human race
is useless and without significance to us. ‘Therefore, in order that
he may communicate to us what he has received from the Father,
he must become ours and dwell in us. Hence he is called our
‘head,’ and ‘the first-born among many brethren’; while we in
turn are said to be ingrafted into him and to put him on, because
whatever he possesses is nothing to us until we coalesce into one
with him.” And again (xi. 10): ‘Christ, having become ours,
makes us partakers of the gifts with which he is endowed. [72
do not therefore view him as outside of us, so that his righteousness
is imputed to us ; but because we put on himself and are ingrafted
into his body, he has deigned to make us one with himself.
Therefore we boast that we have his righteousness.” So, too,
Luther ( Werke, Erlang. Ausg. 37, 441): “ Christ is God’s grace,
mercy, wisdom, strength, comfort, and blessedness. I say not as
some, cauwsaliter ; that is, that he gives righteousness, and remains
without. For in that case righteousness is dead, nay, it is never
given. Christ is there Azmse/f, like the light and heat of the fire,
which are not where the sun and the fire are not.”

(4) This passage presents a conception of faith different from
that implied in the imputative theory. According to that, faith
is merely a medium by which the man is put into contact with
something outside of himself — ‘‘a mere hand,” as Professor Bruce
puts it, “to lay hold of an external righteousness.” According to
Paul’s teaching here, an ethical quality inheres in faith. Faith is
amoral energy. It “works by love” (Gal. v. 6). This accords
with Heb. xi., where faith is exhibited as the generator of moral
heroism. Righteousness, as already observed, is effected in a
believer by the transfusion into him of Christ’s life and character,
not by Christ’s righteousness being placed to his account. To
assume the latter is to fall back from the gospel upon the law.
Paul says, “ not having a righteousness of my own which is of the
law”; but if the righteousness of faith is legally and forensically
imputed, it zy of the law. Righteousness has its roots in personal
relation to God. Sin is more than bad conduct. Bad conduct is
only the result of personal separation and estrangement from the
Father, God. The terrible significance of sin lies in the break
between a human life and its divine source; and the attainment
of righteousness is possible only through the reéstablishment of
the original birth-relation, as Christ declared in the words, “ Ye
must be born anew.” ‘The mere genealogical fact of sonship must
be translated into a living, personal relation. ‘This is possible only
through faith. A handbook of laws will not effect it. Rules will

128 PHILIPPIANS [III. 8-10

not establish personal relations. Precepts will not put a son’s
heart into a man. He will not love to order, nor obey because
he is bidden, nor trust because a trustworthy object is commended
to him, nor be meek and merciful because it is right to be so.
Being righteous is not a matter of assent to a proposition. It is
a matter of surrender to a person. Such surrender comes about
only through faith, because only faith has in it that element which
draws personalities, lives, hearts together. ‘Therefore faith does
not count zzszvead of righteousness. It counts as making for (εἰς)
righteousness ; with a view to righteousness ; as tending to right-
eousness, just as the corn of wheat counts for the full corn in the
ear. ‘Therein is its value. It is counted for what it is, not for
what it is not. It is the prime agent in righteousness. The right-
eousness which is of God becomes in man the righteousness of
faith, because in faith, which inaugurates the vital union of the
man with Christ, which constitutes personal and not mere legal
relation, lie enfolded all the possibilities of righteousness. Faith
is presumptive righteousness. It is the native element in which
righteousness evolves itself. Righteousness is begun, continued,
and perfected in the exercise of the faith which holds the life in
living contact with the personal source of holiness; in the trust
and self-surrender which make possible the inpouring and appro-
priation of all heavenly forces. ‘With the heart man believeth
unto righteousness” (Rom. x. 10). In Christ the believer decomes
the righteousness of God (2 Cor. v. 21). “Faith is that temper
of sympathetic and immediate response to another’s will which
belongs to a recognised relation of vital communion. It is the
spirit of confident surrender which can only be justified by an
inner identification of life. Faith is the power by which the con-
scious life attaches itself to God ; it is an apprehensive motion of
the living spirit by which it intensifies its touch on God; it is
an instinct of surrender by which it gives itself up to the fuller
handling of God ; it is an affection of the will by which it presses
up against God, and drinks in divine vitality with quickened
receptivity”? (Henry Scott Holland, in Lux Mundi, pp. 17, 18).
There is no true faith in Christ without the indwelling of Christ.
Paul makes the latter the criterion of the former (2 Cor. xii. 5).

Pfleiderer’s treatment of this subject is interesting and suggestive. (See

Paulinismus, ch. iv.)

Ϊ
|
Ι
!

IV.1] VARIOUS EXHORTATIONS TO UNITY, ETC. 129

Iv. 1-9. VARIOUS EXHORTATIONS TO UNITY, JOY,
FORBEARANCE, TRUSTFULNESS, PRAYER, ATTEN-
TION TO ALL VIRTUES, AND THE PRACTICE OF
ALL THAT THEY HAVE LEARNED FROM PAUL;
WITH ASSURANCES OF THE PRESENCE, GUAR-—
DIANSHIP, AND PEACE OF GOD

In view of this glorious future, do you, my brethren beloved,
continue steadfast in the Lord, TI learn that Euodia and Syntyche
are at variance. TI beseech them to be reconciled; and I entreat

| you, Synzyeus, who are justly so named, to use your influence to this
3 YO “ - ᾽

end; for those women were my helpers in the gospel work, along
with Clement and other faithful laborers. Rejoice in the Lord,
always. I repeat tt, rejoice. Let all men see your forbearing
spirit; and in no case be anxious, for the Lord ts at hand. Com-
mit every matter to God in prayer, and pray always with thankful
hearts; and God's peace which, better than any human device, can
lift you above doubt and fear, shall guard your hearts and thoughts
in Christ Jesus. Finally, my brethren, take account of everything
that is venerable, just, pure, lovely, and of good report—in short,
of whatever virtue there is, and of whatever praise attaches to it.
Practise what you have learned from me, and the God of peace
shall be with you.

1. wore: ‘so that’; ‘accordingly.’ (Comp. Mt. xii. 12; Rom.
Wifi? tear xv.55- ἘΠῚ 117) Connected immediately
with 111. 20,21; but through those verses with the whole of
ch. ili., since in heavenly citizenship are gathered up all the
characteristics which Paul in that chapter has commended to his
readers. This verse may therefore be regarded as the proper
conclusion of ch. iii.

ἐπιπόθητοι : ‘longed for.’ A hint of the pain caused by his
separation from them. Only here in N.T. (Comp. Clem. σα
Cor. \xv.) The verb ἐπιποθεῖν occurs mostly in Paul. (See Rom.
i. 11; 2 Cor. v. 2; Phil. i. 8, ii. 26.) “Ezezofia only in Rom. xv.
23. ᾿Ἐπιπόθησις, 2 Cor. vii. 7, 11. (See on i. 8.)

χαρὰ καὶ στεφανός μου: ‘my joy and crown.’ (Comp. τ Thess.
li. 19.) Χαρὰ by metonymy for the subject of joy. Sredavds in
class. mostly of the woven crown—the chaplet awarded to the
victor in the games ; a wreath of wild olive, green parsley, bay, or
pine ; or the garland placed on the head of a guest at a banquet.

130 PHILIPPIANS [τν΄. 1,2

(See Athen. xv. p. 685 ; Anistoph. Ach. 636; Plat. Symp. 51}
So mostly in N.T., though στεφανός occurs with χρυσοῦν (Apoc.
xiv. 14). The kingly crown is διάδημα, found only in Apoc. The
distinction is not strictly observed in Hellenistic Greek. (See
Trench, Syz. xxiii.) Neither χαρὰ nor στεφανός applied to the
Philippians is to be referred to the future, as Calv., Alf. They
express Paul’s sense of joy and honor in the Christian fidelity of
his readers, (Comp: Sit. τι, so07./6.)

οὕτως στήκετε: “50 Stand fast.’ ‘So,’ as I have exhorted you,
and as becomes citizens of the heavenly commonwealth. Not,
‘so as ye do stand,’ as Beng., Calv. For στήκετε see on i. 27.
The particle ὥστε with the imperative retains its consecutive force,
but instead of a fact consequent upon what precedes, there is a
consequent exhortation.

ἐν κυρίῳ : With the exception of Apoc. xiv. 13 only in Paul, who
uses it more than forty times. See on ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (i. 1).
Denoting the sphere or element in which steadfastness is to be
exiipited. (Comp. 1 Uhess: ii. 8)

ἀγαπητοί : repeated with affectionate emphasis.

B, 17, Cop., Syr.8h, add μου.

Two prominent women in the church are urged to become
reconciled to each other.

2. Evodiav — Svvtixnv: ‘ Euodia—Syntyche.’ Not ‘ Euodias,’
as A.V. Both are female names ; see αὐταῖς (vs. 3). Both occur
in inscriptions, and there are no instances of masculine forms.
The activity of the Macedonian women in cooperating with Paul
appears from Acts xvii. 4, 12.

Tam alittle doubtful, however, as to Lightfoot’s view that a higher social
influence was assigned to the female sex in Macedonia than was common
among the civilised nations of antiquity. I fail to find any notice of this
elsewhere. Lightf.’s inference is drawn wholly from inscriptions which do
not appear to be decisive. For example, all the inscriptions which he
cites to show that monuments in honor of women were erected by public
bodies, distinctly indicate Roman influence. ‘The names are Roman, and
perpetuate the memory of different Roman gezzes, a point which would
naturally be emphasised in a Roman co/onza distant from the mother city.
His assertion, moreover, that the active zeal of Macedonian women is
without a parallel in the apostle’s history elsewhere, seems open to ques-
tion in the light of the closing salutations of the Epistle to the Romans.
Kl6pper thinks that the names Euodia and Syntyche represent two women
in each of whose houses a separate congregation assembled, the one Jewish-
Christian and the other Gentile-Christian. Lipsius thinks this possible. For
some of the fanciful interpretations of these two names, see Introd. vi.
Theo. Mop. mentions a story he had heard to the effect that they were a
married pair, the latter name being Syntyches, and that the husband was
the converted jailer of Philippi. The climax is reached by Hitzig (A77z.
paulin, Br. 5 {{.}, who affirms that Euodia and Syntyche were reproductions

IV.2,3] | EUODIA, SYNTYCHE, AND SYNZYGUS 131

of the patriarchs Asher and Gad; their sex having been changed in the
transition from one language to the other; and that they represent the
Greek and the Roman elements in the church,

παρακαλῶ: “1 exhort.’ See on παράκλησις (11. 1). The repeti-
tion of the word emphasises the separate exhortation to each.

τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν : ‘to be of the same mind.’ (See on ii. 2.)

ἐν κυρίῳ : With τ. av. dpov. In that accord of which the Lord
is the bond: each individually in Christ, and each therefore at
one with the other.

3. vat: ‘yea.’ The reading καὶ has almost no support. (Comp.
Mt. xv. 27; Rom. iii. 29 ; Philem. 20.) The preceding exhortation
is enforced by introducing a third party. ‘I have urged Euodia
and Syntyche to live in harmony; yes, and I entreat you also,’
Cle:

ἐρωτῶ καὶ σέ: ‘I beseech thee also.’ “Epwray originally ‘to
question,’ as Lk. xxii. 68; Jn. ix. 21. Only in that sense in class.
The meaning ‘to entreat’ belongs to later Greek. Thus rendered,
it usually signifies to ask a person; not to ask a ¢izng of a person ;
and to ask a person zo do, rarely fo give. See Trench, Syz. xl. ;
but his distinction between ἐρωτᾷν and αἰτεῖν does not hold. (See
Ezra Abbot, Zhe Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other
Critical Essays.)

γνήσιε ύνζυγε: ‘Synzygus, who art rightly so named.’ ‘The
A.V. ‘yoke-fellow,’ gives the correct sense of the proper name,
and γνήσιε marks the person addressed as one to whom the name
is justly applied. (See on γνησίως, 11. 20. Comp. ἑτεροζυγοῦντες,
2 Cor. vi. 14.) It is true that this proper name has no confirma-
tion from inscriptions ; but such descriptive or punning names are
very common, as Onesimus, Chrestus, Chresimus, Onesiphorus,
Symphorus, etc.

The attempts to identify the person referred to are numerous, and the
best are only guesses. Clem. Alex., Paul’s own wife; Chr., the husband or
brother of Euodia or Syntyche; Lightf., Epaphroditus. But it is improb-
able that Paul would have written thus in a letter of which Epaph. was the
bearer. Others, Timothy or Silas; Ellic. and De W., the chief bishop at
Philippi. Wiesel., Christ; vat introducing a prayer.

συλλαμβάνου αὐταῖς : ‘help those (women).’ Lit. ‘take hold
with.’ Assist them in reconciling their differences. (Comp.
Tele. Ven Fe)

Lips., following Chr. and Theoph., explains the verb in a general sense:
‘interest yourself in them.’ Grot. refers it to their support as widows.

αἵτινες : ‘inasmuch as they.’ See on ἅτινα (iii. 7). Not as
A.V. ‘who.’ The double relative classifies them among Paul’s
helpers, and gives a reason why Synzygus should promote their
reconciliation.

132 PHILIPPIANS [Iv. 3

συνηθλησάν μοι: ‘they labored with me.’ The verb only here
and i. 27, on which see note. It indicates an activity attended
with danger and suffering. (Comp. 1 Thess. 11. 2.)

ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ : the sphere of their labors. (Comp. Rom. i. 9 ;
τ Whess.ait. 72)

μετὰ καὶ Κλήμεντος : Construe with συνηθ. ‘Who labored with
me in the gospel along with Clement and others.’ ‘The position
of καὶ between the preposition and the noun is unusual, and shows
that the force of the preposition extends over the whole clause.

Lightf. takes wera Κλήμ. with συλλαμβ. According to this, Paul calls
upon Clement and the rest whose names are in the book of life to help the
women. But the relative clause ὧν τὰ ὀνόμ., etc., associates itself more
naturally with συνηθ. Paul gives this confidential commission to one per-
son,-and not to an indefinite number.

Philippi was probably the scene of the labors referred to, since
Paul speaks of them as familiarly known. Clement appears to
have been a Philippian Christian who assisted in the foundation
of the church at Philippi. ‘This is suggested by τῶν λοιπῶν.

The attempt to identify him with Clement of Rome, which originated
with Origen (/z Joann. i. 29), is generally abandoned. (See Lightf.
Comm. Ὁ. 168 ff.; Langen, Geschichte der Romischen Kirche, Bd. 1. 5. 84;
Moller, Atrchengeschichte, i. 89; Salmon’s art. “Clemens Romanus” in
Smith and Wace, Dict. Chn. Biog.)

συνεργῶν : Comp. 11. 25. Only once in N.T. outside of Paul’s
letbers.” S(See's {πο δ)

ov τὰ ὀνόματα ἐν βίβλῳ ζωῆς : ‘whose names are in the book of
life.’ Supply ἐστί, not εἴη, ‘ may they be,’ as Beng., who says, “ they
seem to have been already dead, for we generally follow such with
wishes of that sort.” ‘The names are in the book of life, though
not mentioned in the apostle’s letter. The expression βίβλος or
βιβλίον τῆς ζωῆς in N.T. is peculiar to Apoc. This is the only
exception, and the only case in which ζωῆς occurs without the
article. -(See Apoc. {Π|: 5: ΧΙ ὃ; xvil, 8, ΣῈ 2, ΤῊ Ἐπ ee
1g.) It is an O.T. metaphor, drawn from the civil list or register
in which the names of citizens were entered. The earliest refer-
ence to it is Ex. xxx. 32. (Comp. Is. iv. 3; zeke, Wan.
ΧΙ. 1.) To be enrolled in the book of life is to be divinely
accredited as a member of God’s commonwealth (comp. Lk.
x. 20), so that the expression falls in with τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς
(ili. 20). To be blotted out from the book of life (Ex. xxxii. 32,
333 Ps. lxix. 28) is to be disfranchised, cut off from fellowship
with the living God and with his kingdom. ‘The phrase was also
in use by Rabbinical writers. (See Wetst.) ‘Thus in the Targum
on Ezek. xiii. 9: “In the book of eternal life which has been
written for the just of the house of Israel, they shall not be written.”
Any reference to the doctrine of predestination is entirely out of

IV. 3-5] REJOICE AND FORBEAR 133

place. Flacius, cit. by Mey., justly observes that it is not fazadis
guaetam electio which is pointed to, but that they are described
as written in the book of life because possessing the true right-
eousness which is of Christ.

EXHORTATIONS TO THE CHURCH AT LARGE

4. χαίρετε : ‘rejoice’; the keynote of the epistle. Not ‘ fare-
well.’ (See on ili. 1.)

πάντοτε: With a look at the future no less than at the present,
and at the possibility of future trials. Only as their life shall be
ἐν κυρίῳ will they have true joy.

πάλιν ἐρῶ : ‘again I will say it.’ As if he had considered all
the possibilities of sorrow. ‘In spite of them all, I will repeat it
— rejoice.’

Not as Beng,, joining πάντοτε with the second χαίρετε, ‘again I will say,
always rejoice.’

5. τὸ ἐπιεικὲς ὑμῶν : ‘your forbearance.’ From εἰκός, ‘reason-
able’; hence, ‘not unduly rigorous.’ Aristot. Wch. Eth. v. 10,
contrasts it with ἀκριβοδίκαιος, ‘severely judging.’ The idea is,
‘do not make a rigorous and obstinate stand for what is your just
due.” Comp. Ign. Eph. x., ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν εὑρεθῶμεν τῇ ἐπιεικείᾳ:
‘Let us show ourselves their brothers by our forbearance.’

*Emceckyjs in N.T., 1 Tim. iii. 3; Tit. iii. 2, where it is joined with ἄμαχος;

I Pet. ii. 18; Jas. iii. 17, with ἀγαθὸς and εὐπειθής. ᾿Βπιείκεια, Acts xxiv. 4;

2 Cor. x.1; the latter with πραύτης. LXX, ἐπιεικής, Ps. xxxvi. (Ixxxv.) 5:

ἐπιείκεια, Sap. il. 19; 2 Mace. ii. 22; 3 Mace. iii. 15. ᾿Επιεικῶς, not in

N.T., 1 Sam. xii. 22; 2 K. vi. 3; 2 Macc.ix.27. The neuter adjective with

the article = the abstract noun ἐπιείκεια. (Comp. τὸ χρηστὸν, Rom. ii. 4;

TO μωρὸν, I Cor. i. 25.)

Mey. remarks that the disposition of Christian joyfulness must
elevate men quite as much above strict insistence on their rights
and claims as above solicitude.

πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις : Not to your fellow-Christians only.

ὁ κύριος ἐγγύς : ‘the Lord is near.’ For κύριος, see on ii. 11.
In the Gospels usually ‘God.’ In Paul mostly ‘ Christ,’ and more
commonly with the article (Win. xix. 1). The phrase expresses
the general expectation of the speedy second coming of Christ.
Comp. Μαρὰν ἀθά (τ Cor. xvi. 22), ‘the Lord will come,’ or ‘the
Lord is here.’ See also Rom. xiii. 12; Jas.v.8. "Eyyvs, of time.
The connection of thought may be either with what precedes, or
with what follows ; 2.6. the near approach of Christ may be regarded
as a motive to either forbearance or restfulness of spirit. Most
modern expositors connect with the former, but the thought pro-
ceeds upon the line of the latter. Apart from this fact there is
nothing to prevent our connecting 6 «vp. ἐγ. with both, as Alf.

134 PHILIPPIANS [τν 5,6

and Ellic. ‘Be forbearing ; the Lord is at hand who will right all
wrongs and give to each his due. Be not anxious. The Lord is
at hand. Why be concerned about what is so soon to pass away?
The Lord’s coming will deliver you from all earthly care.’ (Comp.
1 Cor. vil. 29-31.)

Some of the earlier interpreters, taking ἐγγύς in a local sense, explain
of the perpetual nearness of Christ; as Mt. xxviii. 20 (Aug.). Others, taking
κύριος = ‘God,’ of the helpful presence of God’s providence; as Ps. xxxiy.
18, cxix. 151, cxlv. 18 (am E., Calov., Ril.). But this does not accord with
the Pauline usage of κύριος.

6. μηδὲν μεριμνᾶτε : ‘in nothing be anxious.’ Μεριμνᾷν occurs
most frequently in the Gospels. In Paul only here and 1 Cor.
From the root pep or pap, which appears in the Homeric μερμηρίζ-
ev, ‘to be anxious,’ ‘to debate anxiously.’ The verb may mean
either ‘to be full of anxiety,’ or ‘to ponder or brood over.’ In
N.T. usage it does not always involve the idea of worry or
anxiety. εξ, for imst., Cor, vi, 52. x0 255 ΕΠ consi
other cases that idea 15 emphasised, as-here, Mt. xu ez ake
x. 41. (See Prellwitz, ΖΦ νηοῦ, Worterb. α΄. griech. Sprache, sub
μέριμνα; Schmidt, Syzon. 86, 3; W. Sz. on Mt. vi. 25.) The
exhortation is pertinent always to those who live the life of faith
(1 Pet. v. 7), and acquired additional force from the expectation
of the speedy coming of the Lord.

ἐν παντὶ : ‘in everything.’ Antithesis to μηδὲν. The formula is
found only in Paul. Not ‘on every occasion,’ supplying καιρῷ
(see Eph. vi. 18), nor, as Ril., including the idea of time; nor,
as Vulg., ‘in omni oratione et obsecratione,’ construing παντὶ with
προσ. x. deno. Prayer is to include all our interests, small and
great. Nothing is too great for God’s power; nothing too small
for his fatherly care.

τῇ προσευχῇ καὶ τῇ δεήσει: ‘by prayer and supplication.’ Zhe
(or your) prayer and 226 supplication appropriate to each case.
In N.T. the two words are joined only by Paul. (See Eph. vi. 18 ;
t Tim. ii. 1, v.53; LXX; Ps. vi. 20, lv. (liv. 2.) Momthetdisine-
tion, see oni. 4. The dative is instrumental.

μετὰ εὐχαριστίας : ‘with thanksgiving.’ ‘The thanksgiving is to
go with the prayer, 77 everything (comp. Col. 111. 17); for although
the Christian may not recognise a particular ground of thanks-
giving on the special occasion of his prayer, he has always the
remembrance of past favors and the consciousness of present
blessings, and the knowledge that all things are working together
for good for him (Rom. vii. 28). This more comprehensive
application of εὐχαριστία may explain the absence of the article,
which appears with both προσευχῇ and δεήσει, and which Paul uses
with edxap. in only two instances (1 Cor. xiv. 16; 2 Cor. iv. 15),
where the reason is evident. Rilliet observes that the Christian,

IV. 6, 7| THE GUARDIANSHIP OF GOD’S PEACE 135

“being, as it were, suspended between blessings received and
blessings hoped for, should always give thanks and always ask.
Remembrance and supplication are the two necessary elements
of every Christian prayer.” ‘Thanksgiving expresses, not only the
spirit of gratitude, but the spirit of submission, which excludes
anxiety, because it recognises in the will of God the sum of its
desires. So Calv., “ Dei voluntas votorum nostrorum summa est.”
Paul lays great stress upon the duty of thanksgiving. (See Rom.
fot AV Ὁ; ΡΟ Wels ἵν: D5, 1x. Ir, τ2: ΡΠ. v. 20;. Col.
15: 2: Dhess:.ieeas)

τὰ αἰτήματα ὑμῶν : ‘your requests.’ Only here; Lk. xxiii. 24 ;
1 Jn. v. 15. According to its termination, αἰτήμα is ‘a thing
requested,’ and so in all the N.T. instances. Vulg. ‘ petitiones.’

In class. it sometimes has the sense of αἴτησις, ‘the act of requesting,’
which does not occur in N.T., as Plato, Repud. vill. 566 B. On the other
hand, ΟΣ σία is found in the sense of aitnua, as Hdt. vil. 32; LXX;
ὙΠῸ τ τὸν 56:

γνωριζέσθω : ‘be declared’ or ‘made known.’ (See oni. 22.)
As if God did not know them. (Comp. Mt. vi. 8.)

πρὸς τὸν θεόν: Not merely “Ὁ God,’ but implying intercourse
with God, as well as the idea of direction. (See on ii. 30; and
ΌΤΙ. ΝΠ: ΣΧ τῶν: Mk ΜΠ 5, ix τὸς; na. τὸ τ Cor. xvi. 6.)

κα. (ΟΠΞΕΟΙ ΝΘ: “and. So.’

9 εἰρήνη τοῦ θεοῦ: ‘the peace of God.’ Only here in N.T.
Comp. ὃ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης (vs. 9). Not the objective peace with
God, wrought by justification (Rom. v. 1 [Chr., Theoph., Aug. ]}) ;
nor the favor of God (Grot.); nor peace with one another
(Thdrt., Lips.), since mutual peace cannot dissipate anxiety ; but
the inward peace of the soul which comes from God, and is
grounded in God’s presence and promise. It is the fruit of
believing prayer; ‘the companion of joy” (Beng.). Of course
such peace implies and involves the peace of reconciliation with
God. In the hearts of those who are reconciled to God through
faith in Christ, the peace of Christ rules (Col. iii. 15). As mem-
bers of the heavenly commonwealth (iii. 20), they are in a king-
dom which is “ righteousness and peace and joy” (Rom. xiv. 17).
“The God of hope,” to whom their expectation is directed, fills
them “ with all joy and peace in believing” (Rom. xv. 13). They
are not disquieted because they know that “all things are working
together for good to them that love God”’ (Rom. viii. 28).

ἡ ὑπερέχουσα πάντα νοῦν : ‘which surpasseth every thought (of
man).’ For ὑπερέχειν, ‘to rise above,’ ‘overtop,’ ‘surpass,’ see
il. 3, 11. 8. The verb is not common in N.T. Only four times
in Paul, and once in 1 Pet. ii. 13. Paul has been enjoining the
duty of prayer under all circumstances as a safeguard against
anxiety. Hence this assurance that the peace of God surpasses

136 PHILIPPIANS [Eve

every human thought or device as a means of insuring tranquillity
of heart. ‘The processes and combinations of human reasoning
result only in continued doubt and anxiety. Mere reason cannot
find a way out of perplexity. The mysterious dealings of God
present problems which it cannot solve, and which only multiply
its doubts and questionings. Within the sphere of God’s peace
all these are dismissed, and the spirit rests in the Lord, even
where it cannot understand. A different and widely-accepted
explanation is that of the Greek expositors: that the peace of
God is so great and wonderful that it transcends the power of the
human mind to understand it. So Ellic., Ril., Alf., Ead. Aug.
and Theoph. add that even the angels cannot comprehend it.
But this thought has no special relevancy here, while the other
explanation is in entire harmony with the context. Comp. also
t Cor. ii. 9-16.

Nois is the reflective intelligence ; in Paul, mostly as related to
ethical and spiritual matters. It is the organ of the natural moral
consciousness and knowledge of God (Rom. 1. 20, 28, vil. 23).
It is related to πνεῦμα as the faculty to the efficient power. Until
renewed by the divine πνεῦμα, it cannot exercise right morai judg-
ment (Rom. xii. 2); and although it may theoretically approve
what is good, it cannot conform the practice of the life to its
theory (Rom. vii. 25). It is this which is incapable of dealing
with the painful and menacing facts of life in such a way as to
afford rest.

φρουρήσει : ‘shall guard.’ A promise, not a prayer, ‘may the
peace of God guard,’ as the Greek Fathers (Chr., however, says it
may mean either), some of the older expositors, and Vulg. ‘ custo-
diat.’. The word, which is a military term, in the N.T. is almost
confined to Paul. (See 1 Pet. i. 5.) The metaphor is beautiful
—the peace of God as a sentinel mounting guard over a believer’s
heart. It suggests ‘Tennyson’s familiar lines :

“ Love is and was my King and Lord,
And will be, though as yet I keep
Within his court on earth, and sleep

Encompassed by his faithful guard,
And hear at times a sentinel
Who moves about from place to place,
And whispers to the worlds of space,
In the deep night, that all is well.”

All limitations of the promise, such as guarding from the power
of Satan, from spiritual enemies, from evil thoughts, etc. are arbi-
trary. The promise is general, covering all conceivable occasions
for fear or anxiety. ‘He teaches us the certain result of our
prayers. He does not, indeed, promise that God will deliver us
in this life entirely from calamities and straits, since he may have

NG ἡ, 8| THE GUARDIANSHIP OF GOD’S PEACE 1327
the best reasons for leaving us in this struggle of faith and patience
with a view to his and our greater glory at the appearing of Christ ;
but he does promise us that which is greater and more desir-
able than all the good things of this life—the peace of God”
(Schlichting).

Tas καρδίας ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν : ‘your hearts and your
thoughts.’ Καρδία in the sense of the physical organ is not-used
in N.T. It is the centre of willing, feeling, and thinking. Never,
like ψυχή, to denote the individual subject of personal life, so as
to be exchanged with the personal pronoun; nor as πνεῦμα, of
the divine principle of life in man. Like our ‘heart,’ it denotes
the seat of feeling, as contrasted with intelligence (Rom. ix. 2,
x. 1; 2 Cor. ii. 4, vi. 11; Phil. i. 7). But not this only. It is
also the seat of mental action— intelligence (Rom. i. 21 ; Eph. i.
18), and of moral choice (1 Cor. vil. 37; 2 Cor. ix. 7). It gives
impulse and character to action (Rom. vi. 17; Eph. vi. 5). It is
the seat of the divine Spirit (Rom. v. 5 ; 2 Cor. i. 22; Gal. iv. 6),
and the sphere of his operation in directing, comforting, establish-
Mos etes (Colma ns τ Viesss ions 2° Thess. 11 17, 1.3). . It
is the seat of faith (Rom. x. 9), and of divine love (Rom. v. 5),
and is the organ of spiritual praise (Col. iii. 16).

νοήματα, only in Paul. Things which issue from the xapdéa ;
thoughts, acts of the will. Hence, of Satan’s ‘ devices’ (2 Cor. ii.
Die ΕΒ COG il, 14, 1V.4,0. 5, 2) πὸ two nouns are
emphatically separated by the article and the personal pronoun
attached to each.

Calv.’s distinction between καρδ. and vo. as ‘affections’ and “ intelli-
gence’ is unpauline. Neither are they to be taken as synonymous, nor as
a popular and summary description of the spiritual life (De W.).

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ : As so often, the sphere in which divine pro-
tection will be exercised. This divine peace is assigned as guardian
only to those who are in Christ (iii. 9).

Some, as De W., Ril., K1., Weiss, explain: ‘Shall keep your hearts 27
union with Christ. So Theoph., aore μὴ ἐκπεσεῖν αὐτοῦ ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον
μένειν ἐν αὐτῷ.

8. τὸ λοιπόν : ‘finally.’ (See on iii. 1.) Introducing the con-
clusion of the letter. No reference to iii. 1, by way of resuming
after a long digression; nor does it introduce what remains for
them to do in addition to God’s protecting care (De W.), since
there is no indication of an antithesis. It prefaces an exhortation
parallel with vs. 4-6, containing a summary of duties, to which is
added a promise of the presence of the God of peace. The
exhortation is not to the cultivation of distinct virtues as such
(so Luth., Calv., Beza, Beng.), but each virtue represents general

righteousness of life viewed on a particular side, the different sides
τῇ

138 PHILIPPIANS [Iv. 8

being successively introduced by the repeated ὅσα, and summed
up by the twofold εἴ τις.
ἀληθῆ: ‘true.’ God is the norm of truth. That is true in
thought, word, or deed, which answers to the nature of God as
revealed in the moral ideals of the gospel of his Son, who mani-
fests him, and who can therefore say, ‘I am the truth’ (Jn. xiv. 6).
Not to be limited to truth in speaking, as Thdrt., Beng.
σεμνά : ‘reverend’ or ‘venerable.’ Exhibiting a dignity which
grows out of moral elevation, and which thus invites reverence.
In class. an epithet of the gods. ‘Venerable’ is the best render-
ing, if divested of its conventional implication of age. Matthew
Arnold (God and the Bible, Pref. xxii.) renders ‘nobly serious,’
as opposed to κοῦφος, ‘ lacking intellectual seriousness.’
With the exception of this passage, σεμνὸς occurs only in the Pastorals,
and the kindred σεμνότης only there. (See 1 Tim. ii. 2, ill. 4, 8, 11;
Tit. ii. 2, 7.) In LXX, of the name of God (2 Macc. vill. 15); of divine

laws (2 Mace. vi. 28); of the Sabbath (2 Mace. vi. 11); of the words of
wisdom (Proy. viii. ©); of the words of the pure (Prov. xv. 26).

δίκαια : ‘just.’ In the broadest sense, not merely in relation to
men, but according to the divine standard, satisfying all obliga-
tions to God, to their neighbor, and to themselves. (Comp.
ROM. aL. 15.)
ayva: ‘pure.’ Always with a moral sense. So ἁγνότης (2 Cor.
vi. 6). Not to be limited here to freedom from sins of the flesh :
it covers purity in all departments of the life, motives as well as
acts. In class. dyvds is ‘ pure,’ ‘chaste,’ in relation to life (as of
female purity, purity from blood-guilt), or to religious observances,
as of sacrifices. (See Schmidt, Syzov.181, 11.) Both ἁγνός and
ἅγιος mean pure in the sense of ‘sinless.’ The radical difference
between them is, that ἅγιος is ‘holy,’ as being set apart and
devoted ; ἁγνός, as absolutely undefiled. Christ is both ἅγιος and
ἁγνός, See on ἁγίοις, i. τ. In 1 Jn. iii. 3, dyvds is applied to
Christ, and ἁγνίζειν to the imitation of his purity. In 2 Cor. xi. 2,
of virgin purity. (Comp.:Clem. ad (02. xxi.) Imex ΜΠ ΠΥ 5.
of moral spotlessness. In Jas. iii. 17, as characterising heavenly
wisdom. “Ayvas (Phil. i. 17), of preaching the gospel with un-
mixed motives. ᾿Αγνίζειν, which in LXX is used only of ceremon-
ial purification, has that meaning in four of the seven instances
in N.T. (Jn. x1. 55; Acts xxi. 24, 260, xxiv. τοῦ net canner
(Jas. iv. 8; τ Pet. 1.22; τ Jn. mi. 2); of purifying the) heart anc
soul. Neither ἁγνός, ἁγνότης, nor ἁγνῶς occur in the Gospels.
‘Ayvés and all the kindred words which appear in N.T. are found in
LXX. “Ayvioua (Num. xix.9), not in N.T. For αγνιασμός (Num. viii. 7),
the correct reading is ἁγνισμός. In LXX ayvés is used of the oracles of
God, of the fear of God, of prayers, of the heart, of works, of fire, of a virgin,
of a man free from cowardice, and of the soul. (See Ps. xii. [xi.] 6, xix.
[ἄν 1.7 τοῦ Prov.)xix. 13, xx. 0. x1) ὃ; 2 Macc. xilio; 2 lacc 27, τι}
7, 8, 23.)

IV. 8] TAKE ACCOUNT OF ALL GOOD THINGS 139

The two following qualities appeal to the affectionate or admir-
ing recognition of others.

προσφιλῆ : ‘lovely,’ ‘amiable.’ Whatever calls forth love. Only
here in N.T. In LXX in a passive sense (Sir. iv. 7, xx. 13).

εὔφημα : ‘fair-sounding.’ A.V. and R.V. ‘of good report.’
‘Gracious,’ R.V. marg. is vague. Not merely having a fair sound
to the popular ear, “ vox et praeterea nihil,” but fair-sounding, as
implying essential worthiness.

In class. of words or sounds of good omen. Hence εὔφημος, ‘ abstaining
from inauspicious words’; ‘keeping a holy silence.’ (See Aésch. Ag. 1247;
Soph. O. C. 132.)

A comprehensive exhortation follows, covering all possible
virtues.

ei tis: ‘if there be any’: whatever there is. For the form of
expression, comp. li. 1; Rom. xiii. 9; Eph. iv. 29. Not ‘ what-
ever other.’

ἀρετὴ : ‘virtue’; moral excellence. In class. it has no special
moral significance, but denotes excellence of any kind — bravery,
rank, excellence of land or of animals. It is possibly for this rea-
son that Paul has no fondness for the word, and uses it only here.
Elsewhere in N.T. only by Peter, who uses it of God (1 Pet. i. 9 ;
2 Pet. 1. 3), and enjoins it as a Christian quality (2 Pet.i.5). It
is foundein, XX; of God, Hab: ui. 3 — dofa + Is. xiii. 8, 12, plu.,
in connection with δόξα, and xlili. 21, signifying God’s attributes
of power, wisdom, etc. ; Zech. vi. 13, of him whose name is ‘ the
Branch,’ and who shall receive ἀρετὴν, 2.6. the attributes of sover-
eignty ; Esth. (interpol.) xiv. 10, of the pretended attributes of
the vain ; Sap. iv. 1, of moral excellence in men.

Lightf.’s explanation is ingenious and suggestive. ‘ Whatever value may
reside in your old heathen conception of virtue’; as if he were anxious to
omit no possible ground of appeal.

ἔπαινος : ‘praise.’ If there is any praise that follows the prac-

tice of virtue, as the praise of love (1 Cor. xiii.) Not ‘that which
is praiseworthy’ (Weiss).

τ ταῦτα λογίζεσθε: ‘these things take into account.’ ‘ Reckon’
with them. “ Horum rationem habete”’ (Beng.). It is an appeal
to an independent moral judgment, to thoughtfully estimate the
value of these things. Not = φρονεῖν, ἃ5 De W. ‘Think on these
things’ (A.V., R.V.) is a feeble and partial rendering.

He now brings the scheme of duties more clearly before them,
and at the same time reminds them, by appealing to his own
previous instructions and example, that he is making no new

140 PHILIPPIANS [IV. 8,9

demands upon them. “ Facit transitionem a generalibus ad
Paulina” (Beng.).

9. ἃ καὶ : ‘those things which also.’ Those things which are
true, venerable, etc., which a/so ye learned of me.

Others codrdinate the four cals: ‘those things which ye have as well
learned as received; as well heard as seen’ (Vulg., Calv., Beza, Lightf.).

The four verbs form two pairs: ἐμάθετε and παρελάβετε referring
to what they had learned by teaching; ἠκούσατε and εἴδετε, by
example.

euabere .. . παρελάβετε : ‘learned’... ‘received.’ The mean-
ings do not differ greatly, except that παρελ. adds, to the simple
notion of learning, that of what was communicated or transmitted.

Kl. ἐμάθ. by personal instruction; παρελ. as oral or epistolary traditions
obtained from him or transmitted by his delegates. Mey. renders παρελ.
‘accepted’; but that sense is rare in Paul. 1 Cor. xv. 1 is doubtful.
I Cor. xi. 23, xv. 3; Gal.i. 12; 2 Thess. iii. 6, signify simple reception.
(See Lightf. on Gal. 1. 12; Col. 11.65 1 Dhessm. 12.)

ἠκούσατε καὶ εἴδετε: ‘heard and saw.’ In their personal inter-
course with him. Not through preaching (Calv.), which has
already been expressed. Lightf. and others explain x. of what
they heard when he was absent. But all the other verbs refer to
the time of his presence at Philippi.

Ἔν ἐμοι properly belongs to 7x. and εἴδ., but is loosely taken
with all four verbs. Ἔμάθ. and παρελ., strictly, would require
παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ.

πράσσετε: ‘do,’ or ‘practise.’ A distinction between πράσσειν
and ποιεῖν is recognisable in some cases; πράσσειν, ‘ practise,’
marking activity in its progress, and ποιεῖν in its accomplishment
or product. ‘The distinction, however, is not uniformly main-
tained, and must not be pressed. (See Schmidt, Syzon. 23, and
Trench, Syz. xcvi.)

kal: Consecutive, as vs. 7; ‘and so.’

6 θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης : ‘the God of peace.’ Who is the source and
giver of peace. ‘The phrase only in Paul and Heb. (See Rom.
XV. 33, ΧΥΙ. 20; 1 Thess. v. 22; Heb. xii. 20) )eeeaee in the
N.T. sense, is not mere calm or tranquillity. All true calm and
restfulness are conceived as based upon reconciliation with God.
Christian peace implies the cessation of enmity between God and
man (Rom. vii. 7) ; the complete harmony of the divine and the
human wills; the rest of faith in divine love and wisdom (Is.
Xxvi. 3). God is ‘the God of peace’ only to those who are at
one with him. God’s peace is not sentimental, but moral. Hence
the God of peace is the sanctifer of the entire personality (1 Thess.
v.23). Accordingly ‘ peace’ is habitually used in connection with

Veo; 10] YOUR GIFT MADE ME GLAD 141

the Messianic salvation, both in the Old and the New Testaments.
The Messiah himself will be ‘peace’ (Mic. ν. 5). Peace is associ-
ated with righteousness as a Messianic blessing (Ps. ]xxii. 7, Ixxxv.
10). Peace, founded in reconciliation with God, is the theme of
the gospel (Acts x. 36); the gospel is ‘the gospel of peace’
(Hpi 7. vio τὸ; ἘΟΙΠ x. 15) ; Christ is ‘the Lord ‘of peace’
(2 Thess. iii. 16), and bestows peace (Jn. xiv. 27, xvi. 33). “It
is through God, as the author and giver of peace, that man is able
to find the harmony which he seeks in the conflicting elements of
his own nature, in his relations with the world, and in his relations
to God himself’? (Westcott, on Heb. xili. 20).

He now returns thanks for the gift which the Philippian church
has sent him by Epaphroditus, and praises their past and present
generosity.

τὸ “ὦ 7 greatly rejoice in the Lord because of your kind thought
Jor me as shown in your gift; a thought which you have indeed
entertained all along, but have had no opportunity to carry out.
7 do not speak as though I had been in want; for I have learned
the secret of being self-sufficient in my condition; not that 7 am
sufficient of myself, but 7 can do all things in Him that strength-
eneth me. Lt was a beautiful thing for you thus to put yourselves tn
Jellowship with my affliction; but this ts not the first time; for in
the very beginning, as I was leaving Macedonia, you were the only
church that contributed to my necessities, sending supplies to me
more than once in Thessalonica. But my chief interest ts not in
the gift itself, but in the spiritual blessing which your acts of min-
istry will bring to you. Nevertheless my need is fully met by this
sift which Epaphroditus brought from you — this sacrifice of sweet
odor, acceptable to God. And as you have ministered to my need,
so God will supply every need of yours, with such bounteousness
as befits his riches in glory in Christ Jesus. To him, our God,
and Father, be glory forever. / My salutations to all the members
of your church. The brethren who are with me send you greeting,
and all the members of the Roman church, especially those of
Cesar’s household. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with
your spirit.

10. ἐχάρην δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ : ‘but I rejoice in the Lord.’ Again the
keynote of the epistle is struck. (See i. 18, ii. 17, 18, 28, ill. 1,
iv. 4; comp. Polyc. ad Phil. i.) Ἔχάρ. : epistolary aorist.

142 PHILIPPIANS [IV. 10

ἐν κυρίῳ : The gift, its motive, and the apostle’s joy in it, were
all within the sphere of life in Christ. ‘The gift has its distinctive
and choicest character for him as proceeding from their mutual
fellowship in Christ. Thus Chr., οὐ κοσμικῶς ἐχάρην, φησὶν, οὐδὲ
βιωτικῶς : “1 rejoice, he says, not in a worldly fashion, nor as
over a matter of common life.”

μέγαλως : ‘greatly.’ Only herein N.T. (See LXX; 1 Chron.
xxix. 9; Neh. xii. 43.) Notice the emphatic position.

non ποτὲ : ‘now at length.’ Only here and Rom.i. 10. Ἤδη
marks a present as related to a past during which something has
been in process of completion which is now completed, or some-
thing has been expected which is now realised. Ποτὲ indicates
indefinitely the interval of delay. With 7dy the writer puts him-
self at the point where the interval indicated by ποτὲ terminates.

Others, as Weiss, render ‘already once’; which would be a mere refer-
ence to something past and now repeated. ‘This is precluded by the con-
nection, and especially by the latter part of vs. 10.

ἀνεθάλετε τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν : ‘ye have revived your thought
for me.’ ᾿Ἄνεθ. is transitive, and τὸ ὑπ. ἐμ. dp. is accusative of
the object. You caused your thought for me to sprout and bloom
afresh, like a tree putting out fresh shoots after the winter. So
Weiss, Lips., Lightf., De W.

Others, as Mey., KI., Ellic., Alf., Beet, regard the verb as intransitive.
In that case either τὸ ὑπ. ἐμ. must be taken as accus. of the obj. after ppov.,
‘ye revived to think of that which concerned me,’ which is awkward and
improbable; or τὸ gp. ὑπ. ἐμ. must be taken as the accus. of reference,
‘ye revived as regarded the thinking concerning me.’ According to this
the following clause would mean, ‘ye took thought concerning the taking
thought for me.’ The only serious objection urged against the transitive
sense of ἀνεθ. is that it seems to make the revival of interest dependent on
the will of the Philippians, and thus implies a reproach. But this is strain-
ing a point. Paul simply says: ‘I rejoice that, when the opportunity per-
mitted, you directed your thought towards me and sent me a gift which
circumstances had prevented your doing before.’ That no reproach is
implied is evident from the following words. ᾿Αναθάλλειν only here in N.T.
Im) ΤΟ ΧΟ transitivelyzek. αν 2 ΞΡ ἢ. Τῷ, Σὶ 221 ΤῸ

ἐφ ᾧ: ‘wherein,’ or ‘with reference to which’; namely, the
matter of my welfare. Ὑπὲρ (ἐμοῦ) emphasises the personal inter-
est ; ἐπὶ merely marks a reference to the matter in question.

καὶ : Besides your ἀναθάλλειν at the favorable opportunity, you
were ‘a/so’ concerned all the time until the opportunity occurred.

ἐφρονεῖτε : imperfect tense: ‘ye were all along taking thought.’
Every possible suggestion of reproach is removed by this.

ἠκαιρεῖσθε δέ: * but ye were lacking (all the while you were thus
taking thought) opportunity.’ The verb (only here in Bib.) refers
to the circumstances which had prevented them from sooner
sending their gift; either lack of means, or want of facilities for
transmitting the contribution, etc.

EV - 22, 15] SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN CHRIST 143

There is a possibility of their misunderstanding his expression
of joy to mean merely satisfaction at the relief of his personal
needs. He will guard this.

11. ovy ore: ‘not to say that,’ or ‘I do not say that.’ A dis-
Hacuvert IN.) formula (Seey yn: vi. 46, vil. 225 2 Cor. i. 24,
ii. 5.) Inclass. ‘not only’; or, when not followed by a second
clause, ‘ although.’

καθ᾽ ὑστέρησιν λέγω : “1 speak according to want’; 2.6. ‘as if I
were in a state of want.’ Lightf. aptly, ‘in language dictated by
want.’ Comp. κατ᾽ ἐριθίαν, κατὰ κενοδοξίαν, li. 3. Ὑστέρησις, only
here and Mk. xii. 44. He does not deny the want itself, but the
want as the motive and measure of his joy.

ἐγὼ yap ἔμαθον : ‘for I have learned.’ The aorist for the per-
fect. See on é€Aafov, ili. 12 (Burt. 46, 55). The tuition has
extended over his whole experience up to the present. Ἐγὼ
emphasises his personal relation to the matter of want. ‘/, so far
as my being affected by want.’

ἐν ois εἰμὶ : ‘in the state in which Iam.’ Notas A.V. and R.V.,
‘in whatever state I am,’ but in all the circumstances of the pres-
ent. For εἶναι or γίνεσθαι ἐν, see Mk. v. 25 ; Lk. xxii. 42; 1 Cor.
vey er Phess: 11-6, Vv. 4

αὐτάρκης : ‘self-sufficing.’ Only here in N.T.; LXX; Sir. xl.
18 ; αὐτάρκεια, 2 Cor. ix. 8; τ Tim. vi. 6. Αὐτάρκεια is an inward
self-sufficing, as opposed to the lack or the desire of outward
things. Comp. Plat. Zi. 33 1), ἡγήσατο yap αὐτὸ ὃ ξυνθεὶς
αὔταρκες Ov ἄμεινον ἔσεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ προσδεὲς ἄλλων: “For the
Creator conceived that a being which was self-sufficient would be
far more excellent than one which lacked anything.” It was a
favorite Stoic word. See on πολιτεύεσθε, i. 27. It expressed the
doctrine of that sect that man should be sufficient unto himself
for all things, and able, by the power of his own will, to resist
the force of circumstances. Comp. Seneca, De Vita Beata, 6,
addressed to Gallio: “ Beatus est praesentibus, qualiacunque sunt,
contentus.” A list of interesting paralls. in Wetst. Paul is not
self-sufficient in the Stoic sense, but through the power of a new
self — the power of Christ in him. (Comp. 2 Cor. iii. 5.)

He proceeds to explain ἐν ois . . . αὐτάρκης in detail. The
ἔμαθον is developed by οἶδα and μεμύημαι.

12. οἶδα : ‘I know,’ as the result of having learned. (See on
PLO, 25.)

καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι: ‘also how to be abased.’ Kat connects raz.
with the preceding more general statement, ἐμ. . . . αὐτάρ. εἶν.
Ταπεινοῦσθαι : ‘to be brought low,’ with special reference to the
abasement caused by want. Not in the spiritual sense, which is

144 PHILIPPIANS [1v. 12

all but universal in N.T. The usual antithesis of ταπεινοῦν 15 ὑψοῦν.
(See 2 Cor./xi.7; Phila. 8,)/9% 1 Pet.v. 6.) Piece the προ τ τε τις
is περισσεύειν, contrasting abundance with the want implied in raz.

οἶδα καὶ περισσεύειν : ‘and I know how to abound.’ Οἶδα is
repeated for emphasis. epic., ‘to be abundantly furnished.’
Not ‘to have superfluity,’ as Calv. Paul says, ‘I know how to
be abased and not crushed ; to be in abundance and not exalted.’
(Comp. 2'Corsiv..3, 9.)

ἐν παντὶ καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν : ‘in everything and in all things.’ In all
relations and circumstances. In every particular circumstance,
and in all circumstances generally. ‘In Allem und Jedem.”
(Comp. 2 Cor. x. 6.) For ἐν πᾶσιν, comp.-Col- ἢ απ τ ies
τ Tim. iii. 11 ; Heb. xiii. 18. Paul more commonly uses ἐν παντὶ.
Both adjectives are neuter, after the analogy of οἷς (vs. 11).

Such interpretations of ἐν παντὶ as ‘ubique’ (Vulg:, Calv., Beza); or
reference to time (Chr.); or, taking παντὶ as neuter, and πᾶσιν as mascu-
line (Luth., Beng.), are fanciful.

μεμύημαι : ‘I have been initiated.’ R.V., ‘I have learned the
secret.’ In class., mostly in the passive, of initiation into the
Greek mysteries, as the Eleusinian. (See Hdt. ii. 51; Plat. Gorg.
497C; Aristoph. AZut. 846; Ran. 158.) In a similar sense,
LXX; 3 Macc. il. 30. The kindred word μυστήριον is common in
Paul of the great truths hidden from eternity in the divine coun-
sels, and revealed to believers) (Eph. ai, a5 95 ΘΟ diana.
etc.). Comp. Ign. Zfh. xii., Παύλου συμμύσται τοῦ ἡγιασμένου :
‘“‘ associates in the mysteries with Paul who has been sanctified.”
Connect ἐν παν. κ. ἐν πᾶσ. adverbially with μεμύ., while the infini-
tives depend on μεμύ. Thus: ‘In everything and in all things I
have been instructed to be full,’ etc.

Others, as De W., Lips., Ellic., while connecting ἐν παν. x. ἐν πᾶσ. with
μεμύ. as above, make the following infinitives simply explicative; while that
in which Paul has been instructed is represented by ἐν παντὶ, etc. The
objection urged against this is that μυεῖσθαι appears to be habitually con-
strued, either with the accusative of the thing, the dative, or, rarely, with
the infinitive; though there is one instance of its construction with a
preposition, κατὰ (3 Macc. ii. 30). This objection is not formidable, and
is relieved by our rendering.

χορτάζεσθαι: ‘to be full.” The verb, primarily, of the feeding
and fattening of animals in a stall. “Comp. Apoc. xix. 21, of
feeding birds of prey with the flesh of God’s enemies. In Synop.,
of satisfying the hunger of the multitude (Mt. xiv. 20 and paralls. ).
In Mt. v. 6; Lk. vi. 21, of satisfying spiritual hunger.

ὑστερεῖσθαι: ‘to suffer need.’ From ὕστερος, ‘behind.’ The
phrase ‘to fall behind’ is popularly used of one in straitened
circumstances, or in debt. It is applied in N.T. to material defi-
ciency (Lk. xv. 14; Jn, ii, 3) ; and to moral and spiritual short-

ἘΝ 12,13] I CAN DO ALL THINGS 145

coming (Rom. iii. 23 ; 1 Cor. vill. 8; Heb. xii. 15). The middle
voice (not pass. as Thay.) indicates the /eeng of the pressure of
Walljsioie. ὧν τῇ; ROM: 1. 23 ; 2 (ΟἹ. xi. 8. "The mere fact
of want is expressed by the active voice, as Mt. xix. 20; Jn. 11]. 3.
In 2 Cor. xii. 11, Paul says that he was in no respect dehind the
‘extra super’ apostles ; οὐδὲν ὑστέρησα, expressing the fact of his
equality, not his sevse of it.

See some good remarks of Canon T. 5. Evans on 1 Cor. i. 7 (Zxposztor,
2d Ser. iii. p. 6); also Gifford, in Speaker's Comm., on Rom, 111. 23.

13. πάντα ἰσχύω : “1 can do all things.’ Not only all the things
just mentioned, but everything.

*Ioxvey and the kindred words ἰσχὺς, ἰσχυρὸς, are not of frequent
occurrence in Paul. The meanings of ἰσχὺς and δύναμις (see ἐνδυναμοῦντι)
often run together, as do those of δύναμις and ἐνέργεια. (See on 11]. 21.)
The general distinction, however, is that ἰσχὺς is indwelling power put
forth or embodied, either aggressively, or as an obstacle to resistance;
physical power organised, or working under individual direction. An army
and a fortress are both ἰσχυρὸς. The power inhering in the magistrate,
which is put forth in laws or judicial decisions, is ἰσχὺς, and makes the
edicts ἰσχυρὰ, ‘valid,’ and hard to resist. Δύναμις is rather the indwelling
power or virtue which comes to manifestation in ἰσχὺς. (See Schmidt,
Synon. 148, 3, 4, 5.) For the accus. with ἰσχύειν, comp. Gal. v. 6.

ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί we: ‘in him that strengtheneth me,’ or, more
literally, ‘infuses strength into me.’ The évdvy. appears in the
ἰσχύω.
Χριστω is added by κὸ DFGKLP.

ἘΠῚ Not. trou, put in” for he-is).72 Chmst (ii, 9).
᾿Ἐνδυναμοῦν, mostly in Paul. (See Rom. iv. 20; Eph. vi. 10;
1 Din ἴ 12.) , With the thought Here, comp. 2 Cor, xit- Ὁ;
Elimoi. 1252 lim, i, πὶ iv. ΠῚ: and lon. Swyr: iv., πάντα ὕπο:
μένω, αὐτοῦ pe ἐνδυναμοῦντος τοῦ τελείου ἀνθρώπου: “1 endure all
things, seeing that he himself enableth me who is perfect man.”’
Any possible misunderstanding of αὐτάρκης (vs. tr) is corrected
by these words.

He guards against a possible inference from his words that he
lightly esteems their gift, or thinks it superfluous. Not, as Chr.,
(c., and Theoph., very strangely, that he feared lest his apparent
contempt for the gift might dissuade them from similar acts in the
future. It is characteristic that there is no formal expression of
thanks beyond his recognition and commendation of the moral
and spiritual significance of the act, in which he virtually acknow-
ledges the benefit to himself. The best thanks he can give them

146 PHILIPPIANS [IV. 13, 14

is to recognise their fidelity to the principle of Christian love, and
to see in their gift an expression of that principle. On the other
hand, there is no attempt to conceal the fact that he was in real
affliction (θλίψει), and that their act relieved it; and only the
most perverted and shallow exegesis, such as Holsten’s, can read
into his words an expression of indifference to the love displayed
by the church, and describe them as ‘ thankless thanks,” or see
in them a contradiction of 1 Thess. ii. 9.

14. πλὴν: ‘nevertheless.’ (See on i. 18, ili. 16.) * Neverthe-
less, do not think that, because 1 am thus independent of earthly
contingencies, I lightly prize your gift.’

καλῶς ἐποιήσατε : ‘ye did nobly.’ Positive and generous praise :
not a mere acknowledgment that they had simply done their duty.
It was a beautiful deed, true to the gospel ideal of καλὸς. For
the phrase καλῶς ποιεῖν, see Mk. vil. 37; Lk. vi. 27; 1 Cor. vii. 37.

συνκοινωνήσαντές μου τῇ θλίψει: ‘that ye made common cause
with my affliction’; ‘went shares with’ (Lightf. on Gal. vi. 6).
The A.V. ‘communicate’ is correct, if ‘communicate’ is under-
stood in its older sense of ‘share,’ as Ben Jonson, “ thousands that
communicate our loss.’”?” (Comp. Rom. xii. 13.) The verb occurs
only in Eph. v. 11 ; Apoc. xviii. 4. The participle, as the comple-
ment of ἐποι., specifies the act in which the καλ. ἐποι. was exhibited.
For the construction, comp. Acts v. 42; 2 Thess. iii. 13 ; Win.
xly. 4. The dative θλίψει expresses that with which common
cause was made.

Their gift is not the first and only one which he has received.
It is a repetition of former acts of the same kind, a new outgrowth
from his long and affectionate relations with them. He might
justly expect and could honorably accept help from those who
had been the first to minister to his necessities, and who had so
often repeated their ministry. The idea of a gwasi-apology for
his reproach of the Philippians, because his former relations with
them had justified his disappointment in not receiving earlier sup-
plies (Chr., Gic., Theoph.), is utterly without foundation, since
no reproach had been uttered or implied. ‘There is no specific
praise of their earlier gifts, but the kad. ἐποι. is confirmed by the
fact that the last gift was a continued manifestation of the same
spirit that had marked them from the beginning.

Baur’s inference from 2 Cor. xi. 9, that the Philippians had been accus-

tomed to send him a regular annual contribution which had now for some
time been intermitted, requires no notice.

τὺ 15]" THE FIRST TO HELP 147

15. οἴδατε δὲ καὶ ὑμεῖς Φιλιππήσιοι: ‘and ye also, Philippians,
know.’ Δὲ passes on to the mention of former acts of liberality,
or perhaps marks the contrast between the expression of his own
judgment (vs. 14) and the appeal to their knowledge. Kai
marks the comparison of the Philippians with the apostle himself.
‘Ye aswell as I.’ Not, as Calv., ‘ye as well as other witnesses
whom I might cite.’ It is quite unnecessary to assume, as Hofn.
and Weiss, any special sensitiveness of Paul in alluding to his rela-
tions with other churches, which causes him to appeal to the
knowledge of the Philippians.

Φιλιππήσιοι : Paul is not accustomed thus to address his readers
by name. (See 2 Cor. vi. 11; Gal. iii. 1.) The address is not
intended to point a contrast with other churches, but expresses
earnestness and affectionate remembrance.

ὅτι : ‘that.’ Habitual construction with οἶδα. (See 1. 19, 25 ;
τ Cor. iii. 16; Gal. iv. 13, etc.) Not ‘because,’ as Hofn., whose
explanation, ‘ ye know that ye have done well because this is not
the first time that you have sent me similar gifts,’ needs no com-
ment. (See Mey. ad loc.)

ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου : ‘in the beginning of the gospel.’ The
reference is clearly shown by the succeeding words to be to the
first preaching of the gospel in Macedonia, about ten years before
the composition of this letter. It is equivalent to ‘when the gospel
was first proclaimed among you.’ He alludes, no doubt, to money
supplied before or at his departure from Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14).

Some, as Lightf., De W., Weiss, refer to the contribution given at
Corinth (2 Cor. xi. 9), in which case ἐξῆλθον must be rendered as pluperf.
This, of course, is grammatically defensible. Lightf. says that as the
entrance into Macedonia was one of the two most important stages in
Paul’s missionary life, he speaks of his labors in Macedonia as the deg?z-
ning of the gospel, though his missionary career was now half run. “The
faith of Christ had, as it were, made a fresh start” (δ εῤίἠεαί Essays: “The
Churches of Macedonia”). This is fanciful. (See Ramsay, Sz. Pawt,
the Traveller, etc. p. 199.)

Explanations which assume to fix the exact points of corre-
spondence between Paul’s statements here and the narrative in
Acts must needs be tentative and indecisive. No doubt the
different parts of the N.T., in some cases, exhibit ‘“ undesigned
coincidences”; but in many other cases the coincidences are
imperfect, or are altogether wanting. It is most unlikely that all
the contributions of the Philippians to Paul were accurately chroni-
cled by Luke. That Paul in vs. 16 mentions a contribution earlier
than that noted in vs. 15 presents no difficulty. Having said that
the Philippians were the very first to assist him on his departure
from Macedonia, he emphasises that readiness by going back to a
still earlier instance. ‘Not only on my departure, but even before
I departed you were mindful of my necessities.’

148 PHILIPPIANS [τῦ. 15. 16

Μακεδονίας : In Paul’s later letters he always prefers to mention
provinces rather than cities in connection with his own travels,
and does so in cases where a definite city might have been as
properly referred to. (See Rom. xvi. 5; 1 Cor. xvi. 15; 2 Cor.
li. 13, Vil. 5, Vili. 1, 1x. 2, and Weizs. Afost. Zeit. p. 195.)

pot... ἐκοινώνησεν : ‘became partner with me,’ or ‘ entered
into partnership with me.’ See on συνκοιν., vs. 14. Comp. Ril.,
“ne se mit en rapport avec moi.” For the construction with dat.
of the person, see Gal. vi. 6, and Ellic.’s note there.

εἰς λόγον δόσεως Kat λήμψεως : ‘as to an account of giving and
receiving.’ The matter is expressed in a mercantile metaphor.
He means that the question of money given and received did not
enter into his relations with any other church. ‘The Philippians,
by their contributions, had ‘opened an account’ with him.

Others, as Ril. and Lightf., dismiss the metaphor and render εἰς λόγον
“as regards,’ or ‘ with reference to.’ This has classical but not N.T. prece-
dent. (See Thuc. iii. 46; Dem. De Falsa Leg. 385; Hat. iii. 99, vii. 9.)
But the recurrence of λόγον in vs. 17, where the metaphor is unmistakable,
seems to point to the other explanation.

For ἐκοιν. εἰς comp. κοιν. εἰς (i. 5), and see Win. xxx. 8 a. ᾿ἕχκοιν. εἰς Noy.
forms one idea. For λόγος, in the sense of ‘account’ or ‘reckoning,’ see
Mt. xii. 36; Lk. xvi. 2; Rom. xiv.12; and comp. Ign. Philad. xi., eis λόγον
τιμῆς, “as a mark of honor”; Swzyr.x., ot ἐπηκολούθησάν μοι εἰς λόγον θεοῦ,
“who followed me in the cause of God.”

Ado. καὶ λήμψ., in the sense of credit and debt, occurs in LXX,
Sir. xli. 19, xlii. 7. (Comp. Arist. 27h. Wic. ii. 7,4; Plat. Repud.
332A.) Δύσις in N.T. only here and Jas.i.17. The giving by
the Philippians and the receiving by Paul form the two sides of
the account. Chr., Theoph., Gic., Aug., followed by Calv., Weiss,
Lips., and others, explain of an exchange: Paul giving spiritual
gifts to the Philippians, and receiving their material gifts. This is
possible, but seems far-fetched.

ci μὴ ὑμεῖς μόνοι: ‘but ye only.’ (Comp. 1 Cor. ix. 6-18;
2 Cor. xi. 7-10; 1 Thess. 11. 9.) In all those cases he is speaking
of rightful remuneration for apostolic service, and not, as here, of
free offerings.

16. ὅτι : ‘ for,’ or ‘since,’ justifying the statement of vs. 15. Not
‘that,’ as Ril., Weiss, connecting with οἴδατε.

καὶ ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ : ‘even in Thessalonica.’ A Macedonian
city, near Philippi, where a church was founded by Paul before
his departure into Achaia (Acts xvii. 1-9) ; yet the contribution
came from Philippi, and not from Thessalonica, and that while he
was actually zz Thessalonica. Ἔν cannot be explained as ‘to.’

καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δὶς : ‘not merely once, but twice.’ (Comp. 1 Thess.
il; πολ,

cis τὴν χρείαν : ‘with reference to the (then) present need.’
Eis, as in i. 5; 2 Cor. ii. 12. hv with a possessive sense, ‘ my,’
or he particular need of the time. For χρείαν, comp. il. 25.

ἀν 16; 17] THE GIFT WILL ENRICH THE GIVERS 149

They are not, however, to understand him as implying that he
desired their gifts principally for his own relief or enrichment.
He prizes their gift chiefly because their sending it will be fruitful
in blessing to them. In vs. rr he disclaimed the sense of want.
Here he disclaims the desire for the gift in itself considered.

ἘΠῚ Οὐχ ὅτι: oee OL VS. ΤΙ:

ἐπιζητῶ: Used by Paul only here and Rom. xi. 7ζ. The con-
tinuous present, ‘ I am seeking,’ characterising his habitual attitude.

Ἐπὶ marks the direction, not the intensity of the action. See
on ἐπιποθῶ, 1. 8.

τὸ dopa: ‘the gift.’ In Paul only here and Eph. iv. 8. Not
the particular gift which they had sent, but the gift as related to
his characteristic attitude, and which might be in question in any
similar case.

ἀλλὰ ἐπιζητῶ : ‘The verb is repeated in order to emphasise the
contrary statement. (Comp. the repetitions in vs. 2, 12.)

tov xaprov: ‘the fruit.’ (See on i. 11.) The recompense
which the gift will bring to the givers. (Comp. 2 Cor. ix. 6.)

tov πλεονάζοντα : ‘that increaseth’ or ‘aboundeth.’ The verb,
which is often used by Paul, signifies large abundance. Paul does
not use it transitively, exc. 1 Thess. iii. 12, though it is so found
ὙΠ ΘΟ ΕΞ Nim, svi Gace ess Le (xlixs) τὸ; ΙΧΣῚ (lxx.) ore ἢ
Mace. iv. 35. In class. mostly, ‘to superabound.’ It is associated
with ὑπεραυξάνειν in 2 Thess. i. 3 (see Lightf. ad loc.), and with
περισσεύειν in τ Thess. 11]. 12. ‘The phrase πλεον. εἰς is unique,
since πλεον. habitually stands alone. In 2 Thess. i. 3, εἰς goes
with ἀγάπη. For this reason, some, as De W., connect with
ἐπιζητῶ: ‘I seek, with a view to your advantage, fruit which
aboundeth,’ etc. But this is against the natural order of the
sentence, since τὸν πλεον. eis Ady. iu. forms one idea in contrast
with ἐπιζ. τ. dou. ; and, as Mey. justly remarks, the preposition is
not determined by the word in itself, but by its logical reference.

λόγον : ‘account’ or ‘reckoning,’ as vs. 15. The idea of ‘ inter-
est’ (τόκος), as KI., is, perhaps, not exactly legitimate, though it
suits the metaphor in πλεον. εἰς λόγ., and καρπὸς is used in class.
of profit from material things, as flocks, honey, wool, etc. Mey.’s
objection that this sense is unsuited to δόμα is of little weight,
since the δόμα might be figuratively regarded as an investment.
It is arbitrary to limit the meaning to the future reward (Mey.,
Alf., Ellic.). The present participle may, indeed, signify, ‘ which
is rolling up a recompense to be awarded in the day of Christ’ ;
but it may equally point to the blessing which is continually
accruing to faithful ministry in the richer development of Christ-
lan character. (Comp. Rom. vi. 21, 22.) Every act of Christian
ministry develops and enriches him who performs it. (Comp.

150 PHILIPPIANS [DW 17. 18

Acts xx. 35.) Aug., distinguishing between the gift as such and
the gift as the offering of a Christian spirit, says that a mere gift
might be brought by a raven, as to Elijah.

18. ἀπέχω δὲ πάντα : ‘and I have all things.’ Δὲ is not advers-
ative, but connective, introducing an additional reason for οὐχ
ἐπιζητῶ τὸ δόμα, ‘I do not seek the gift but the fruit; and as to
my need, I have all that I could need.’

Otherwise Ellic., De W., Ead., Weiss, Alf., Vulg., who take δὲ as advers-
ative. So Alf. “Azz, notwithstanding that the gift is not that which I
desire, I have received it, and am sufficiently supplied by it.” This seems
feeble and superfluous after the strong adversative ἀλλὰ.

ἀπέχω : ‘I have to the full.’ Nothing remains for me to desire.
᾿Απὸ marks correspondence ; 2.6. “ of the contents to the capacity ;
of the possession to the desire” (Lightf.). (See Win. xl. 46.) So
Mt. vi. 2. ‘‘They have their reward in full.” There is nothing
more for them to receiye. (Comp. Lk. vi. 24.) Not a formal
acknowledgment of the gift, omitted in vs. 17 (Chr., Cic.,
Theoph.).

καὶ περισσεύω : and abound.’ Not only is my need met, but I
have more than I could desire. On περισσεύειν see Lightf. on
ΤΡ ΠΕ ΞΕ ΤΠ: 12.

πεπλήρωμαι: ‘I am filled.’ Hardly the completion of a climax
(Ellic.), since fulness is not an advance on wepioo. It rather
introduces the following clause, which is an explanatory comment
upon what precedes.

δεξάμενος : Explanatory of πεπλ. “1 am filled, now that I have
received.’

παρὰ 'Exadpodirov: See on 1]. 25.

τὰ παρ᾽ ὑμῶν : ‘the things sent from you’ (through him). Tapa
emphasises the idea of transmission, and marks the connection
between the giver and the receiver, more than ἀπὸ, which merely
points to the source. (See Win. xlvu.; Tiehtf. om Galea a2
Schmidt, Syzon. 107, 18.)

ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας : ‘an odor of a sweet smell.’ Their offering of
love is described as a sweet-smelling sacrifice. ‘The expression 15
common in O.T. to describe a sacrifice acceptable to God. (See
Gen. vili..21; Lev: 1. Ὁ, 12, τὴ. Comp. 2 Cer. tag, τὸ: bpm
v. 2.) ᾿Οσμὴν is in apposition with τὰ παρ᾽ ὑμῶν ; εὐωδίας is genit.
of quality. “Oop is more general than εὐωδία, denoting an odor of
any kind, pleasing or otherwise.

θυσίαν : ‘a sacrifice.’ Not the act of sacrifice, but the thing
sacrificed. (See onii.17.) Here in the same sense as Rom. xii. I.

δεκτήν: ‘acceptable.’ Rare in N.T., and only here by Paul,
2 Cor. vi..2 being a quotation. (Sée LXX; γι π᾿
XX. 19.)

εὐάρεστον : ‘ well-pleasing,

as Rom: xi: τ In Nu. only am

IV. 18, 19] GOD’S GLORIOUS SUPPLY 151

Paul ἘΠ ἘΣ (see Rom. xiv. 18; 2 Cor. v..9; Eph. v. 10;
Heb. xen; LXX; Sap. iv. 10, ix. ro.)

τῷ θεῷ : Connect with both ὀσμ. εὐωδ. and θυσ.

19. 6 δὲ θεὸς μου πληρώσει πᾶσαν χρείαν ὑμῶν : ‘and my God
shall fulfil every need of yours.’ 177ν God who has made you his
instruments in fulfilling my need (πεπλήρωμαι, vs. 18) will fulfil
every need of yours. The δὲ is not adversative, ‘but’ (Beng.,
De W., A.V.), which would seem to emphasise the loss incurred
in sacrifice by setting over against it the promise of the divine
supply. It rather adds this statement to the preceding; and
this statement expresses God’s practical approval of the Philip-
pians’ offering, and not their compensation by him. (Comp.
2 (τ. ix. 8-ττ.}

κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος αὐτοῦ : ‘according to his riches.’ The measure
or standard of the supply; the infinite possibility, according to
which the πληρώσει will be dispensed.

ἐν δόξῃ : ‘in glory.’ The mode or manner of the fulfilment,
‘gloriously’; in such wise that his glory will be manifested.
Construe with πληρώσει, not with πλοῦτος (as Grot., Rhw., Heinr.,
A.V., R.V.), ‘riches in glory,’ which is contrary to N.T. usage,
since δόξα with πλοῦτος is invariably in the genitive. See, ¢.g., τὸν
πλοῦτον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ (Rom. ix. 23); and comp. Eph. i. 18,
111. 16; Col. i. 27. Ἔν δόξῃ is always used in connection with a
verbs (see 2 Cor, i. ὃ: ΕΠ; (ΘΟΙ; im. 4), and so are all similar
phrases, as ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, ἐν δυνάμει, ἐν δόλῳ, ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ, ἐν ἀδικίᾳ, ἐν
ἀγάπῃ, etc. There is not in the N.T. a phrase like πλοῦτος ἐν
δόξῃ. Comp. πληρώσῃ ἐν δυνάμει (2 Thess. i. 11).

Mey. makes ἐν instrumental, though dependent on πληρώσει, ‘with
glory,’ or ‘in that he gives them glory,’ and characterises the explanation
given above as “indefinite and peculiarly affected,” in which he is followed
by Alf., who calls it “weak and flat in the extreme.” Nevertheless it is
adopted by Thay., Lips., De W., Calv., Ead., Weiss, KI. Comp. Rom. i. 4,
where ἐν δυνάμει is adverbial with ὁρισθέντος, and 2 Cor. iii. 7,8, 11. Mey.’s
explanation is shaped by his persistent reference to the Parousza, which
narrows his interpretation of πλεονάζοντα in vs. 17. He cannot conceive
how Paul, with his view of the Jarousta as imminent, could promise, ov
this side of it,a glorious recompense. So Lightf. ‘ by placing you in glory.’
But πληρώσει is not to be limited to the future reward. It includes, with
that, all that supply which God so richly imparts in this life to those who
are in Christ.) (See Jn. 16} 1 Cor. i,.5; Eph. ili. 16-20; Col. ii. 10.)

ἐν Χριστῷ “Incot: Not to be connected with δόξῃ, but with
πληρώσει, as the domain in which alone the πληρώσει can take
place.

The dignity and tact with which Paul treats this delicate subject
have been remarked by all expositors from the Fathers down.
Lightf. has justly observed that Paul had given to the Philippians
“the surest pledge of confidence which could be given by a high-
minded and sensitive man, to whom it was of the highest import-

152 PHILIPPIANS [IV. 19, 20

ance, for the sake of the great cause which he had advocated, to
avoid the slightest breath of suspicion, and whose motives never-
theless were narrowly scanned and unscrupulously misrepresented.
He had placed himself under pecuniary obligations to them.”
With his tone of manly independence and self-respect, mingles
his grateful recognition of their care for him and a delicate con-
sideration for their feelings. He will not doubt that they have
never ceased to remember him, and have never relaxed their
eagerness to minister to him, although circumstances have pre-
vented their ministry. Yet he values their gift principally as an
expression of the spirit of Christ in them, and as an evidence
of their Christian proficiency. He can give their generosity no
higher praise, no higher mark of appreciation and gratitude, than
to say that it was a sacrifice of sweet odor to God. He is not
raised above human suffering. ‘Their gift was timely and wel-
come ; yet if it had not come, he was independent of human con-
tingencies. ‘They have not only given him money, but they have
given him Christian love’ and sympathy and ministry — fruit of his
apostolic work.

The promise just uttered, by its wonderful range and richness,
calls forth an ascription of praise.

20. to δὲ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ ἡμῶν : ‘to our God and Father’; the
God who will supply every need out of his fatherly bounty. For
the formula, see Gal. i. 4; 1 Thess. 1.3, lil. 11,13. ‘“Hyv proba-
bly belongs to both nouns, since the article is unnecessary with
θεῷ, and is apparently prefixed in order to bind both nouns with
the pronoun. On the other hand, Ellic. suggests that, as πατρὶ
expresses a relative idea and θεὸς an absolute one, the defining
genitive may be intended for πατρὶ only. (See Ellic. and Lighttf.
on Gal. i. 4.)

εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων : ‘to the ages of the ages.’ Forever.
For the formula, see Gal 1. δ΄; τ “Πα τῇ" ee oye
1 Pet. iv. 11, and often in Apoc. LXX habitually in the singular ;
εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος (Ps. Ixxxix. 29 [Ixxxvili. 30], cxi. [cx.] 3,
10); εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, Omitting τῶν αἰώνων (Ps. [ΧΙ]. 4 [ἸΧ. 5], Ixxvii.
[Ixxvi.] 8; 2 Chron. vi. 2).. For similar doxologies in Paul’s
letters, see Rom. x1..36; Gal. 1.55 Eph. {|| τη τ ἐπ ee
Paul has εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας (Rom. i. 25, ix. 5, xi. 36) ; εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα
(1 Cor. vill. 13; 2 Cor. ix. 9) ; εἰς πάσας τὰς γενεὰς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν
αἰώνων (Eph. ili. 21). Αἰὼν is a long space of time; an age; a
cycle. In the doxology the whole period of duration is conceived
as a succession of cycles.

Ἐν 21. 22| CLOSING SALUTATIONS 153

CLOSING SALUTATIONS

21. πάντα ἅγιον : ‘every saint’ ; individually. Comp. πᾶσιν τοῖς
ἁγίοις (1. 1) ; πάντας ἀδελφούς (τ Thess. v. 26) ; ἀλλήλους (Rom.
Sy mee COL. xvi 20; 2 Cor. ΧΙϊ- 12). - The salutation is
probably addressed through the superintendents of the church
(i. 1), into whose hands the letter would be delivered, and who
would read it publicly. For ἅγιον, see on i. 1.

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: May be construed either with ἀσπάσασθε or
with ἅγιον. The matter is unimportant. ᾿Ασπάζεσθαι with ἐν Χτῷ
does not occur in N.T.; with ἐν Κυρίῳ, τ Cor. xvi. 19. Ἅγιος
with ἐν Xr °1.,i.1. The passages commonly cited from the clos-
ing salutations of Rom. are not decisive. ‘The evidence is rather
in favor of ἅγιον. It is true that dy. implies ἐν Χ. Ἴ. but the
same reason may possibly apply here which is given by Chr. for
the phrase in i. 1; namely, that he speaks of them as ‘saints,’ in
the Christian as distinguished from the O.T. sense.

ot σὺν ἐμοὶ ἀδελφοί: ‘the brethren who are with me.’ The
circle of Paul’s immediate colleagues or more intimate friends.
The apparent disagreement of these words with 11. 20 cannot be
considered until we can explain the latter passage, which, with
our present knowledge, seems hopeless. In any case, Paul would
not withhold the name ‘brethren’ even from such as are described
there. Probably there were equally unworthy members of the
Philippian church, yet he addresses the whole body by that title
(τ το τ a). See, tor a different view, Weiss: in Amer.
VeurLhéol., April, 1897, Pp. 391:

22. πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι : ‘The church-members in Rome generally,
as distinguished from the smaller circle just named.

μάλιστα δὲ οἱ ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας : ‘ especially they that are of
Ceesar’s household.’ Οἰκία does not signify members of the im-
perial family, but the whole ménage of the imperial residence —
slaves, freedmen, household servants, and other dependants, pos-
sibly some of high rank. Freedmen, and even slaves, were often
entrusted with high and confidential positions in the palace. The
imperial establishment was enormous, and the offices and duties
were minutely divided and subdivided. (See R. Lanciani’s
“Ancient Rome in the Light of Recent Excavations, p. 128 ff.)
Many Christians were doubtless numbered among these retainers.
Some have thought that οἰκία included the preetorian guard, mem-
bers of which might have come from Macedonia ; for though the
preetorians were originally of Italian birth, they were drawn, later,
from Macedonia, Noricum, and Spain, as well as from Italy. But
this is improbable. I cannot do better than to refer the reader
to Lightf.’s dissertation on “‘ Czesar’s Household,” Comm. Ὁ. 171,
to which may be added Professor Sanday on “om. Introd. p. xciv.,

154 PHILIPPIANS [IV. 22, 23

and notes on Ch. xvi., p. 422 ff. Lightf. argues, fairly I think,
that, assuming the earlier date of the Philippian letter (see
Introd. v.), the members of Czesar’s household who sent their
salutations to Philippi were earlier converts who did not owe their
knowledge of the gospel to Paul’s preaching at Rome; that Paul
assumes the acquaintance of the Philippians with these, and that
therefore we must look for them among the names in the closing
salutations of the Roman Epistle, composed some three years
before this letter.

Why μάλιστα, cannot be explained. It may imply some pre-
vious acquaintance of these persons with the Philippians.

23. ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν :
‘the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.’ So
Philem. 25 ; Gal. vi. 18.

For μετα του πνευματος, TR reads μετα παντων with x¢ KL, Syr.¥t.
x ADKLP, Vulg., Cop., Syr.v, Arm., Afth., add αμην, which is omitted
by WH.., Tisch., Weiss, with BFG, 47, Sah.

Ripe Pistin Or sal PAWL. ΤΟ
EEE MON

Pitesti ee OF Sk. PAUL TO
PHILEMON

INTRODUCTION

PHILEMON was a citizen of Colosse. Onesimus, his slave, is
described in the Epistle to the Colossians as “ one of you” (iv. 9) ;
while in the letter to Philemon, written and sent at the same time,
the return of Onesimus to his master is announced (10, 12, 17).

The opinion of Wieseler (Chron. des Apost. Zettal.), that both Philemon
and Archippus belonged to Laodiczea, and that the epistle was therefore
sent to that place, is entitled to no weight. He assumes that the Epistle
to Philemon was identical with the Epistle to Laodiczea (Col. iv. 16. See
note on vs. 2). Equally unimportant is the view of Holtzn. (Z77/. 246),
which places Philemon and his household at Ephesus.

That Philemon had been converted to Christianity through
Paul’s ministry, appears from vs. 19. ‘The conversion of the
Colossians is probably to be connected with the apostle’s long
residence at Ephesus, from which city his influence seems to have
extended very widely. (See Acts xix. 26, and comp. the saluta-
tion to the Corinthian church from “ the churches in Asia,” 1 Cor.
xvi. 19.) We do not hear of his visiting the neighboring cities,
but people from these came to Ephesus to listen to his teach-
ings (Acts xix. 9, 10), since the relations were very close between
that city and the cities of the Lycus. (See Lightf. Zvtrod. fo
Colossians, Ὁ. 31.)

From this epistle it appears that Philemon was active and
prominent in Christian work at Colossz, and very helpful in his
ministries to his fellow-Christians (vs. 5, 7). His house was a
meeting-place for a Christian congregation, and the apostle’s rela-
tions with him were intimate and affectionate (vs. 2, 13, 17, 22),

158 INTRODUCTION

The traditions which represent him as a presbyter, bishop, or
deacon, are valueless. In the J/enaca' of Nov. 22, he is com-
memorated as a “holy apostle.” (See Lightf. Zev. ii. p. 535.)

Onesimus, Philemon’s slave, had run away from him, and had
possibly robbed him. (See on vs. 18.) He had found his way to
Rome, and had there met Paul. Perhaps, in former days, he had
accompanied his master in his visits to Ephesus, and had seen the
apostle there. Through Paul’s influence he became a Christian
(vs. 10), and devoted himself to the service of the Lord’s pris-
oner. Paul had conceived a strong personal affection for him
(vs. 10-13, 16, 17, comp. Col. iv. 9), and would gladly have kept
him with himself; but was unwilling to do so without Philemon’s
consent (vs. 14). Moreover, Onesimus, by his flight, had deprived
his master of his services, if he had not also robbed him of prop-
erty; and therefore, as a Christian, was bound to make restitu-
tion. Accordingly, as Tychicus was about to go to Colossze and
Laodiczea bearing letters from Paul, the apostle placed Onesimus
in his charge, and sent by him this letter to Philemon, in which he
related the slave’s faithful ministries to himself, commended his
Christian fidelity and zeal, entreated his master to receive him
kindly, and offered himself as surety for whatever loss Philemon
had suffered by him.

All that is known of Onesimus is that he was a slave, and a
Phrygian slave, which latter fact would mark him in common
estimation as of poor quality.

Suidas gives the proverb: Φρὺξ ἀνὴρ πληγεὶς ἄμεινον καὶ διακονέστερος,
‘a Phrygian is the better and the more serviceable for a beating.’ It is
quoted by Cicero (Pro Flacco, 27. See Wallon, Wistoire de 1’ Esclavage
dans 1 Antiquité, ii. p. 61, 62).

The martyrologies make him bishop of Ephesus (see Ign.
Eph. i.) and of Beroea in Macedonia, and represent him as
laboring for the gospel in Spain, and suffering martyrdom at
Rome.

His name appears in the A/enaea of Feb. 15, where he is called a slave

of Philemon, a Roman man, to whom the holy Apostle Paul writes. ΤῈ is
further said that he was arraigned before Tertullus, the prefect of the

1 Menaea, from μήν, “ἃ month’: corresponding, in the Greek Church, to the
Roman Breviary, and containing for each holiday and feast of the year the ap-
pointed prayers and hymns, together with short lives of the saints and martyrs.

INTRODUCTION 159

country, sent to Puteoli, and put to death by having his legs broken. The
Roman Acts, 10, speak of him as perfected by martyrdom in the great city
of the Romans.

The letter was included in the collection of Marcion, and is
named in the Muratorian Canon in connection with the Past-
oral Epistles. The supposed references in Ignatius (ZA. ii. ;
Mag. xii.; Polyc. vi.) are vague. In ph. ii. the name Onesimus
occurs in connection with the verb ὀναίμην, and the reference
is inferred from a similar play on the name, Philem. 20. (See
Westcott, Canon of the N.T., Ὁ. 48.) It is found in the Syriac
and Old Latin versions, and is ascribed to Paul by Origen (Hom.
ΠΟ. τῶ; Comm. 7 70) tract. 33, 57) Tertullian is the first
who distinctly notices it. He says: “ This epistle alone has had
an advantage from its brevity ; for by that it has escaped the falsi-
fying touch of Marcion. Nevertheless, I wonder that when he
receives one epistle to one man, he should reject two to Timothy,
and one to Titus which treat of the government of the church”
(Adv. Marc. v. 42). Eusebius (4. &. iii. 25) puts it among the
ὁμολογούμενα. Jerome, in his preface to his commentary on the
epistle, refers to those who hold that it was not written by Paul, or
if by him, not under inspiration, because it contained nothing to
edify. ‘These also alleged that it was rejected by most of the
ancients because it was a letter of commendation and not of
instruction, containing allusions to everyday matters. Jerome
replies that all St. Paul’s letters contain allusions to such matters,
and that this letter would never have been received by all the
churches of the world if it had not been Paul’s. Similar testi-
mony is given by Chrysostom, who, like Jerome, had to defend
the letter against the charge of being on a subject beneath the
apostle’s notice.

The only serious attack upon the epistle in modern times is
- that of Baur, who intimates that he rejects it with reluctance, and
exposes himself by so doing to the charge of hypercriticism.
“This letter,” he says, ‘is distinguished by the private nature of
its contents ; it has nothing of those commonplaces, those general
doctrines void of originality, those repetitions of familiar things
which are so frequent in the supposed writings of the apostle. It
deals with a concrete fact, a practical detail of ordinary life. . .
What objection can criticism make to these pleasant and charming

160 INTRODUCTION

lines, inspired by the purest Christian feeling, and against which
suspicion has never been breathed?” (Paulus). Rejecting
Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, he is compelled to reject
Philemon along with them. ‘The diction is unpauline. Words
and expressions occur which are either not found at all in Paul’s
epistles, or only in those which Baur rejects. ‘The epistle exhibits
a peculiar conjunction of circumstances in the flight of Onesimus
and his meeting St. Paul at Rome, which savors of romance. The
letter is the embryo of a Christian romance like the Clementine
Recognitions, intended to illustrate the idea that what man loses
in time in this world he regains forever in Christianity; or that
every believer finds himself again in each of his brethren.

Holtzmann is inclined to receive the epistle, but thinks that
the passage 4-6 shows the hand of the author of the Ephesian
letter.

Weizsacker (Afost. Zeital. p. 545) and Pfleiderer (Pauiinismus,
p- 44) hold that the play on the name Onesimus proves the letter
to be allegorical (see note on vs. 11).

Steck thinks that he has discovered the germ of the letter in
two epistles of the younger Pliny.

It is needless to waste time over these. They are mostly
fancies. ‘The external testimony and the general consensus of
critics of nearly all schools are corroborated by the thoroughly
Pauline style and diction, and by the exhibition of those personal
traits with which the greater epistles have made us familiar. The
letter, as already remarked, was written and sent at the same time
with that to the Colossians. Its authenticity goes to establish that
of the longer epistle. ‘In fact,” remarks Sabatier, “ this short
letter to Philemon is so intensely original, so entirely innocent of
dogmatic preoccupation, and Paul’s mind has left its impress so
clearly and indelibly upon it, that it can only be set aside by an
act of sheer violence. Linked from the first with the Colossian
and Ephesian Epistles, it is virtually Paul’s own signature appended
as their guarantee to accompany them through the centuries”
(Zhe Apostle Paul, Hellier’s trans.).

The general belief from ancient times has been that this, with
the Colossian and Ephesian letters, was composed at Rome ; but
the opinion which assigns their composition to Czesarea has had
some strong advocates, among whom may be named Reuss,

INTRODUCTION 161

Schenkel, Weiss, Holtzmann, Hilgenfeld, Hausrath, and Meyer.
The principal arguments are the following :

1. It is more natural and probable that the slave should have
fled from Colossze to Ceesarea, than that he should have under-
taken a long sea voyage to Rome.

On the contrary, it is more natural and probable that Onesimus
should have gone to Rome as quickly as possible, both because it
was farther away from Colossze, and because there would be much
less chance of detection in the vast city and population of the
metropolis.

2. According to Phil. ii. 24, Paul intended, if liberated, to go
directly to Macedonia; whereas, according to Philem. 22, he pro-
posed to go to Colossze. On this, see note on Philem. 22.

3. The absence from the Colossian Epistle of any mention of
the earthquake by which the cities of the Lycus had been visited.
According to Tacitus, an earthquake overthrew Laodicea in the
year 60 A.D., the last year of Paul’s imprisonment at Cesarea.
According to Eusebius (Chron. Ol. 210), the date is four years
later, and Laodiczea, Hierapolis, and Colossz are named as hay-
ing suffered. Assuming that Tacitus and Eusebius refer to the
same event, and that Tacitus’ date is correct, the omission of
reference in the letter written at Czsarea is explained by the fact
that the letter preceded the event. But if the letter was written
during the latter part of the Roman imprisonment, the omission
of all reference to such an event is incredible. (See Weiss, Zzv/.
§ 24; Lightf. Colossians, Introd. p. 37; Hort, Romans and Ephe-
sians, P. 105.)

It is possible to found a valid argument upon an earthquake ;
but in this case the tremors of the earthquake pervade the
argument. Nothing more indecisive can be imagined than this
process of reasoning. The argument ὁ sz/en/io is always suspicious,
and, in this instance, proves absolutely nothing. Assuming all
the premises to be definitely settled, it does not follow that the
apostle must have referred to the earthquake. But the premises
are not settled. Which is right, Tacitus or Eusebius ? Sup-
posing Eusebius to be right, the Roman, as well as the Cesarean
captivity, might have preceded the earthquake. If St. Paul
arrived in Rome in 56 (see Introd. to Philippians, iv.), his im-
prisonment was over before the dates assigned by both Tacitus

162 INTRODUCTION

and Eusebius. What is the date of Paul’s departure from Czesarea?
What are the exact dates of the Epistles of the Captivity? Do
Tacitus and Eusebius refer to the same event? Both Lightf. and
Hort quote Herzberg’s supposition that the two notices refer to
two different earthquakes, and that, since Tacitus mentions Laodi-
ceea only, the first one did not extend to Colossz.

It may be added that the plans of the apostle, as indicated in both
Philippians and Philemon, agree better with the hypothesis of the
Roman captivity. In Cesarea all his plans would have pointed to
Rome. Moreover, his situation in Rome, if we may judge from
the account in Acts, afforded the slave much greater facilities for
intercourse with him than he could have had in Ceesarea.

This letter cannot be appreciated without some knowledge of
the institution of slavery among the Romans, and its effect upon
both the slave and the master. Abundant information on this
subject is furnished by the elaborate work of Wallon (//s/oire de
Φ Esclavage dans lf’ Antiquité, 2d ed. 1879), by the Roman jurists
and the Roman codes, and by the comedians and satirists. ‘The
excursus on the slaves, in Becker’s Gad/us, trans. by Metcalfe, will
also be found very useful, and ch. ii. and iv. of Lecky’s A/zstory
of European Morals will repay reading.

Slavery grew with the growth of the Roman state until it
changed the economic basis of society, doing away with free
labor, and transferring nearly all industries to the hands of slaves.
The exact numbers of the slave population of the Empire cannot
be determined ; but they were enormous. ‘Tacitus speaks of the
city of Rome being frightened at their increase (Am. xiv. 45) ;
and Petronius (37) declared his belief that not a tenth part of
the slaves knew their own masters. (See Wallon, Liv. ii. ch. 111.)
Most of them were employed on the country estates, but hundreds
were kept in the family residences in the cities, where every kind
of work was deputed to them. In the imperial household, and in
the houses of nobles and of wealthy citizens, the minute subdi-
visions of labor, and the number of particular functions to each of
which a slave or a corps of slaves was assigned, excite our laughter.
(See note on Phil. iv. 22.) Some of these functions required
intelligence and culture. The famiva or slave-household included
not only field-laborers and household drudges, but architects,
sculptors, painters, poets, musicians, librarians, physicians, readers

INTRODUCTION 163

who beguiled the hours at the bath or at the table, — ministers,
in short, to all forms of cultivated taste, no less than to common
necessities.

On slaves as physicians, see Lanciani, Avcztent Rome, etc. p. 71 ff.

But, no matter what his particular function, the slave, in the
eye of the law, was a chattel, a thing, inventoried with oxen and
wagons (Varro, De Ke Rust. i.17,1). He could be given, let,
sold, exchanged, or seized for debt. His person and his life
‘were absolutely in the power of his master. Every one will recall
the familiar passage of Juvenal (vi. 28), in which a dissolute
woman of fashion orders the crucifixion of a slave, and refuses to
give any reason save her own pleasure. ‘‘ Hoc volo, sic jubeo, sit
pro ratione voluntas.” The slave had no right of marriage. He
was allowed concubinage (contubernium), and such alliances were
regulated by the master. The master’s caprice in the matter of
punishment was unlimited. Sometimes the culprit was degraded
from the house to the field or the workshop, and was often com-
pelled to work in chains (Ter. Phorm. ii. 1, τῇ; Juv. viii. 180).
Sometimes he was scourged, sometimes branded on the forehead,
or forced to carry the /urca, a frame shaped like a V, and placed
over the back of the neck on the shoulders, the hands being
bound to the thighs. He might be crucified or thrown to wild
beasts, or to voracious fish.

The moral effects of such an institution upon both slave and
master it would not be difficult to predict, and they meet the
student in every phase of Roman life, — domestic, social, and
political. There was, first, the fearfully significant fact that a
whole vast section of the population was legally deprived of the
first element of manhood, — self-respect. No moral consideration
could be expected to appeal to a chattel to prevent his seeking
his own interest or pleasure by any means, however bad. He
gave himself up to his own worst passions, and ministered, for his
own gain, to the worst passions of his master, all the more as he
stood higher in the scale of intelligence, and acquired thereby a
certain influence and power. Knowledge and culture furnished
him for subtler and deeper villainy. His sense of power and his
love of intrigue were gratified when he came, as he often did,
between members of the same family, making of one a dupe,

164 INTRODUCTION

and of the other an accomplice, an ally, and sometimes a slave.
Every circumstance of his life was adapted to foster in him
viciousness, low cunning, falsehood, and treachery.

On the master the effect was that which always follows the pos-
session of absolute authority without legal or moral restraint. It
encouraged a tyrannical and ferocious spirit. It was demoralising
even to the best and the most kindly disposed. It made beasts of
the naturally licentious and cruel. It corrupted the family life.
The inevitable and familiar contact of childhood and youth with
the swarm of household slaves could have but one result, fatal
alike to personal virtue and to domestic union.

It is true there was another side. Affectionate relations be-
tween master and slave were not uncommon. ‘The younger Pliny
expressed his deep sorrow for the death of some of his slaves
(22. viii. 16). Instances of heroic devotion on the part of slaves
are on record. ‘The slave had a right to whatever he might save
out of his allowance of food and clothing, and with it he some-
times purchased his freedom (Ter. Phorm. i. 1,9). There were
frequent cases of manumission. Although the slave’s marriage
was not recognised, it was not customary forcibly to separate him
from his companion. Yet, after the best has been said, these
were exceptions which proved the rule. Confronting them are
the pictures of Terence, Plautus, Petronius, Tacitus, Juvenal, and
Persius. It was the institution that was demoralising. Its evil
possibilities were inherent, and any one of a hundred causes
might bring them into full play. Wallon remarks that “ for public
depravity to reach its utmost depths of licentiousness, there
needed to be a being with the passions and attractions of a man,
yet stripped by public opinion of all the moral obligations of a
human being, all whose wildest excesses were lawful provided they
were commanded by a master.”

The evil created and carried in itself its own retribution.
Every wrong is expensive ; and it is the unvarying testimony of
history that the price of slavery is paid, both materially and mor-
ally, to the last penny, and with compound interest, by the masters.
The price was not discounted by emancipation. Emancipation
might change the political standing of the slave, but it did not
change the slave. Rome had trained her later generation of free-
men as slaves, and she reaped what she had sown. The emanci-

INTRODUCTION 165

pated slave carried into his free condition the antecedents, the
habits, the spirit, the moral quality of a slave. The time came
when the majority of the free population were either freedmen or
descended from slaves. ‘Tacitus tells of their insolence and in-
subordination (Az. xil. 26, 27). ‘The slave-taint crept into the
offices of state. Labor was stigmatised and its avenues were
barred to the free poor. Almost every sphere of industry was
occupied by slaves, and the free poor became literally paupers,
dependent upon the imperial doles of bread.

The attitude of the great Christian apostle towards this institu-
tion is, naturally, a subject of much interest; and this epistle,
which represents that attitude in a practical issue, has therefore
figured in most discussions on the moral aspect of slavery. ‘These
discussions have developed two errors, against which it is import-
ant to guard. On the one hand, the epistle has been regarded as
committing St. Paul to the concession of the abstract rightfulness
and of the divine sanction of slavery. On the other hand, it has
been claimed that the epistle represents him as the enemy and
the condemner of slavery, and as working with a conscious intent
for its abolition by the deep and slow process of fostering Christian
sentiment. Neither of these views expresses the whole truth of
the case.

It is more than questionable whether St. Paul had grasped the
postulate of the modern Christian consciousness that no man has
the right to own another. He had been familiar with slavery
all his life, both in his Hebrew and in his Gentile associations.
Hebrew law, it is true, afforded the slave more protection than
Greek or Roman law, and insured his ultimate manumission ;
none the less, the Hebrew law assumed the right to own human
beings. The tendency is much too common to estimate the

_leaders of the primitive church in the light of nineteenth-century
ideas, and to attribute to a sentiment which was only beginning
to take shape, the maturity and definiteness which are behind its
appeal to us, and which are the growth of centuries. It is safe to
say that St. Paul was a good way removed from the point of view
of the modern abolitionist. If he had distinctly regarded the
institution of slavery as wrong, fer se, there is every reason for
believing that he would have spoken out as plainly as he did con-
cerning fornication; whereas there is not a word to that effect

166 INTRODUCTION

nor a hint of such an opinicn in his epistles. In this epistle,
and wherever he alludes to the subject, the institution of slavery
is recognised and accepted as an established fact with which he
does not quarrel, as a condition which has its own opportunities
for Christian service and its own obligations which the Christian
profession enforces. In 1 Cor. vii. 21 ff. he advises the bonds-
man to use and improve his condition for the service of God,
and to abide in it, even though he may have the opportunity of
becoming free."

In Eph. vi. 5-8 and Col. 111. 22, 23 he enjoins the obedience of
slaves to their masters as a Christian duty. ‘They are to serve
their masters as servants of God.

Hence it is, I think, a mistake to regard Paul’s silence concern-
ing the iniquity of the institution as caused by the obvious hope-
lessness of eradicating a long-established, deeply rooted, social
factor. I cannot agree with the view so graphically presented
by Dr. Matheson (Spiritual Development of St. Paul, ch. xiii.),
that Paul recognised Onesimus’ right to freedom, but refrained
from exhorting him to claim his right, because his connivance at
Onesimus’ flight would have been the signal for a servile insurrec-
tion and consequent anarchy. It is equally a mistake to say that
he consciously addressed himself to the task of abolishing slavery
by urging those aspects of the gospel which, in their practical
application, he knew would eventually undermine it. It is not
likely that he saw the way to its destruction at all.

On the other hand, this by no means commits the apostle
to the indorsement of the abstract rightfulness of slavery. It
is only to say that if that question presented itself to his own
mind, he did not raise it. The same thing, for that matter, may
be said of Christ, and of God in the administration of the Old-
Testament economy. ‘The fact is familiar that God temporarily
recognised, tolerated, and even legalised certain institutions and
' practices, as polygamy, for instance, which New-Testament moral-
ity condemns, which he purposed ultimately to abolish, and which
Christ does abolish.

Paul knew and appreciated the actual abuses and the evil possi-

1 My view of this disputed passage differs from that of Bishop Lightfoot and
Canon Evans. (See Lightf. /z¢rod. to Philemon, Ὁ. 390, and Evans, Speaker's
Comm, ad loc.)

INTRODUCTION 167

bilities of slavery: yet it is quite possible that he may not have
looked beyond such an operation of gospel principles as might rid
the institution of its abuses without destroying it. What we see
is, that he addressed himself to the regulation, and not to the de-
struction, of existing relations. He does see that the slave is more
than a chattel (Philem. ro-12, 16). The Christian bondservant
is the Lord’s freedman (1 Cor. vii. 22). The difference between
bond and free lapses in Christ with the difference between uncir-
cumcision and circumcision, between Greek and Jew, between
male and female (1 Cor. xil. 13 ; Gal. iii. 28). He does see that
the Christian master has a duty to the slave no less than a right
over him, and on this duty he insists (Eph. vi. 9; Col. iv. 1;
Philem. 8-12, 15, 17).

The slave, too, was quick to perceive this, and discerned in
Christianity his only prospect of betterment. It is true that Plato
and Aristotle, Zeno, Epicurus, and Seneca had insisted on the
duty of humanity to slaves. Seneca urged that the accident of
position does not affect the real dignity of man; that freedom
and slavery reside in virtue and vice rather than in outward con-
dition, and that a good man should abstain from even the feeling
of contempt for his slaves (De Benef. iii. 18-28; De Vita Beata,
xxiv. ; 222. xlvii.). Truthful and noble sentiments these, but they
did not reach far beyond the cultivated classes ; they did little or
nothing to engender moral aspiration in the slave, and their com-
paratively superficial and limited influence is shown by the condi-
tion of the slave during the prevalence of Stoicism. The slave
sought his refuge where such sentiments were enforced by love
rather than by philosophy; where they healingly touched those
“accidents of position’? and those “outward conditions,” of
which philosophy declared him independent, but from which,
with their accompanying wrongs and cruelties and degradations,
he could not extricate himself; and hence the fact that the early
church was so largely recruited from the ranks of slaves.

Whatever may have been the range of Paul’s outlook, the policy
which he pursued vindicated itself in the subsequent history of
slavery. The principles of the gospel not only curtailed its abuses,
but destroyed the thing itself; for it could not exist without its
abuses. ‘To destroy its abuses was to destroy it. It survived for
centuries, but the Roman codes showed more and more the

168 INTRODUCTION

impress of Christian sentiment. The official manumission of
slaves became common as an act of piety or of gratitude to God ;
and sepulchral paintings often represent the master standing
before the Good Shepherd with a band of slaves liberated at his
death, pleading for him at the last judgment. Each new ruler
enacted some measure which facilitated emancipation. “No one
can carefully study the long series of laws, from Constantine to
the tenth century, in regard to slavery, without clearly seeing the
effect of Christianity. It is true that the unjust institution still
survived, and some of its cruel features remained ; but all through
this period the new spirit of humanity is seen struggling against
it, even in legislation, which is always the last to feel a new moral
power in society. The very language of the acts speaks of the
inspiration of the Christian faith ; and the idea which lay at the
bottom of the reforms, the value of each individual, and_ his
equality to all others in the sight of God, was essentially Christian.
But laws are often far behind the practices of a community. The
foundation-idea of Christ’s principles compelled his followers to
recognise the slave as equal with the master. They sat side by
side in church, and partook of the communion together. By the
civil law, a master killing his slave accidentally by excessive pun-
ishment was not punished, but in the church he was excluded
from communion. ‘The chastity of the slave ‘was strictly guarded
by the church. Slave priests were free. The festivals of religion
— the Sundays, fast-days, and days of joy — were early connected
in the church with the emancipation of those in servitude. The
consoling words of Christ, repeated from mouth to mouth, and
the hope which now dawned on the world through him, became
the especial comfort of that great multitude of unhappy persons,
—the Roman bondsmen. ‘The Christian teachers and clergymen
became known as ‘the brothers of the slave,’ and the slaves them-
selves were called ‘the freedmen of Christ’” (Charles L. Brace,
Gesta Christ).

Tributes to the beauty, delicacy, and tact of the Epistle to
Philemon come from representatives of all schools, from Luther
and Calvin to Renan, Baur, and von Soden. A number of these
have been collected by Lightfoot (Introd. p. 383 ff.). The letter
has been compared with one addressed by the younger Pliny to a
friend on a somewhat similar occasion. ‘“ Yet,” to quote Bishop

INTRODUCTION 169

Lightfoot, “if purity of diction be excepted, there will hardly be
any difference of opinion in awarding the palm to the Christian
apostle. As an expression of simple dignity, of refined courtesy,
of large sympathy, and of warm personal affection, the Epistle to
Philemon stands unrivalled. And its preéminence is the more
remarkable because in style it is exceptionally loose. It owes
nothing to the graces of rhetoric; its effect is due solely to the
spirit of the writer.” ‘‘We delight to meet with it,” says Sabatier,
“on our toilsome road, and to rest awhile with Paul from his great
controversies and fatiguing labors in this refreshing oasis which
Christian friendship offered to him. We are accustomed to con-
ceive of the apostle as always armed for warfare, sheathed in
logic, and bristling with arguments. It is delightful to find him
at his ease, and for a moment able to unbend, engaged in this
friendly intercourse, so full of freedom and even playfulness.”

ip SEE INTRODUCTION TO PHILIPPIANS

oe eons Vee ae On

πο
oe

COMMENTARIES

PATRISTIC

Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, GEcumenius,
Theophylact. (See under Commentaries on Philippians.)

SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES

L. DAN&us or DAN%U: 1579 | Sc. GENTILIS: 1618
ἘΞ ROLLOCK: 1598 T. TAYLor: 1659
D. DYKE: 1618 J. H. HuMMEL: 1670
MODERN
AuG. KocH: 1846.

J. Ὁ. WIESINGER : 1850. Trans. by Fulton: 1851. Rev. and notes, A. Ὁ.
Kendrick, 1858.

H. EwALp: 1857.
J. J. VAN OOSTERZEE: Lange’s Bibelwerk. Schaff’s ed. Notes by Hackett,
1869.

Lp. ΒΡ. OF DERRY: Speaker's Comm.

HUGUES OLTRAMARE: Commentaire sur les Epitres de S. Paul aux Colossiens
aux Ephésiens et ἃ Philémon. 1891. Good and
scholarly, but adds nothing of special value to for-
mer commentaries.

H. VON SODEN: Hland-Commentar. Bad. iii. Valuable. See Comms.
on Philippians, Lipsius.

For Bengel, Calvin, Alford, Meyer, Lightfoot, Beet, De Wette,
Ellicott, Lumby, Dwight, Hackett, see under Commentaries on
Philippians.

co PELE MON

THE SALUTATION

1-3. Paul a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy the brother,
to Philemon our beloved and fellow-laborer, and to Apphia our
sister, and to Archippus our fellow-soldier, and to the church which
assembles in thy house: Grace be unto you, and peace from God
our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

1. δέσμιος Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ : ‘a prisoner of Christ Jesus.’ (Comp.
Eph. iii. 1.) In fetters because of his labors as an apostle of
Christ. ‘These words, at once awakening special interest and
compassion, prepare the way for the apostle’s request. ‘The title
‘apostle’ is laid aside as not befitting a private and friendly letter.

Τιμόθεος : The name of Timothy is associated with that of Paul
in 2 Cor., Phil., Col., 1 and 2 Thess. Here each has a separate
designation. Comp. Phil. i. 1, where they are joined under the com-
mon title δοῦλοι Χτοῦ Ἰησοῦ. When Paul names others with him-
self in the address, it is usually because of the relations of those
named to the church addressed. The mention of Timothy here
may be owing to personal relations between him and Philemon ;
so that the appeal would be the stronger by the addition of Timo-
thy’s name. ‘Timothy appears to have been with Paul during a
great part of his three years’ residence in Ephesus. He may have
become acquainted with Philemon there.

6 ἀδελφὸς : Thus also are designated Quartus, Rom. xvi. 23;
Sosthenes, 1 Cor. i. 1; Apollos, 1 Cor. xvi. 12. Timothy is not
_ called an apostle. ‘(See 2 Cor.i.1; Col. 1. τ Although Paul
does not confine the name of apostle to the twelve (see Rom.
xvi. 7; 1 Cor. ix. 5, 6), the having been an eyewitness of the
risen Christ was an indispensable condition of the apostolate ;
and Timothy was a late convert, residing at Lystra, far distant
from the scene of Christ’s personal ministry. (See Lightf. on
“The Name and Office of an Apostle,” Comm. on Galanans,
Ρ- 92.)

Φιλήμονι : See Introduction.

175

176 PHILEMON a2

τῷ ἀγαπητῷ καὶ συνεργῷ ἡμῶν : ‘our beloved and fellow-laborer.’
(Comp. Acts xv. 25.) Theoph. says: εἰ ἀγαπητός, δώσει τὴν χάριν,
εἰ συνεργός, οὐ καθέξει τὸν δοῦλον ἀλλὰ πάλιν ἀποστελεῖ πρὸς ὑπηρεσίαν
τοῦ κηρύγματος. ‘If beloved, he will grant the favor ; if a fellow-
worker, he will not retain the slave, but will send him forth again
for the service of preaching.”

Weizsicker’s statement (Afost. Zeit. p. 333) that ἀγαπητός applied by
Paul to individuals indicates that they were his own converts, needs more
evidence than is furnished by Rom. xvi. 5, 8, 9, 12.

συνεργὸς : Only in Paul and 3 Jn. 8. (See Rom. xvi. 3, 9, 21;
Phil. 1126's COLMV. ΤῈ Εἰ.

ἡμῶν: Of myself and T imothy.

2. καὶ ᾿Απφίᾳ τῇ ἀδελφῇ : ‘and to Apphia our sister.’

DKL, Syr.8h, Syr.P, add ayarnrn.

᾿Απφία is a Phrygian name. Not the same as ‘Azziov (Acts
XXVill. 15). She is commonly supposed to have been Philemon’s
wife, which is the more probable because the case of the slave was
a household matter. ‘ Uxori ad quam nonnihil pertinebat nego-
tium Onesimi” (Beng.). Unless especially related to Philemon,
her name would naturally have stood after the one which follows.

ἀδελφῇ : In the Christian sense.

᾿Αρχίππῳ : Possibly ason of Philemon. He is mentioned Col.
iv. 17 with a special admonition to fulfil the ministry (διακονίαν)
which he received in the Lord; from which it may be inferred
that he was an office-bearer in the church. A reason for address-
ing him in this letter, even if he was not a member of Philemon’s
household, might lie in the fact that Onesimus was to be received
into the church in which Archippus exercised his ministry.

Different speculations have made him a bishop, a deacon, a presbyter,
and an evangelist. Opinions differ as to whether his ministry was at
Colossze or at the neighboring city of Laodiczea, since his name occurs in
the epistle to Colossze, immediately, it is said, after the salutations to the
Laodiceeans. On the other hand, Wieseler (Chrozol. des Apost. Zeital.)
argues that if Archippus had been a Colossian it is not easy to see why Paul
in vs. 17 makes him to be admonished by others. We do not know the
motive of the exhortation. It does not immediately follow the salutations
to the Laodiceans. If Archippus had not resided at Colossz, Paul would
probably have caused a salutation to be sent to him as well as to Nymphas.
It is very strange that Paul should have conveyed this admonition to Ar-
chippus through a strange church, more especially when he had written at
the same time to Archippus in this letter, addressing him jointly with
Philemon, That the admonition to Archippus in Col. implies a rebuke
(Lightf.) is not certain. (Comp. Acts xii. 25.)

συστρατιώτῃ: “ fellow-soldier.’ Only here and Phil. 11. 25 ; but
comp. 2 Tim. 11. 3. The veteran apostle salutes his younger
friend as a fellow-campaigner in the gospel warfare. It is unneces-

2-4] ἜΠΠΕ CHURCHE IN] DHT HOUSE 17.

sary to search for any particular crisis or contest in church affairs
in which they were associated. ‘The figure may have been sug-
gested by Paul's military associations in Rome.
τῇ Kat’ οἶκον σου ἐκκλησίᾳ : ‘to the church in thy house.’
The assembly of believers which met at Philemon’s house. In
large cities there would be several such assemblies, since no one
house could accommodate the whole body, and besides, a large
assembly of the whole church would have awakened the suspicion
of the Roman authorities. (Comp. Acts ΧΙ]. 12; Rom. xvi. 5;
1 Cor. xvi. 19; Col. iv. 15, and see note at the end of the chap-
ter.) ’ExxAnoia was originally a secular word: ‘ an assembly of
citizens called out.’ So Acts xix. 39; LXX; 1 Kings vill. 65. Used
of the congregation of Israel (Acts vil. 38). The Jewish assembly
is more commonly styled συναγωγή, as Acts ΧΙ]. 43. ᾿Εκκλησία
denotes the Christian community in the midst of Israel (Acts v.
II, Vili. 1, Xll. 1, XIV. 23, 27). vvaywyy, however, is used of a
Christian assembly (Jas. 11. 2). Both in the Old and New Testa-
ment ἐκκλησία implies a community based upon a special religious
idea, and established in a special way. ‘The word is also used in
N.T. of a single church or assembly, or of a church confined to a
particular place, as the church in the house of Prisca and Aquila
(Rom. xvi. 5), or of Philemon as here; the church at Corinth,
Jerusalem, etc. In these assemblies in private houses messages
and letters from the apostles were announced or read. It is per-
haps to the address of this letter to a congregational circle, as well
as to an individual correspondent, that we are indebted for its
preservation. Paul must have written many such private letters.
The character of the address emphasises the importance of the
subject of the letter as one affecting both the household circle and
the church.
3. xadpts ἡμῖν etc.: See on Phil. i. 2.

4-7. Because I hear of the love and faith which you have
towards the Lord Jesus and to all the saints, 7 thank God when-
ever 7 make mention of you in my prayers ; praying that in your
Jull knowledge of every spiritual blessing which we as Christans
possess, your faith may prove itself for the glory of Christ in the
communication of tts fruits to others. For on hearing from you, 7
had much joy and comfort on account of your love, because of the
refreshment which the hearts of the saints have received from you,
my brother.

4. εὐχαριστῶ, εἰς. : “1 thank my God always when I make men-
tion of you in my prayers.’ (See on Phil. i. 3.) Thus πάντοτε is
connected with edxap. (Comp. Rom. i. 8-10; τ Cor.i. 4; Col. 1.

2 a

178 PHILEMON [4,5

3,4.) The construction probably accords with Col. i. 3, 4, since
there is a close correspondence of the phraseology, and the two
letters were written at the same time. ILovovpevos defines πάντοτε.
(See on Phil. i. 4.)

Ellic. differs from most of the modern commentators by connecting
πάντοτε with ποιούμενος.

All that the apostle had heard of Philemon caused him to add
thanksgiving to his prayers. ‘‘ Notandum quod pro quo gratias
agit, pro eodem simul precatur. Nunquam enim tanta est vel per-
fectissimis gratulandi materia, quamdiu in hoc mundo vivunt,
quin precibus indigeant, ut det illis Deus non tantum perseverare
usque ad finem, sed in dies proficere. Haec enim laus quam
mox Philemoni tribuit, breviter complectitur totam Christiani
hominis perfectionem ” (Calv.).

ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν pov: ‘when engaged in offering my prayers.’
"Ext blends the temporal with the local force. For προσευχὴ,
prayer in general, see on Phil. iv. 6. Any special petition would
be δέησις, which is implied in μνείαν.

5. ἀκούων : ‘because I hear,’ through Epaphras (Col. i. 7, 8,
iv. 12), or possibly from Onesimus himself. .

᾿Ακούων indicates the cause of εὐχαριστῶ; not the motive of the inter-
cession, as De W., which would leave evx. without a cause assigned for it;
while the ‘mention’ of Philemon did not require that a motive should be
assigned.

σου τὴν ἀγάπην καὶ THY πίστιν ἣν ἔχεις πρὸς TOV κύριον Ἰησοῦν καὶ
εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἁγίους : ‘ thy love and faith which thou hast towards
the Lord Jesus and to all the saints.’

Εἰς τ᾿ κυρ. ets mavT. ACD*, 17, 137, WH.
προς τ. Kup. § OP GILP. syr.2) isch.) Ik, l..) Weiss.

Love and faith are both exercised towards the Lord Jesus, and
by a hasty and compressed construction, due to the momentum
of the previous part of the clause, the saints also are made the
objects of both love and faith, instead of his writing, ‘the love
and the faith which thou hast towards the Lord Jesus, and the
love which thou hast to all the saints.’ (Comp. Col. i. 4.) Faith
works by love, and love exercised towards the saints is a work of
faith. In the next clause he speaks of a ‘ communication’ of faith
to others. Lumby very aptly says: “The love was displayed
towards the Christian congregation, the faith towards the Lord
Jesus Christ ; but they are so knit together where they truly exist
that St. Paul speaks of them both as exhibited alike towards Christ
and towards his people.”

A parallel is furnished by Eph. i. 15, if ἀγάπην is omitted from the text
with AB, WH., R.T. Tisch. retains. See WH.., ad loc., G&. Zesz., “* Notes

95, 6| LOVE AND FAITH TO CHRIST AND THE SAINTS 179

on Select Readings.” (Comp. Tit. iii. 15.) Mey., Win. (1. 2), Beet, render
πίστιν ‘ fidelity’ or “ faithfulness,’ a sense which is found in N.T. though
rarely (see Rom. iii. 3; 1 Tim. v. 12; Tit. 11. 10), and which is habitual in
LXX. (See Lightf. Comm. on Gal. p. 152, and Hatch, Lssays in Bid. Gk.
Ρ. 83 ff.). But (1) πίστις with ἀγάπη never occurs in this sense in N.T,
(See © Cor. xii. 13; ον 6; 1 Thess. i. 3, v. 8; 1 Tim. i. £4, vi. 11;
2 Tim. ii. 22.) This is not affected by the fact that ἀγάπην here precedes
πίστιν. (See Eph. vi. 23.) Gal. ν. 22 and 1 Tim. iv. 12 are not in point.
In those passages the words occur in enumerations; and in Gal. ν. 22
ἀγάπη is entirely detached from πίστις. (2) "ἔχειν πίστιν in N.T. never
means ‘to have fidelity.’ The phrase occurs eleven times, and always
means ‘to have faith.’ A very common explanation is by the rhetorical
chiasmus or cross-reference, by which ἀγάπην is referred to τοὺς avyious,
and πίστιν to Kup.’*Ino. But the examples of chzaszus commonly cited,
even from the class., illustrate mainly the mere arrangement of the words,
as where the adjective and the noun are in inverse order in two successive
clauses. (See Jelf, Gram. 904, 3; Farrar, on the rhetoric of St. Paul, Zz/e
and Work, i. 626.) Besides, the ἣν ἔχεις connects πίστιν with the entire
clause τρὸς τ. kup....aylous. The position of cov indicates that it belongs
to both ἀγάπ. and ric. Comp, the different arrangement in Col. i. 4.

πρὸς Tov κύριον : ἸΙρὸς nowhere else with πίστις as directed at
Christ. Of faith ‘towards’ God, 1 Thess. i. 8. Comp. πεποίθη-
σιν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν (2 Cor. iii. 4). ᾿Αγάπη commonly with eis in
Paul. (See Rom. v. 8; 2 Cor. ii..8; Col.i. 4; 1 Thess. in. 12 ;
2 Wess. τ but comp..2 Cor. vill. 7; τ Cor. xvi. 24.) .The
use of different prepositions is not to be accounted for on the
ground of Paul’s fondness for varying the prepositions without
designing to express a different relation (Mey.). Paul does,
indeed, often use different prepositions in one clause and with
reference to one subject in order to define the conception more
accurately (Rom. iii. 30, xi. 36; Gal. i. 1, ii. 16; Col.i.14) ; but
it is too much to say that no different relation is intended.

See Holtzn. Pastoralbr. p. 101; Winer, xlvii.; Deissmann, Dre neztfest.
Formel ‘in Christo Jesu, pp. 5, 6.

Bearing in mind that τὴν ἀγάπ. and τὴν πίστ. are so Closely
related in this passage (see above, and Oltr. ad loc.), πρὸς may be
taken in the sense indicated in the notes on Phil. 11. 30, iv. 6, as
expressing, not the mere direction of faith and love towards Christ
(Lightf., Ellic., Alf.), but the relation of loving and believing
intercourse with him; while εἰς indicates the direct practical
bearing of faith and love on the Christian brethren.

πρὸς in class. occurs frequently of all sorts of personal intercourse. (See
Hom. Od. xiv. 331, xix. 288; Thucyd. ii. 59, iv. 15, vii. 82; Hdt.i. 61.) It
occurs with φιλία, εὔνοια, ἀπιστία, and with πίστις in the sense of ‘a pledge’

(Thucyd. iv. 51;, Xen. Cyr. ili. I, 39).

6. ὅπως ἡ κοινωνία τῆς πίστεώς σου ἐνεργὴς γένηται : ‘that the
communication of thy faith may become’ (or prove itself) effect-
ual.’ The thought grows directly out of εἰς πάντ. τ. dy., and ὅπως

180 PHILEMON [6

expresses the purpose of the intercession, μνεί. ποιούμ. etc., in vs. 4.
(Comp. Mt..ii. 23, νἱ. 2; 165 Acts ix. 273 1 Coma ΝΠ
i. 12.) He prays that the love and faith which so greatly aid and
comfort all the saints may likewise communicate their blessing to
Onesimus, though he does not mention his name. Notice the
general similarity of structure between this passage and Eph.
1.16, 17; Phil. 1. 3 ff.; Col. i. 3 ff.—a prayer after the thanks-
giving, followed by a final particle introducing a clause. Alf. and
Oltr. take ὅπως with εὐχαριστῶ. Κοιν. τ. rior. signifies ‘the com-
munication of thy faith’ to others, Onesimus among them: your
faith imparting its virtue through your deeds of love. Κοινωνία is
used as in Rom. xv. 26; 2 Cor. viii. 4, ix. 13; Heb. xiii. 16.

Mey. connects ὅπως with ἣν ἔχεις, and explains κοινωνία as the fellowship
entered into by the saints with Philemon’s Christian fidelity. Thus, ‘the
faith which thou hast in order that the fellowship of the saints with it may
not be a mere idle sympathy, but may express itself in action.’ Oltr., the
communion established by faith between Paul and Philemon. Beng., ‘the
faith which thou hast and exercisest in common with us.’ Lightf., appar-
ently taking πίστεως as genit. of possession or source, ‘your charitable
deeds which spring from your faith.’

"Evepyys : ‘effectual,’ only twice by Paul. (See 1 Cor. xvi. 9,
and comp. Heb. iv. 12.) Effectual by reason of the fruit which
follows. ‘The Vulg. ‘evidens’ is probably from a reading ἐναργής.

ἐν ἐπιγνώσει : ‘in the full knowledge.’ For ἐπιγ., see on Phil. i.
9. The subject of the ἐπιγ. is Philemon. ‘The apostle prays that,
working in the sphere of full knowledge, the communication of
Philemon’s faith may prove itself effective. In other words, the
knowledge of every good thing — gospel truth, the principles of
Christian fraternity and ministry, the ends of Christian striving,
the supplies furnished by the divine Spirit—is the element in
which Philemon’s faith will develop to the greatest advantage of
others, including Onesimus. ‘The larger his knowledge of such
good things, the more will he be moved to deal kindly and Christ-
ianly. He will recognise through this knowledge the rightness of
Paul’s request, and will not allow his resentment towards Onesi-
mus to prevent his recognising the good which the knowledge of
Christ has developed in him.

Mey., Ellic., Beet, Calv., refer ἐπίγνωσις to the knowledge possessed by
others. Thus, Mey., “That whoever enters into participation of the same
(fellowship) may make this partaking, through knowledge of every Christ-
ian blessing, effective for Christ.” This is determined by his explanation of
ko... πίστ. See above.

The prayer for ἐπίγνωσις is characteristic of this group of epistles.
(See Eph..1. 17; Phil. i. 9 ; Col. 9, τὸ τ᾿ 2, ΠῚ compe ome:
xii. 2; Eph. iv. 13; Tit. 1.1.) For this use Οἵ ἐν, marking the
sphere or element in which something takes place, see 2 Cor. i.
6; (601: 1 Ὁ.

6, 7| THE BRETHREN’S HEART REFRESHED 181

παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ τοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν : ‘of every good thing that is in you,’
as Christians. Every spiritual gift which you possess. (Comp.
ΒΡ τ 17: )
τοὺ after ayadov, ἃ DF" GKLP; Tisch., WH.[], Weiss, R.T.; AC, 17,
om. TOU.
υμιν, καὶ FGP, 17, 31, 37, 47, 80, 137, Vulg., Cop., Syr.sch et P| Tisch., Weiss,
Rode
For υμιν ACDKL, WH., read ημιν.

eis Χριστόν: ‘unto Christ.’ Connect with évepy. yév. Unto
Christ’s glory —the advancement of his cause. Compare εἰς τὸ
εὐαγγέλιον (Phil. i. 5). ‘‘ That ultimate reference to Christ which
is the life of all true Christian work, and alone renders communi-
cation energetic” (Bp. of Derry). “Bonum nobis exhibitum
redundare debet in Christum” (Beng.). Not = ἐν Χριστῴ.

Ιησουν added by Νὸ DFGKLP, Vulg., Syr.P, Arm.
Text, WH., Tisch., R.T., Weiss.

7. χαρὰν yap πολλὴν ἔσχον : ‘for I had much joy.’

A few secondary uncials and some Fath. read χαριν.
DCKL, Syr.4", exouev for exxov.

Tap gives the reason for the thanksgiving in vs. 4, 5, and this
verse takes up the two points of the thanksgiving, — the love and
the ministry to the brethren.

Ellic., De W., v. Sod., Alf., connect with the prayer just preceding. Beet
with both the thanksgiving and the prayer.

"Eoyov: ‘I had,’ when I received the report. Comp. ἀκούων
(vs. 5).

ὅτι : ‘because.’ Explaining more particularly the ἐπὶ τ. ay. σου.

τὰ σπλάγχνα : ‘the hearts.’ (See on Phil. i. 8.)

τῶν ἁγίων : See on Phil. 1. 1.

ἀναπέπαυται : ‘have been refreshed.’ ᾿Αναπαύειν, originally ‘ to
cause to cease’ as painor sorrow. Hence ‘to relieve’ or ‘ refresh.’
(see Migxi. os, xxvi. 45 ; Mk vi. 31; 1 Cor. xvi. 18; 2 Cor. vii.
13.) In Attic prose it is almost a technical expression for the
resting of soldiers. Its dominant idea is refreshment in contrast
with weariness from toil. (See Schmidt, Syvon. 25,2.) Lightf.
says it expresses a ¢emporary relief, as the simple παυέσθαι expresses
a final cessation. ‘This needs qualifying. The compound does
express a temporary relief. ᾿Ανάπαυσις frequently in LXX of the
rest of the Sabbath. So Mk. vi. 31, of the temporary retirement
of the disciples. But, on the other hand, the refreshment prom-
ised by Christ to the weary (Mt. xi. 28, 29) is not a mere tem-
porary relief, and the word is used of the rest of the blessed dead,
Apoc. xiv. 13.

182 PHILEMON [7, 8

Often in Ign. in the phrase ἀναπαύειν με (αὐτοὺς) κατὰ πάντα ( 21. ii;
SVN A, WS Soy SONGS ΧΩ. SANS MME, Ἀν IOs Ἐν

ἀδελφέ: Not ‘brother indeed,’ but a simple expression of affec-
tion. (Comp. Gal. vi. 18.)

8-20. Wherefore, although my relations to you would warrant
me in enjoining on you that which is fitting, yet, for love’s sake, 7
prefer to ask it of you as a favor, being such as I am, Paul, an
old man, and a prisoner for the gospel’s sake. JI entreat you,
therefore, on behalf of my son Onesimus, who has been converted
through my instrumentality during my tmprisonment. Once indeed
he was not what his name implies, but was useless to you. Now,
however, he ts profitable both to you and to myself. LI send him back
to you, dear though he ts tome. 7 had indeed a mind to keep him
with me in order that he might minister 10 me in my imprisonment
as you yourself would gladly have done; but 7 was unwilling to do
anything without your concurrence, for I desired that your service
to me should be voluntary and not of necessity. And then it occurred
to me that God had allowed him to be thus separated from you for
a time, in order that he might come back to you a better servant
and a Christan brother besides. Such a brother he ts tome; how
much more to you his rightful master. TL ask you then, in view of
our mutual fellowship, to receive him as you would me, and of he
has wronged you in any way, or is in your debt, put that to my
account. This ts my promise to repay 12, signed with my own hand ;
though I might intimate that itis you who are my debtor for your
very self; since tt was through me that you became a Christan.
Receive Onesimus then, and thus render me a personal favor,
affording me 70} and refreshment in Christ.

8. διό: ‘wherefore’: because I am thus comforted by you.
Connect with παρακαλῶ, vs. 9, and not with the participial clause.

πολλὴν ἐν Χριστῷ παρρησίαν ἔχων : ‘though I have much bold-
ness in Christ.’ Boldness growing out of their Christian relations.
Their personal intimacy, St. Paul’s apostolic office, and Philemon’s
obligation to him for his conversion (vs. 19), would warrant the
apostle, if so disposed, in laying his commands upon Philemon in
the matter of receiving Onesimus.

v. Soden thinks that no allusion to apostolic authority is intended,
because the apostolic title is omitted in the introduction. But this does
not necessarily follow. Even though the title is omitted, there is no reason
why Paul should not allude to his apostolic authority.

8, 9| ENTREATY FOR LOVE’S SAKE 183

For παρρησίαν, see on Phil. i. 20, ᾿Επιτάσσειν, ‘to enjoin’ or
‘command,’ is used rather of commanding which attaches to a
definite office and relates to permanent obligations under the
office, than of special injunctions for particular occasions (ἐπι-
τέλλειν. See Schmidt, Syzon. 8, 10).

τὸ ἀνῆκον : ‘that which is fitting.” (See Eph. v. 4; Col. ui. 18 ;
LXX ; 1 Macc. x. 40, xi. 35 ; 2 Macc. xiv. 8.) The primary mean-
ing of the verb is ‘to have come up to’ or ‘arrived at,’ as to have
attained a standard of measurement or weight, or to have reached
a height. Hence, to have come to one so as to have become his ;
to pertain to or belong to him. Comp. Hdt. vi. 109: καὶ κῶς és
σέ TL τούτων ἀνήκει TOV πραγμάτων TO κῦρος ἔχειν: ‘and how it
comes to thee to have, in some sort, authority over these things.’

9. διὰ τὴν ἀγάπην : ‘for love’s sake.’ Love in its widest sense,
as the characteristic virtue of all Christians. Not to be limited to
the affection between Paul and Philemon.

μᾶλλον : ‘rather’ than command thee. The object of compari-
son is omitted. (See on Phil. i. 12.) Paul desires to obtain for
love’s sake and by asking, what he might have obtained by author-
ity. Comp. the opening and close of Pliny’s letter to a friend on
a similar occasion: ‘ Vereor ne videar non rogare sed cogere”’
(ΕἼΣ:

τοιοῦτος ὧν, ὧς Παῦλος πρεσβύτης νυνὶ δὲ καὶ δέσμιος Χριστοῦ
Ἰησοῦ παρακαλῶ : ‘being such (as I am), as Paul the aged and
now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ, I beseech thee.’ Paul would
say: I might justly enjoin thee, but, for love’s sake, I rather be-
seech thee. This general statement of his attitude stands by
itself, and forms a complete sentence. He then goes on to
define. I do not speak as an apostle, but simply in my personal
capacity. Being such as I am,— Paul, an old man, a prisoner
of Christ, —I beseech thee, etc. Thus a period is placed after
παρακαλῶ, VS. 9. Τοιοῦτος is Paul’s general description of himself,
which is farther defined with the three particulars, — Paul, aged,
a prisoner. Accordingly τοιοῦτος points forward to these details.

There is much difference among interpreters as to the connection. ‘The
points in question are:

(1) Whether τοιοῦτος ὧν is to be connected with ὡς Παῦλος or separated
from it.

(2) Whether τοιοῦτος ὧν begins a new sentence or is connected with
the preceding παρακαλῶ, z.e. whether a period or a comma shall be placed
after mapax. (vs. 9).

(3) Whether the thought in τοι. ὧν refers back to Paul’s attitude as a
suppliant (διὰ τ. dy. wad. παρακ.), or to his claim as an apostle (παρρησ.
ἔχ. émer.), or points forward to his attitude as merely Paul, an old man and
a prisoner.

As to (1), Lightf., Dw., Beet, R.V., make τοιοῦ. and ὡς correlative:
“such an one as Paul.’ But τοιοῦτος can be defined only by a following
adjective, or by οἷος, ὃς, ὅσος, or ὥστε with the infin. Never by as. Tovod-
τος followed by ὡς occurs nowhere in N.T., and Lightf. has not established

184 PHILEMON [9, 10

the correlation by the single citation from Plat. (Sy. 181 E) and another
from Alexis. Besides it is doubtful whether the reference to Sym. is in
point; for τὸ τοιοῦτον may be taken absolutely there, and need not be cor-
related with ὥσπερ. (See Jelf, 655.) This absolute use of τοιοῦτος is well
established. (See Hom. 77. vil. 42; Soph. 47. 1298; Philoct. 1049; Plat.
Repub. 429 B.) Moreover, the rule which makes τοιοῦτος refer to what
precedes, while rovésde refers to what follows, is often reversed (Jelf, 655).
Professor Sophocles says: “ Unless the Greek be irregular, τοιοῦτος and ὡς
cannot be reciprocal terms.”

(2) Period after παρακαλῶ (vs. 9), by Ellic., Mey., Alf., De W., v. Sod.,
Oltr. Comma after παρακαλῶ, and τοι. wy the continuation of the preced-
ing clause (Lightf., Dw.). ‘I beseech thee, being such an one as Paul,’
etc. In that case the παρακ. of vs. 10 is resumptive.

(3) τοιοῦτος wy is referred to Paul’s attitude as a suppliant by Mey.,
v. Sod., Ellic., Alf.

Παῦλος, πρεσβύτης, δέσμιος : Apparently three details of τοιοῦ.
are intended. Some, however, take IlatA. and πρεσβ. as one con-
ception (Luth., Calv., De W., Ellic., Oltr:).

πρεσβύτης : ‘an aged man.’ His precise age cannot be de-
termined. He is called veavias at the time of the martyrdom of
Stephen (Acts vil. 58) ; and if, at the time of writing this letter
he were sixty or even fifty years old, there would be no impro-
priety in his calling himself πρεσβύτης. The term is wholly rela-
tive. He might have aged prematurely under his numerous
hardships. According to Hippocrates, a man was called πρεσβύ-
τῆς from forty-nine to fifty-six ; after that, γέρων.

Lightf. conjectures that the reading is πρεσβευτής, ‘an ambassador,’ in
accordance with Eph. vi. 20; and that that should be the meaning even if
πρεσβύτης is retained. So WH. The two forms are certainly interchanged
in ΤΙ ΧΧ, (ὅδε 2, Chrons xccdi, 315 1 Mace χα 21, xiv Σὲ 22. ΣΝ ΤΕΣ
xi. 34.) Both in Eph. vi. 20, and 2 Cor. ν. 20, πρεσβεύειν is used in con-
nection with public relations. ‘ Ambassador” does not seem quite appro-
priate to a private letter, and does not suit Paul’s attitude of entreaty.
The suggestion of public relations is rather in δέσμιος Ἶ. X.

νυνὶ δὲ καὶ : ‘now,’ at the time of my writing this ; καὶ : “ besides,’
in addition to my age.

δέσμιος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ : Comp. vs. 1; Eph. iii. 1; iv. 1; 2 Tim.
1, 8. Not ‘a prisoner belonging to Christ,’ nor ‘for Christ’s
sake,’ διὰ Χριστὸν δεδεμένος (Chr.), but one whom Christ has
brought into captivity. (See Win. xxx. 2.)

Lightf., in accordance with his explanation of πρεσβύτης, thinks that the
genit. I. X. belongs to both πρεσβ. and δέσμ.

10. τοῦ ἐμοῦ τέκνου : An affectionate designation of Onesimus.
The slight hesitation in mentioning the name of the slave, and the
delay in coming to the point of the letter, are noticeable. Τέκνον
in a similar sense, a spiritual child, 1 Cor. iv. 14, 17; Gal. iv. 19
{τέκνα} ; a Pima. (2; 1352 ΜΠ τ τὶ

10, 11] THE PROFITABLE SLAVE 185

ὃν ἐγέννησα : Of whose conversion I was the instrument. ‘The
appeal in the thought of his won child is heightened by ἐμοῦ, and
by the fact that he is the spiritual child of his captivity. For this
figurative use of γεννᾷν, comp. 1 Cor. iv. 15. Thayer, Zex., cites
Sanhedr. fol.,19, 2, of one who brings others to his own way of
life. “If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Script-
ure reckons this the same as though he had begotten him.”

ἐν Tots δεσμοῖς : ‘in my bonds.’

μου added by Νὸ CDKLP, Syr.¥tt, Cop., Arm., “ΕἼΗ.

Ὀνήσιμον : ‘profitable’ (ὀνίνημι). A common name among
slaves, like many others expressing utility, as Chresimus, Chrestus,
Onesiphorus, Symphorus, Carpus. (See Lightf.’s Zntrod. to Philem.
sec. 4.) Accordingly, Weizsacker’s statement that the allegorical
character of the epistle is apparent from this name has no rele-
vancy whatever (Afost. Zettal. p. 545). ᾿Ονήσιμον is accus. by
attraction after ἐγένν.

11. ἄχρηστον : ‘useless,’ ‘unserviceable.’ Titmann (.Syz.) says
that to the idea of uselessness it adds that of harmfulness, while
ἀχρεῖος means simply that of which there is no need. (See
Schmidt, Syzon. 166, 6.) It is not, however, probable that the
idea of harmfulness is implied in connection with a possible
robbery of his master by Onesimus. (See on vs. 18.)

"Axpnoros only here in N.T., LXX, Hos. viii. 8; Sap. ii. 11, ili. 11;
Sir. xvi. I, xxvil. 19; 2 Macc. vii. 5.

νυνὶ Se: ‘but now,’ that he has become a Christian disciple.
Novi δὲ, mostly and very often in Paul. (See Rom. vi. 22, vil. 6,
Dye S27 ay tek Gre. m0; CLC.)

σοὶ καὶ ἐμοὶ εὔχρηστον : ‘profitable to thee and to me.’ For-
merly useless to zhee, when he was thy worthless, runaway slave,
and before 7 had known him. Now profitable to us both. The
nice use of the personal pronouns and the assumption of a joint
interest in Onesimus are very charming. (Comp. Rom. xvi. 13 ;
© Corsi cord Phil, i. 27.)

x* FerG, 17, 31, 47, 67, Syr.sh, Aith., add καὶ before σοι. So Tisch.,
Weiss.
και om. by ACDKLP, Syr.?, Arm., WH., ΚΤ.

εὔχρηστον occurs only here, 2 Tim. ii. 21, iv. τι. Profitable to
Philemon in the new and higher character of his service as a
Christian, as described (Eph. vi. 5 ff.; Col. iii. 22 ff.). Profitable
to Paul as an evidence of his successful apostolic labor (καρπὸς
ἔργου, Phil. i. 22), and therefore a cause of joy and encourage-
ment. There may also be a reference to Onesimus’ kindly minis-

tries to himself in his imprisonment (vs. 13).
») B
“ἰ

186 PHILEMON [12, 13

12. ov ἀνέπεμψα σοι αὐτόν, τοῦτ᾽ ἐστιν τὰ ἐμὰ σπλάγχνα : ‘whom
I send back to thee in his own person, that is my very heart.’
Αὐτόν thus emphasises ov, and prepares the way for τὰ ἐμὰ ond.

Lightf. punctuates ἀνέπ. σοι. Αὐτόν, τουτέστιν τὰ ἐμὰ σπλ., ὃν ἐγὼ,
etc., thus beginning a new sentence with αὐτόν as depending on the idea of
προσλαβοῦ (vs. 17). Such a “dislocation” is hardly conceivable, even in
Paul’s writing.

᾿Ανέπεμψα is the epistolary aorist, by which the writer puts him-
self at the point of time when the correspondent is reading his
letter. (See Acts xxii. 30; Phil’. 23°; Win. xl-2-s4an@ moresen
ἔγραψα, vs. 19.) For τὰ ἐμὰ σπλάγχνα, see on Phil. 1. 8, 1]. 1.
Pesh. renders ‘my son.’ Wetst. cites Artemidorus, ᾿Ονειροκριτικά |
(i. 46) οἱ παίδες σπλάγχνα λέγονται ; also 74. 35, v. 57, and Philo,
De Joseph. 5 (ii. 45). In Latin poetry and post-Augustine prose
viscera is used in the same sense. (See Ov. Mev. vi. 651, viii.
478, x. 405 ; Ὁ. Curt. iv. 14, 22:) So Chr..and ΜΠ τι ei ais
does not agree with Paul’s usage elsewhere. (See 2 Cor. vi. 12,
vii. 15 ; Phil. 1. 8, i. 1; Col. ii. 12.) Besides, it would-be tauto-
logical after ov ἐγέννησα.

13. ov ἐγὼ ἐβουλόμην πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν κατέχειν: ‘whom I was
minded to keep with myself.’ The expression of an actual
thought and desire entertained by Paul; ἐβουλόμην indicating
deliberation with an accompanying inclination. I was inclined to
keep him, and was turning over the matter in my mind. See on
τὸ θέλειν, Phil. ii. 13.

Lightf. prefers the conditional sense of the imperfect, ‘I could have
wished,’ referring it to a suppressed conditional clause, ‘if circumstances
had favored.’ This is a well-known use of the imperf. (See Acts xxv. 22;
Rom. ix. 3; Gal. iv. 20; and Lightf. Oz Revzs. of V.T., under “ Faults of
Grammar.’”’) But no such conditional clause is implied; for Paul does not
intimate that the fulfilment of his wish was impossible, and that therefore
he did not cherish it, but only that, though he entertained the wish, he

refrained from acting upon it until he should have learned Philemon’s
pleasure in the matter (vs. 14).

πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν : ‘with myself.’ See on zpos, vs. 5 ; and Phil. iv. 6.

κατέχειν: For the verb, see Lk. iv. 42, vill. τὸ; Εὐπι ΠΤ
Te ΠΕΈΞΞῚ ν᾿ 21:

ἵνα ὑπὲρ σοῦ μοι διακονῇ : ‘that he might serve me on thy behalf.’
A delicate justification of ἐβουλόμην, and full of tact. The ὑπὲρ
σου is exquisite, assuming that his friend would delight in render-
ing him, through the slave, the service which he could not per-
sonally perform. Ὑπὲρ is not for ἀντὶ, ‘instead of,’ or ‘in thy
place’ (Thdrt., Cic., Calv., De W., Bleek, van Oos.), but has its
usual N.T. sense, ‘on behalf of,’ or ‘ for thy sake.’ The expression
thus gains in delicacy. Onesimus is more than a mere substitute
for Philemon. In these words the relation of master and slave
disappears for the moment. Both are servants for Christ’s sake

13, 14] A FAVOR FREELY GRANTED 187

in the discharge of a ministry congenial to both. The suggestion
is already conveyed by εὔχρηστον that Onesimus, in becoming a
Christian disciple, has passed into a new and higher sphere of
service, in which he and his master are on common ground. At
the same time, there is a hint that Onesimus, even as a slave, is
rendering better service to the master whom he has wronged, in
thus serving Philemon’s friend and teacher ; serving no longer as
a menial, but in hearty sympathy with his master.

ἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς τοῦ εὐαγγελίου : ‘in the bonds of the gospel’ ;
of which the gospel is the cause ; in my imprisonment which has
resulted from the preaching of the gospel. Thus a hint is added
of his need of such service as that of Onesimus, which has the
force of an appeal, as in vs. 9, 10. (Comp. Eph. iv. 1, vi. 20,
and Ign. Zrad/. xii.: παρακαλεῖ ὑμᾶς τὰ δεσμά pov, ἃ ἕνεκεν ᾿Ιησοῦ
Χριστοῦ περιφέρω : ‘my bonds exhort you which I wear for the
sake of Jesus Christ.’ See also Eph. xi: Magn. i.).

14. χωρὶς δὲ THs σῆς γνώμης : “ but without thy judgment.’ ‘But,’
though I had the inclination. Χωρὶς, ‘ apart from,’ in N.T. almost
entirely supplements ἄνευ, ‘ without,’ which occurs only three times,
and not in Paul. (See Ellic. on Eph. ii. 12.) ΨῬνώμης, not fre-
quent in N.T. Primarily ‘a means of knowing’ (γινώσκειν): the
organ by which one knows. Hence mind and its operations,
thought, judgment, opinion. (See Acts xx. 3; 1 Cor. 1. 10,
τον 2 Cor vil. TO, Apoc. Xvil. 13, 17.) \‘ Mind” or “judg-
ment’ is the meaning throughout the N.T. Paul was unwilling
to take any steps without having Philemon’s judgment as to what
was right in the case.

ἠθέλησα: “1 determined.’ Comp. the aor. with the imperf.
ἐβουλόμην. 1 was deliberating and came to the decision.

iva μὴ ὡς κατὰ ἀνάγκην τὸ ἀγαθόν σου 7: ‘in order that thy benefit
might not be as of necessity’; the benefit, namely, which Phile-
mon would confer by allowing Onesimus to remain with Paul.
᾿Αγαθόν not in the sense of ‘ morally good,’ but ‘ kindly,’ ‘ benefi-
cent) = (eamp. Roms ν 7, vil. 12; τ Thess. wi. 6} Tit.. it..5 ;
τ Pet. ii. 18, and see Lightf. Votes on Eps. of St. P. from
Unpublished Commentaries, pp. 45, 286, 303.)

The point made by Mey., Ellic., Beet, Alf., that τὸ ἀγαθόν is general —
the category under which falls the special ἀγαθόν of Onesimus’ remaining
— seems to be an over-refinement. The special reference to πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν
κατέχειν (vs. 13) is not affected by the fact that Paul did not intend to keep
Onesimus (Mey.). His intention was in abeyance for a time. He actually
wished to keep him, and debated with himself whether he should not keep
him, but he did not resolve to keep him. In that case Philemon would
have served Paul, and Paul would have received a benefit from him without
consulting him, which was what he did not wish.

ὡς κατὰ ἀνάγκην : ‘as of necessity’; ‘compulsion-wise ’ (Ellic.).
Ὡς, seeming as, wearing the appearance of. Introduced because

188 PHILEMON [14-16

Paul is satisfied that his retaining Onesimus would have been agree-
able to Philemon ; but he would not have it affearas if Philemon’s
permission was constrained. Kar. dvdy., not = ἐξ ἀνάγκης (as Oltr.),
which marks the origin of the action, but indicating that the action
is performed according to a certain rule or model. (See Ellic. on
Tit. iu. 5.) This particular phrase only here in N.T., but see
κατὰ νόμον, φύσιν, ἀλήθειαν, σάρκα, πνεῦμα, ἐρίθειαν. LXX, only 2
Macc. xv. 2.

κατὰ ἑκούσιον : ‘of free will’; ‘according to what is voluntary.’
‘Exovotos only here in N.T. (See LXX, Num. xv. 3.) For the
same antithesis see 1 Pet. v. 2.

15. Another reason for not detaining Onesimus. Paul might
thus have crossed the purpose of divine Providence. ‘The con-
sideration is modestly introduced with raya as the suggestion of a
possibility, and not as assuming acquaintance with God’s designs.
It might be that God allowed the slave to leave you in order that
he might become a Christian disciple ; and if I should retain him,
you would not have him back in your household as a Christian
brother. Philemon’s attention is thus turned from his individual
wrongs to the providential economy which has made these wrongs
work for good.

Tap explains the additional motive of ἠθέλησα. Τάχα is found
only here and Rom. v. 7.

ἐχωρίσθη : ‘he was parted (from thee).’ The word is chosen
with rare tact. He does not say ‘he ran away,’ which might
excite Philemon’s anger ; but ‘he was separated,’ and, by the use
of the passive, he puts Onesimus’ flight into relation with the
ordering of Providence:,: See Chrysostom’s comparison with the
case of Joseph, who says, “God did send me before you”
(Gen. xlv. 5).

πρὸς wpav: ‘for a season.’ Indefinite. (Comp. 2 Cor. vii. 8;
Gal. il. 5 ; 1 Thess. ii. 17.) Whatever the period of separation, it
was but ‘an hour’ as compared with its lasting consequences.

va... ἀπέχῃς : ‘that thou mightest have him.’ The com-
pound verb denotes the completeness of the possession. (See
on Phil. iv. 18.) The bond between the master and the slave
would no longer be that of ownership by purchase which death
would dissolve, but their common relation to Christ which made
them brethren, now and evermore.

Lightf. explains ἀπέχῃς ‘receive ack.’ If this is correct, it is the only
instance in N.T., though ἀπὸ has this meaning in composition with διδόναι,
καθιστάναι, καταλλάσσειν, and λαμβάνειν. (See Mt. xii. 13; Mk. iii. 5;
Teles ν, 20, 1X. 412. ἘΠῚ δ.)

16. οὐκέτι ὡς δοῦλον : ‘no longer as a slave.’ ‘Qs denotes the
subjective conception of Onesimus’ relation to his master, without
reference to the external relation; 2.5. Paul does not say that

16, 17] ᾿ MORE THAN A SLAVE 189

Philemon is to receive Onesimus freed, and no longer a slave,
which would be δοῦλον simply, but that, whether he shall remain
a slave or not, he will no longer be regarded as a slave, but as a
brother beloved. ‘The relation between the master and the slave
is transformed. ‘The slave, even without ceasing to be a slave, is
on a different and higher footing with his master. Both are in
Christ. (See 1 Cor. vii. 20-24; Col. ii. 11.) The relation is
conceived absolutely, without special reference to Philemon’s view
of it.

ὑπὲρ δοῦλον : ‘above a slave’; ‘more than a slave.’ For this
sense Of ὑπὲρ, see Mt. x. 24, 37; Acts xxvi. 13; Win. xlix.

ἀδελφὸν ἀγαπητόν : Explaining ὑπὲρ δοῦλον.

μαλίστα ἐμοί : ‘especially to me’ whose spiritual child he is.

πόσῳ δὲ μᾶλλον got: ‘but how much more to thee.’ Because
he is your property. ‘There is a hint that the property relation
involves more than mere ownership and receiving of service.
Ownership should be a basis for Christian fraternity and its
mutual ministries.

καὶ ἐν σαρκὶ καὶ ἐν κυρίῳ : ‘both in the flesh and in the Lord.’
Explaining πόσῳ μᾶλλον. In the mere external relation (ἐν σαρκὶ)
Onesimus will be a better servant; in the spiritual relation (ἐν
κυρίῳ) he will be on a higher footing, and will have acquired a
new value as a Christian brother.

The main point of the letter is at last reached, backed by an
appeal to Philemon’s fellowship with Paul. Paul has sent Onesi-
mus back (vs. 11). He prays Philemon to give him a kindly
reception.

17. εἰ οὖν pe ἔχεις κοινωνόν : ‘if therefore thou regardest me as a
partner.’ Ody sums up the considerations just urged, and resumes
the request foreshadowed in vs. 11,12. For ἔχεις comp. Luke xiv.
18; Phil. ii. 29. Κοινωνόν : The noun and its kindred verbs are
used in.N.T. almost exclusively of ethical and spiritual relations.
Even when applied to pecuniary contributions, they imply Christ-
ian fellowship as the basis of the liberality. Comp., however,
Lk. v. 10; Heb. ii. 14. Here a partner in Christian faith, so that
the refusal of Paul’s request would be inconsistent with such a
relation. Surely not as Beng. “that what is thine may be mine,
and mine thine.”

προσλαβοῦ αὐτὸν ὡς ἐμέ: ‘receive him as myself” ‘Take him
unto thee. Admit him to Christian fellowship. ‘Qs ἐμέ. Comp.
τὰ ἐμὰ σπλάγχνα (VS. 12).

He guards against certain possible hindrances to Onesimus’
favorable reception.

190 PHILEMON [18, 19

18. εἰ δέ τι ἠδίκησεν σε ἢ ὀφείλει : ‘if he hath in aught wronged
thee or is in thy debt.’ Another exhibition of the apostle’s tact
in dealing with a delicate subject. Besides running away, Onesi-
mus had possibly robbed his master. He had at least deprived
him of his services by his flight. Paul states the case hypo-
thetically, and puts the offence as a debt.

τοῦτο ἐμοὶ €AAdya: ‘place this to my account.’ He will be
responsible for the amount.

Ἑλλόγα, only here and Rom. v. 13. Not in class., though
occurring in one or two inscriptions. It does not occur in LXX.

The reading eAdovyer has very scanty support.

19. ἐγὼ Παῦλος ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί: “1, Paul, write it with my
own hand.’ Paul’s promissory note. Ἔγραψα is the epistolary
aorist. (Comp. 1 Pet..v. 12; 1 Jn. i. 14,21, 26.) Toewould
appear that Paul wrote these and at least the two following words
with his own hand. ‘How much more he may have written,
whether the entire letter, or all the verses from rg to the end, is
purely a matter of speculation.

Lightf. says that this incidental mention of his autograph, occurring
where it does, shows that he wrote the whole letter with his own hand
instead of employing an amanuensis as usual. So De W. and Alf., and
Ellic. and Oltr. think it not improbable. (See Lightf. and Ellic. on Gal.
vi. II.)

ἐγὼ ἀποτίσω: “1 will repay it.’ Probably without any serious
expectation that Philemon would demand payment; but yet not
as a mere graceful pleasantry (as v. Sod., Mey., Oltr.). ltr.
imagines how Philemon must have laughed at such a promise
from a man who had not a penny in the world. But why? Paul
on his anticipated release from prison might have found means to
pay if payment should be demanded, just as he found means to live
in prison or to earn the money by his own labor as he had done
more than once.

iva μὴ λέγω σοι: ‘not to say to thee.’ (Comp. 2 Cor. ix. 4.)
A sort of elliptical construction in which the writer delicately
protests against saying something which he nevertheless does say.
Similar phrases are οὐχ ὅτι (Phil. iv. 11) ; οὐχ οἷον ὅτι (Rom.
ix. 6). In many such cases the phrase becomes stereotyped,
and the connection with a suppressed thought is not consciously
present to the writer. The thought completely expressed would
be: ‘I agree to assume the obligation 7” order to avoid mention-
ing your great personal debt to me.’

OTL καὶ σεαυτόν μοι προσοφείλεις : ‘that thou owest me also thine
own self besides.’ You owe to me your conversion. The xat
‘also,’ and zpos (προσοφ.) ‘in addition to’ are correlated. You
are my debtor not only to the amount for which I here become

19-22] REFRESH MY HEART ΤΟΙ

responsible, but a/so for your own self zz addition to that, Even
if you remit the debt, you will still owe me yourself. Ἱροσοφείλειν
only here in N.T.

20. vai, ἀδελφέ: ‘yea, brother.’ Nai is a particle of confirma-
tion. See on Phil. iv. 3, and comp. Matt. xv. 27; Rom. iii. 29 ;
Apoc. xiv. 13. It confirms the request in vs. 17.

ἐγώ σου ὀναίμην ἐν κυρίῳ : ‘let me have profit from thee in the
Lord.’ The ἐγώ is emphatic. Receive zm, and so may / be
profited. I ask for him as a favor to myself. ‘This emphasis
delicately points to Onesimus, and the allusion is strengthened by
the play on his name in ὀναίμην. ᾿Ονίνασθαι ‘to have profit or
advantage.’ Only here in N.T. It is common in class. with the
genitive of that from which profit accrues. See Hom. //. xvi. 31 ;
Od. xix. 68; Eurip. Wed. 1025, 1348: Aristoph. Zhesm. 469.
Also Ign. Podye. i. vi; Mag. ii. xii; EPA. ii.

ἐν κυρίῳ : Not material advantage, but advantage accruing from
their both being in Christ, and from the act as a Christian act.

ἀναπαυσόν : 566 ON VS. 7.

pov τὰ σπλάγχνα : ‘my heart.’ Not a designation of Onesimus.
(Comp. vs. 12.)

21, 22. Being assured of your obedient spirit, 7 write to you,
knowing that you will do even more than Task. While you thus
receive Onesimus, be ready to receive me also, and prepare a lodg-
ing for me, since I hope that,in answer to your prayers, 7 may
soon be permitted to visit you.

21. πεποιθὼς τῇ ὑπακοῇ gov: ‘having confidence in thine obedi-
ence.’ Not recurring to the note of authority in vs. 8, but mean-
ing his obedience to the claims of Christian duty as they shall
appeal to his conscience.

ἔγραψά σοι: “1 write to thee.’ See on vs. 19.

ὑπὲρ ἃ λέγω: ‘above what I say.’ For ὑπὲρ, 586 on vs. τό. It
is not certain that he alludes to the manumission of Onesimus
(De W., Oltr., Reuss, Godet), though this may possibly be im-
plied. The expression is general. My confidence in your love
and obedience assures me that you will more than fulfil my
request.

22. ἅμα δὲ : ‘but withal.’ At the same time with your kindly
reception of Onesimus. For ἅμα see Acts xxiv. 26, xxvii. 40;
[60] νῦν rs lim? v.13:

ἑτοίμαζέ μοι ξενίαν : ‘prepare me a lodging,’ or ‘ entertainment.’
Indicating his hope of speedy liberation as expressed in Phil. i.
24. According to Phil. ii. 24, Paul proposed to go to Macedonia
in the event of his liberation; whereas here he expresses a wish
to go immediately to Colosse. (See Weiss, ind. ὃ 24.) But

192 PHILEMON [22, 23

between writing the two letters, he might have found reason to
change his mind; or he might take Philippi on his way from
Rome to Colossz, since Philippi was on the great high-road
between Europe and Asia. (See Hort, Zhe Romans and the
Ephesians, pp. 103, 104.)

ξενίαν: Only here and Acts xxviii. 23. Suid. and Hesych.
define ‘an inn, καταγώγιον, KatadAvpa.’ Ἐξενισθῶμεν, however, Acts
xxi. 16, is used of entertainment in a private house. The primary
meaning of ξενία is ‘ hospitality,’ ‘ friendly entertainment or recep-
tion.’ ᾿Ἐλθεῖν ἐπὶ ξενίαν is ‘to come seeking entertainment’ (Pind.
LV. 49); ἐπὶ ξενίαν καλεῖν is ‘to invite as a guest’ (Dem. 81, 20).
Comp. Clem. Hom. xii. 2, προάξωσιν τὰς ξενίας ἑτοιμάζοντες. ‘The
phrase here may therefore mean, ‘ prepare to entertain me.’

διὰ τῶν προσευχῶν ὑμῶν : Comp. Phil. 1. το.

χαρίσθησομαι : ‘I shall be granted’ or ‘given.’ As a favor by
God, and perhaps with a friendly assumption that his coming will
be regarded by them as a favor. I shall be graciously restored to
you who desire my safety, and who will welcome my restoration.
(See Acts ili. 14, xxvii. 24.)

SALUTATIONS

23. All the persons saluted are named in the salutations of
Col. except Jesus Justus.

Ἔπαφρᾶς : Paul’s delegate to the Colossians (Col. 1. 7). A
Colossian, and not to be identified with Epaphroditus of Phil. 1].
25, on which see note.

Μάρκος : Probably John Mark, the son of Mary (Acts xii. 12, 25,
xv. 37). Called 6 ἀνεψιὸς Βαρνάβα (Col. iv. 10). The first -
mention of him since the separation twelve years before (Acts xv.
39) occurs in Col. and Philem. (Comp. 2 Tim. iv. 11 with the
account of the separation.) He is commended to the church at
Colosse (Col. iv. 10). In 1 Pet. v. 13 he sends salutation to
Asia, and appears to be there some years after the date of Col.
and Philem. (2 Tim. iv. 1r).

᾿Αρίσταρχος: A Thessalonian who started with Paul on his
voyage to Rome (Acts xxvii. 2). On his leaving Paul at Myra,
see Introd. V. In Col. iv. 10, 11, he is mentioned with Mark and
Jesus Justus as being of the circumcision. He appears at Ephesus
as Paul’s companion (Acts xix. 29), and as accompanying the
apostle on his return from Greece through Macedonia to Troas
(Acts xx. 7)"

Δημᾶς : Contraction of Δημήτριος. Probably a Thessalonian
(Col. iv. 14, comp: 2 Timi. 10.)

Λουκᾶς : The evangelist. His connection with Paul first appears
Acts xvi. 10, where he accompanies the apostle to Macedonia.

2] THE CHURCH IN THY HOUSE 193

He remained at Philippi after Paul’s departure, and was there
seven years later, when Paul visited the city (Acts xx. 5,6). He
accompanied the apostle to Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 15), after which
we lose sight of him until he appears at Czsarea (Acts xxvii. 2),
whence he accompanies Paul to Rome.

NoTE ON “THE CHURCH THAT IS IN THY HOUSE” (vs, 2)

The basilica did not appear until the third century. The oldest witnesses
for special church buildings are Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. c. 5, and Hippol.
Fragm. ed. Lagarde, p. 149. Both witnesses represent the beginning of the
third century, about 202 A.D., and are older than the commonly cited passages
in Tert. Adv. Valent. c. 3 (205-8 A.D.).

The liberty of assembling was due to the fact that in the Roman Empire
Christians at this time passed as a Jewish sect. The Jews were allowed to
assemble under the special exemptions granted by Julius Cesar and Augustus,
which declared their communities legally authorised, and gave them the right
to establish societies in all places (Joseph. Azzy. xiv. 10, 8). They thus
availed themselves of the widely spread institution of collegta or sodalitates
which had prevailed in the empire from a very early period. Numerous clubs
or confraternities existed, composed either of the members of different trades,
of the servants of a particular household, or of the worshippers of a particular
deity. A special object of these clubs was to provide decent burial for their
members. A fund was raised by contribution, from which burial expenses
were defrayed, and also the expenses of the annual feasts held on the birthdays
of the deceased. (See Antiochene Acts of Martyrdom of Ignatius, vii.; Pliny’s
Letter to Trajan; Tert. Apol. 39.) For the celebration of these feasts special
buildings were erected called scholae. Sometimes a columbarium was pur-
chased by a club for its own use.

This right of forming co//egia was at first freely granted to all parties under
the republic, but began to be restricted before the close of the republican
period. (See Cicero, Orat. ix L. Calp. Pison. c. 4; and Livy’s account of the
extirpation of the Bacchanalian rites, xxxix. 8.)

Julius Cesar suppressed all but the most ancient cod/egia (Suet. /udius, 42),
and his decrees were confirmed by Augustus (Suet. Augustus, 32). From the
operation of these edicts, however, the Jews were exempted. They had only to
refrain from meeting in a single general association. They were allowed the
free exercise of their worship, and government by the chiefs of their synagogues.
It was easy for the Christians to take advantage of the general misconception
which confounded them with the Jews, and to hold their assemblies. Ata
later period, when they became more distinct, and their ordinary assemblies
were forbidden, they availed themselves of those exceptions to the Julian and
Augustan edicts which allowed the existence of benefit-clubs among the poor
for funeral purposes, and permitted them to meet once a week. This excep-
tion became important under Hadrian (A.D. 117-138).

194...) OS EMR eee [5

See Edwin Hatch, Orvganzzation of the Early Christian ἜΣΤΕ: a

Loening, Gemeindeverfassung ; W. M. Ramsay, Zhe Church in the Roman
Empire, etc.; J. S. Northcote and W. R. Brownlow, Roma Sotteranea, 2d —
ἘΠῚ. swine Lanciani, Ancient Rome in the Light of Recent Excavations, p. 128;

and Pagan and Christian Rome, p. 117; De Rossi, Roma Sotteranea, i. -

p. 209. ‘es

reek OF SUBJECTS

Achaia, xi.

Acts, date of, 41.

“Αγιασμός, a state and a process, 123.

Alexander the Great, x.

Alford, on date of the Philippian let-
ter, Xxil.

Antithesis of Adam and Christ, 84-86.

Apphia, 176.

Arbela, battle of, x.

Archippus, speculations concerning,
177.

Aristarchus, xxili.

Aristotle, on μορφὴ, 79.

Baur, attack on the Philippian letter,
xxvif. Oni. 7, xxvii. Rejects Epis-
tle to Philemon, 159.

Becker, on the Roman slaves, 162.

Beyschlag, on the antithesis of Adam
and Christ, 85. Status of the pre-
incarnate Christ, 85. Distinction
between θεὸς and ὁ θεὸς, 86.

Bishops, 4. In the Pauline epistles,
38, 40. In the Ignatian letters, 40.
In the Pastoral Epistles, 47.

Brace, C. L., on mitigations of slavery,
168.

Briggs, C. A., on the antithesis of
Adam and Christ, 84. Doctrine of

the preincarnate Christ in the Epis-
tle to the Colossians, 85.

Bruce, A. B., on the preincarnate
Christ, 83. Treatment of justifica-
tion in Epistle to the Romans, 124.

Burrhus, the pretorian prefect, xxi,
Xxiii.

Cesarea, composition of the Asiatic
epistles at, 160 f.

Ceesar’s household, 153.

Callistratus, xiv.

Calvin, on imputation, 127.

Cheeronea, battle of, x.

Christians, confounded with Jews,
193.

Church in the house, 177, 193.

| Clementine Homilies, xxvi.

| Clement of Rome, reminiscences of the

Philippian letter, xxvi. Fictitiously

represented as St. Paul’s fellow-la-

borer, xxvi. Spiritual obligations

illustrated by civic duties, 32. Names

of church officers, 40. On the epis-

copal office, 44. On bishops and

deacons, 47. On qualifications of

| presbyters, 48.

Collegia, 193.

Colonies, Roman, xvi f.

Colossians, Epistle to, composition at

| Ceesarea, xxii.

Comparatives, St. Paul’s use of, 29.

Corinth, destroyed by Mummius, xi.

| Cynocephale, battle of, xi.

Datos, xiv.

Deacons, in the Pauline epistles, 38,
40. In the Pastoral Epistles, 49.
In Clement of Rome and the Di-
dache, 49. Older view of their ori-
gin not sustained, 49.

Deissmann, G. A., on ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ,
4. On use of prepositions by Paul,

179.

195

196 INDEX OF

Designations of Christ in the Epistles
of the Imprisonment, 100.

Didache, bearing on primitive church
organisation, 42 f., 44.

Diognetus, letter to, reminiscence of |
Philippian letter, xxvi, 119.

Dorner, on Christ’s equality with God,
84. On antithesis of Adam and
Christ, 84. On Rom. i. 4, 86.

Dyrrhachium, treaty of, xi.

Earthquakes in the Lycus valley, 161.

Egnatia, Via, xviii.

Epaphroditus, xxiii, 75.

Ephesus, relations with cities of the
Lycus, 157.

Ἐπίσκοπος, in LXX, 45.

᾿Επούρανιος, application to the prein-
carnate Christ, xxvil.

Eusebius, recognition of the Philippian
letter, xxvi. Of the Epistle to Phi-
lemon, 159. On the date of the
earthquake at Laodicza, 161.

Expositor, essays on primitive church

polity, 37.

Faith, ethical quality in, 127.
Farrar, F. W., on the date of the Phil-
ippian letter, xxiv.

Godet, F., on the date of the Philippian
letter, xxil.

Gold mines in Macedonia, xv.

Granicus, battle at the, x.

Guilds in the Roman Empire and their
relation to ecclesiastical nomencla-

ture, 44, 45.

Harnack, A., on the date of St. Paul’s
arrival at Rome, xxi. On Phil. i. 3,
6. On primitive church polity, 37,
39. On date of Acts and Pastoral
Epistles, 41, 42. On development
of church polity in the Philippian
letter, 42. On the Afpostolical Ordi-
2aANCES, 43.

Hatch, E., on primitive church polity, |

SUBJECTS

37. On the origin of ecclesiastical
titles, 44. On the relation of the
synagogue to the original Christian
polity, 46.

Hebrews, Epistle to, 87.

Heuzey and Daumet, JZisston Archéo-
logique de Macédotine, xiv, xvy xviii.

Hitzig, F., on Euodia and Syntyche,
130.

Hodge, C., on imputation, 125.

Holland, H. S., on faith, 128.

Holtzmann, H. J., on the date of the
Philippian letter, xxii. Recognises
the authenticity of, xxx. On a
primitive collective Christendom,
38. Date of the Pastoral Epistles,
41. Relations of the primitive
church to the synagogue, 46. Ac-
cepts the Epistle to Philemon as
authentic, 160. On use of preposi-
tions by Paul, 179.

Holtzmann, O., on Acts xvi. 12, xx.
On date of Paul’s arrival at Rome,
XXIs

Hort, F. J. A., on the date of the
Philippian letter, xxiv. On earth-
quakes at Laodiczea, 162.

Ignatius, reminiscences of the Philip-
pian letter in the epistles of, xxvi.
On the episcopate, 40.

Irenzeus, use of πρεσβύτερος, 48.

Jerome, on the Epistle to Philemon,
159.

Josephus, on the detention of prison-
ers, XXi.

Jowett, B., on the character of the
Philippian letter, xxxiv. On the
Parousia, 8. On lost Pauline epis-
tles, ΟἹ.

Judaisers, in Rome, 18.
92, 93:

Jiilicher, A., on the date of the Philip-
pian letter, xxii.

Jus Italicum, xvi, xx.

In Philippi,

INDEX OF

Kldpper, A., on the date of the Philip-
pian letter, xxii. On Phil. i. 23, 29.
Krenides, x.

Lanciani, R., on the imperial house-
hold, 153.

Lecky, W. E. H., on slavery, 162.

Liddon, H. P., on δικαιοσύνη, 123.

Lightfoot, J. B., on the date of the
Philippian letter, xxiii, Essay on
“The Christian Ministry,” 37. Orig-
inal Christian polity an imitation of |
the synagogue, 46. On πραιτώριον,
51. On Phil. 1.17, 71. On σχήμω
and μορφὴ, 79. On μόρφωσις, 80.
On ἁρπαγμός, 88. On lost epistles
to the Philippians, 91. On the posi-
tion of woman in Macedonia, 130.
On Ceesar’s household, 154.

Lipsius, R. A., on the date of the
Philippian letter, xxii.

Loening, E., on primitive church pol-
ity, 37, 43. On ecclesiastical no-
menclature as derived from the
Roman guilds, 44.

Luke, a Macedonian, xviii, xix. Left
by Paul at Philippi, xx. Salutes |
Philemon, 192.

Luther, on imputation, 127.

Lyons and Vienne, Epistle to the
Philippians cited in the letter to
Asia, xxvi.

Macedonia, geography of, ix. Litera-
ture on, xii. Division by the Ro-
mans, xi.

Marquardt, on πραιτώριον, 51.

Matheson, G., on Onesimus, 166.

McGiffert, A., on date of Paul’s arrival
at Rome, xxi.

Menaea, 158.

Ménégoz, on justification, 123.

Messianic lordship of Christ, 86, 87.

Meyer, H. A. W., on the date of the
Philippian letter, xxii. On Judaisers
in Rome, 19. On ἁρπαγμός, 58, 89.

SUBJECTS 197

Mommsen, Th., on πραιτώριον, 52.

Mummius, L., xi.

Municipia, Roman, xvi.

Muratorian Canon, includes Philip-
pians and Philemon, xxvi, 159.

Neapolis, xviil.

Onesimus, in the martyrologies, 158.

| Origen, recognition of the Pauline

authorship of the letters to the
Philippians and Philemon, xxvi, 159.

Parabolani, 77.

Pastoral Epistles, date of, 41.

Paul, arrives at Philippi, xix. In Ma-
cedonia, xviil. Arrival at Rome,
xxi. Delay of trial, xxi.

Paullus, L. Aémilius, ΧΙ.

Perdiccas, x.

Perseus, xi.

Peshitto, epistles to the Philippians
and Philemon included in, xxvi, 159.

Pfleiderer, O., on Judaisers in Rome,
19.) On Phil i; 21,27. Onjoficers
in the primitive church, 39. On
Phil. 1.12, 65. On moral resurrec-
tion, 104. On the Epistle to Phile-
mon, 160.

Philemon, Epistle to, occasion of, 158.
References in Ignatius, 159. Exter-
nal evidence for, 159. Composed
at Rome, 160.

Philemon, a Colossian, 157.

Philip of Macedon, x. Names Phil-
ippi, Xv.

Philip, son of Demetrius, xi.

Philippi, x, xiii, xiv. Defeat of Brutus
and Cassius at, xvi. Description in
Acts xvi. 12, xix f. Modern appear-
ance of, xvil.

Philippians, Epistle to,
Rome, xxii. Occasion of, xxv. Crit-
ical questions on, xxv f. Pauline
diction of, xxx. Defenders of au-
thenticity of, xxx. History of con-
troversy on, xxx. Integrity of, xxxi f.

written at

198 INDEX OF

Contents and character of, xxxii f.

Text, xxxvii f. Commentaries on,
xxxix f,

Philo, on anarthrous θεὸς, 86.

Polycarp, to the Philippians, xxv. On
obligations to the spiritual polity,
32. On former epistles to the Phil-
ippians, 91.

Preetorian guard, 16, 51.

Preetors, xvil.

Preincarnate existence of Christ, 83.

Presbyters, 36. Identity with bishops,
37. In the Pauline epistles, 40. In
the Acts and Pastoral Epistles, 46,

48. Πρεσβύτεροι καθεσταμένοι, 48,
49. Οἱ καλῶς προεστῶτες πρεσβύ-
τεροι, 49. :

Provinces, senatorial and imperial, xi.

Pydna, Macedonian defeat at, xi.

Ramsay, W. M., xviii, xix. On mpa-
τώριον, 52. On date of Paul’s arri-
val at Rome, xxi.

Renan, E., xviii. On origin of eccle-
siastical titles, 44.

Réville, J., on the origin of the
episcopate, 38, 39, 41, 45, 50.

Righteousness of faith, imparted, not
imputed, 125 f.

Rothe, R., original Christian polity an
imitation of the synagogue, 46.

Sabatier, A., on righteousness of faith,
126. On authenticity of Epistle to
Philemon, 160.

Salvation, Pauline doctrine of in Phil.
111. 19-21, 121 f.

Sanday, W., on ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός and
Χριστὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς, 3. On πίστις, 34.
Review of Harnack, 37. On Ceesar’s
household, 153.

SUBJECTS

| Schiirer, E., on imitation of the syna-

gogue by the primitive church, 46.
On Pauline chronology, xxi.
Seneca, on slavery, 167.
Slavery, Roman, 162 ff.
attitude towards, 165 ff.
Smyth, N., on the body of Christ’s
glory, 121.
Sohm, R., Airchenrecht, 44.
Stoicism, 32.

Sti Paul’s

Tacitus, on date of earthquake at
Laodiczea, 161. On the increase
of slaves, 162.

Tertullian, allusion to the Epistle to
Philemon, 159.

Thasos, xiv, xv.

Theophilus of Antioch, reminiscence
of the Philippian letter in, xxvi.
Tigellinus, succeeds Burrhus as preeto-

rian prefect, xxiil.

Timothy, 2, 74, 175.

Tychicus, 158.

Volkmar, G., on Euodia and Syntyche,

XXV1l.

Wallon, H., on ancient slavery, 162.

Weiss, B., on the date of the Philippian
letter, xxii. On Judaisers in Rome,
10. On Phil. i. 23, 29. On poppy
and δόξα, 81.

Weizsacker, C., on primitive Christian
polity, 37. On the date of Acts,
41. On the preincarnate Christ, 83.
On the Epistle to Philemon, 160,
185.

Westcott, B. F., on the glorified body
of believers, 121.

Wieseler, K., on Philemon and Ar-

chippus, 157.

[INDE SOF GREEK WORDS

REFERENCES TO PHILEMON ARE DENOTED By P.

ἀγαθός, P. 14.
ἀγάπη, P. 5, 9.
G&yvos, i. I, iv. 21.
avyvos, iv. 8.

ἀγών, 1. 30.

ἀδελφὸς, 11. 25; P. I, 7.
ἀδημονεῖν, ii. 26.
αἴσθησις, 1. 9.
αἰσχύνεσθαι, i. 20.
αἴτημα, iv. 6.

αἰὼν, iv. 20.
ἀκειρεῖσθαι, iv. 10.
ἀκέραιος, il. 15.

ἀλλὰ εἰ kal, 11. 17.
ἀλλὰ pevodvye, iii. 8.
ἄμωμος, 11. 15.
ἀναθάλλειν, iv. 10.
ἀναλύειν, i. 23.
ἀναπαύειν, P. 7.
ἀναπληροῦν, 11. 30.
ἀνάστασις, ill, 10, II.
ἀνῆκον, P. 8.

ἄνω, ili. 14.
amekdéx eo Oat, 111. 20.
ἀπέχειν; iv. 18; P. 15.
ἀπιδεῖν, ii. 23.
ἀποβαίνειν εἰς, 1. 19.
ἀποκαλύπτειν, iii. 15.
ἀποκαραδοκία, i. 20.
ἀπολογία. i. 7.
ἀπόστολος, ii. 25.
ἀπουσία, ii. 12.
ἀπρόσκοπος, i. 10.
ἀπώλεια, i. 28, 111. 19, 20.

ἀρετὴ, iv. ὃ.

ρπαγμός, li. 6; p. 88.
ἀσφαλής, lil. 1.

ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν, 1. 5.
αὐτάρκης, ἵν. 11.
ἄχρηστος, P. 11.

βεβαίωσις, 1. 7.
βίβλος ζωῆς, ἵν. 3.
βούλεσθαι, ii. 13;
βραβεῖον, 111. 14.

JER vey

γένος, 111. 5.

γίνεσθαι, ii. ὃ, iii. 6.
γίνεσθαι ἐν, il. 7.
γινώσκειν, 1. 19, ili. 10.
γινώσκειν ὑμᾶς βούλομαι,
γνήσιος, iv. 3. [Π1: 12:
γνησίως, 11. 20.

γνώμη, P. 14.

γνωρίζειν, i. 22, iv. 6.
γογγυσμός, il. 14.

δέησις, i. 4, ἵν. 6.
dexT Os, iv. 18.
διάκονος, i. I.
διαλογισμός, ii. 14.
διαστρέφειν, ii. 15.
διαφέρειν, 1. 10.
δίκαιος, i. 7.
δικαιοσύνη, i. 11, 111. 6, 9.
δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, iii. 9.
διὸ, ii. 9.
διώκειν, 111. 6, 12, 14.
199

δοκεῖν, 111. 4.

δοκιμάζειν, 1. 10.
δοκιμή, 11. 22.

δόμα, ἵν. 17.

δόξα, i. 11; Ρ' 51:

ἐν δόξῃ, ἵν. 19.

δόσις καὶ λῆμψις, iv. 15.
δοῦλος, 1.1.

δύναμις, ili, 10, 21.

ἑαυτῶν, il. 12.
‘Efpatos, 11]. 5.
ἐγγύς, iv. 5.
ἐγείρειν, 1. 17.
ἔδραμον, 11. 16.
εἰλικρινὴς, 1. 10.
εἶναι, ii. 6.
εἴ πως, ill. II.
εἰρήνη, 1. 2, 1V. 7, 9.
εἰς; ΤΟΣ NAR Ε΄ τ
εἰς κενὸν, 11. 16.
εἴ τις, ἵν. 8.
ἐκκλησία, P. 2.
ἐλλογᾷν, P. 18.
ἐλπὶς, i. 20.
ἐνάρχεσθαι, 1. 6.
ἔνδειξις, i. 28.
ἐνδυναμοῦν, iv. 13.
ἐνέργεια, ill. 21.
ἐνεργεῖν, 11. 13.
ἐνεργὴς, P. 6.
ἐν Κυρίῳ (Ἰησοῦ), i. 14,
ii. 19, 24, iv. I, 2, 10;
Pe lOy 20%

200

ἐντίμους ἔχειν, ii. 20.

ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, 1.
1π| Ὁ:

ἐξανάστασις, 111. 11.

ἐξομολογεῖσθαι, il. 11.

ἔπαινος, i. II, iv. 8.

᾿Ἐπαφρόδιτος, ii. 25, iv.
18.

ἐπεκτείνεσθαι, 111. 13.

Ι,

ἐπέχειν, 11. 16.
ἐπὶ, 1. Bh 5. 11: 17, 27. 111: Ὁ,
NG 1:
ἐπίγειος, 11. 10.
ἐπίγνωσις, 1. 9; P. 6.
ἐπιεικής, ἵν. 5.
ἐπιζητεῖν, iv. 17.
ἐπιθυμία, 1. 23.
ἐπιλανθάνεσθαι, 111. 13.
ἐπιποθεῖν, i. 8, ii. 26, iv. I.
ἐπιπόθητοι, iv. 1.
ἐπίσκοπος, 1.1.
ἐπιτάσσειν, P. 8.
ἐπιτελεῖν, 1. 6.
ἐπιχορηγία, 1. 10.
ἐπουράνιος, li. 10; p. ΧΧΥΊΪ.
ἔργον Χριστοῦ, ii. 30.
ἐριθία, i. 17.
ἐρωτᾷν, iv. 3.
ἑτέρως, lil. 15.
εὐαγγέλιον, 1. 12.
εὐάρεστος, iv. 18.
εὐδοκία, 1. 15, ll. 13.
Evodla, iv. 2.
εὑρίσκειν, 11. 7, lll. 9.
εὔφημος, iv. 8.
εὐχαριστία, iv. 6.
εὔχρηστος, P. 11.
εὐψυχεῖν, 11. 19.

ζημιοῦσθαι, iii. 8.

ἡγεῖσθαι, ii. 3, 6, 25, iii. 8.
ἤδη ποτὲ, iv. 10.

ἡμεῖς, ill. 17.

ἡμέρα᾽ Τησοῦ Χριστοῦ, i. 6.
ἡμέρα Χριστοῦ, i. 16.

θέλειν, 11. 13; ἘΣ 14.
θλίψιν ἐγείρειν, 1. 17.

θυσία, il. 17, iv. 18.

᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς, 1.1.
ἕνα, 1: Of, wha A

ἵνα μὴ λέγω, P. 19.
ἰσόψυχος, ii. 20.
ἰσχύειν, iv. 13.

καθώς, 1. 7.

καίπερ, lil. 4.

καλῶς ποιεῖν, iv. 14.

καρδία, iv. 7.

Kapmos, 1. II, iv. 17.

κατὰ, 1.12. Th, 7. ally Bite
1: TSE TEL τὴν

καταγγέλλειν, 11.

καταλαμβάνειν, 111. 12.

καταντᾷν, ili. 11.

κατατομή, 111. 2.

καταχθόνιος, ii. 10.

κατεργάζεσθαι, ii. 12.

καύχημα, i. 26, ii. 16.

κεῖμαι, i. 16.

κενοδοξία, 11. 3.

κενοῦν, ll. 7.

κηρύσσειν, i. 15.

Κλήμης, lv. 3.

κλῆσις, lil. 14.

κοιλία, 111. 19.

κοινωνεῖν, ἵν. 15.

κοινωνός, P. 17.

κόπος, κοπιᾷν, ii. 16.
κόσμος, ii. 15.

κύνες, 111. 2.

Κύριος, ii. II, ill. 20, iv. 5.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

μᾶλλον, i. 9.
μεγαλύνειν, 1. 20.
μέγαλως, iy. 10.
μεριμνᾷν, iv. 6.

μέσον, il. 15.
μετασχηματίζειν, 111. 21.
μέχρι, ii. 8, 30.

μνεία; 1. 3.

μορφὴ, il. 6, 7; p. 79.
μόρφωσις, p. 80.
μυεῖσθαι, iv. 12.

νόημα, iv. 7.
νόμος, 111. 5.
νοῦς, ἵν. 7.
νυνὶ δε, P. 11.

ξενία, P. 22.

οἴδαν i. 19, iv. 12.
οἴεσθαι, i. 17.
οἰκία, iv. 22.
ὀκνηρός, ili. I.
OKTANMEPOS, ill. 5.
ὁμοίωμα, il. 7.
ὀνίνασθαι, P. 20.
ὄνομα, 11. 9, 10.
ὀπίσω, lil. 13.
ὀσμὴ, iv. 18.
Corres 111} ἢ. “ν᾿ ss
οὐχ ὅτι, ill. 12, Iv. II.

πάλιν, 11. 28.
παραβολεύεσθαι, ii. 30.
παράκλησις, il. 1.
παραλαμβάνειν, iv. 9.
παραμύθιον, il. 1.
παραπλήσιον, il. 27.
παρουσία, i. 26.

| mappnata, i. 20.

λατρεύειν, 111. 3.
λειτουργία, ii. 17, 30.
λειτουργός, ii. 25.
λογίζεσθαι, ili. 13, iv. ὃ,
λόγος, iv. 15, 17.

λόγος ζωῆς, il. 16.

πᾶς, 1s, 35 9: 28, 11: ὯΙ, 90,
111. 8; lis ἵν Ὁ We 51.
πεποίθησις, ill. 4.

περιπατεῖν, iii. 17, 18.

περισσεύειν, iv. 12, 17, 18.
περιτομὴ, iii. 3.

INDEX OF GREEK WORDS

πίστις, 1. 27, 11. 17, ili. 95
Faye

πλεονάζειν, iv. 17.

πλὴν ὅτι, i. 18.

πληροῦν, i. II.

mvedua, i. 27, 11. I, lil. 3.

πνεῦμα ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ,
1; 10;

πολιτεύεσθαι, 1. 27.

πολίτευμα, ili. 20.

πραιτώριον, 1. 12; p. 51.

πράσσειν, iv. 9.

προκοπὴ; 1. 12.

mp0s, ii. 30, iv.6; P. 5, 13.

προσευχὴ, i. 4, ἵν. 6; P. 4.

προσοφείλειν, P. 19.

προσφιλής, iv. 8.

πρεσβύτης, P. 9.

πτύρεσθαι, i. 28.

odpé, ill. 3; P. 16.
ceuvos, iv. 8.
σκολιός, 11. 15.
σκοπεῖν, li. 4, lil. 17.
σκοπός, 111. 14.
σκύβαλα, iil. ὃ.
σπλάγχνα, i. 8, ii. I; P.
12.
σπουδαιοτέρως, il. 28.
σταυρὸς, ii. 8, iii. 18.
στεφανός, iv. I.
στήκειν, 1. 27, ἵν. 1.

στοιχεῖν, ili. 16.
συλλαμβάνειν, iv. 3.
συμμορφίζεσθαι, lil. 10.
σύμμορφος, ili. 21.
συναθλεῖν, i. 27, iv. 3.

συνεργός, ii. 25, 1v. 3; P. 1.

συνέχειν, i. 23.
Σύνζυγος, iv. 3.
συνκοινωνεῖν, IV. 14.
συνκοινωνός, 1. 7.

συνμιμητής, 111. 17.

συστρατιώτης, ll. 25; P. 2.

Συντύχη, iv. 2.
συνχαίρειν, ii. 17, 18.
σχῆμα, ii. 7; p. 80.
σῶμα τῆς δόξης, 111. 21.
σωτήρ, lii. 20.
σωτηρία, 1. 19.

ταπεινοῦν; ii. 8, iv. 12.

ταπεινοφροσύνη, ll. 3.

ταπείνωσις, 111. 21.

τέκνον, ii. 15; LP. 10.

τέλειος, ili. 15.

τέλος, lll. 19.

τί γάρ, i. 18.

τὸ αὐτὸ, il. 18.

τὸ εἶναι ἴσα, ii. 6; p. $4.

τὸ λοιπόν, iii. I, iv. 8;
p. XXxll.

τοιοῦτος, P. 9.

τύπος, lll. 17.

υἱός, 11. 15.

ὑπακούειν, li, 12.
ὑπάρχειν, 11. 6, ill. 20.
Umeprile 71.11.0} ba 18; 21.
ὑπερέχειν, ll. 3, ili. 8, iv. 7.
ὑπερυψοῦν, ii. 9.
ὑποτάσσειν, iil. 21.
ὑστερεῖσθαι, iv. 12.
ὑστέρησις, iv. 11.

φαίνεσθαι, ii. 15.

Φαρισαῖος, ili. 5.

φθάνειν, ili. 16.

φόβος καὶ τρόμος, il. 12.

ppoveiv, i. 7, li. 2, 3, 8;
11:15, 10. shia 2, 10:

φρουρεῖν, iv. 7.

pwornp, li. 15.

χαίρειν, lll. I, iv. 4, 10.

χαρίζεσθαι, 1. 29, li. 9;
ἘΞ 22:

Xapts, 1: 2, 7.

χορτάζεσθαι, iv. 12.

Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, 1.1.

χωρίζειν, P. 15.

χωρὶς, Ῥ. 14.

ψυχὴ, i. 27.

Ppp Teter Whe yp 12) ἘΦ ΤΑ, ΤΌ:
ὥστει Ie 15: li. 12. iv, 1:

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY.

UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF

PROFESSOR S. R. DRIVER, D.D., OxFrorp; A. PLUMMER, D.D.,
DURHAM ; AND PROFESSOR C. A. BRIGGS, D.D., NEw York.

THE following eminent Scholars have contributed, or
are engaged upon, the Volumes named below :—

Genesis.
Exodus.

Leviticus.

Numbers.
Deuteronomy.
Joshua.
Judges.
Samuel.
Kings.
Isaiah.
Jeremiah.

Minor Prophets.
Psalms,

Proverbs.
Job.

Daniel.

Ezra and
Nehemiak.

Chronicles.

FHE OLD TESTAMENT.

T. K. CHEYNE, D.D., Oriel Professor of the Interpretation of
Holy Scripture, Oxford.

A. R. 5. KENNEDY, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, University of
Edinburgh.

J. Ε΄. STENNING, M.A., Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford ;
and the late Rev. H. A. WHITE, M.A., Fellow of New
College, Oxford.

G. BUCHANAN GRAY, M.A., Lecturer in Hebrew, Mansfield
College, Oxford.

5, R. Driver, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and
Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. [Third Edition, 12s.

GEORGE ADAM SMITH, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, United
Free Church College, Glasgow.

GEORGE F. Moore, D.D., Professor of Hebrew in Andover

Theological Seminary. [Second Edition, 12s.
H. P. SmitH, D.D., Professor of Biblical History and
Interpretation in Amherst College. [ Ready, 12s.

FRANCIS BROWN, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Cognate
Languages, Union Theological Seminary, New York.

A. B. Davipson, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew, United
Free Church College, Edinburgh.

A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.

W. ΚΕ. HARPER, Ph.D., President of Chicago University.

C. A. Briccs, D.D., Edward Robinson Professor of Biblical
Theology, Union Theological Seminary, New York.

C. H. Toy, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Harvard University,
Cambridge, Massachusetts. [Ready, 125.

S. R. DRIvER, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, Oxford.

Rev. JOHN P. PETERS, Ph.D., late Professor of Hebrew,
P. E. Divinity School, Philadelphia, now Rector of St.
Michael's Church, New York City.

Rev. L. W. BATTEN, Ph.D., late Professor of Hebrew,
P. E. Divinity School, Philadelphia, now Rector of St.
Mark's Church, New York.

EDWARD L. Curtis, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Yale Uni-
versity, New Haven, Conn.

(Continued on next page.

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY—continued.

Synopsis of the

THE NEW “TESTAMERME

W.. SANDAY, D.D., LL.D., Lady Margaret Professor of

Four Gospels. Divinity, Oxford; and Rev. W. C. ALLEN, M.A., Exeter

Matthew.

5. Mark.

8. Luke.

Acts.
Romans.

Corinthians,
Galatians.

Ephesians and
Colossians.

Philippians
and Philemon.

The Pastoral
Epistles.
Hebrews.

James.

Peter and Jude.

* The Johannine

Epistles.

Revelation.

College, Oxford.

Rev. WILLOUGHBY C. ALLEN, M.A., Chaplain, Fellow, and
Lecturer in Theology and Hebrew, Exeter College, Oxford.

Ezra P. GouLp, D.D., Professor of the New Testament
Literature and Language, Divinity School of the Protestant

Episcopal Church, Philadelphia. [Ready, tos. 6d.
ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D., Master of University
College, Durham. [Third Edition, tas.

FREDERICK H. CHASE, D.D., Christ’s College, Cambridge,

W. SanpDAy, D.D., LL.D., Lady Margaret Professor of
Divinity, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford; and
Rev. A. C. HEADLAM, B.D., Fellow of All Souls College,

Oxford. [Fourth Edition, 12s.
ARCH. ROBERTSON, D.D., Principal of King’s College,
London.

Rev. ERNEST D. BuRTON, A.B., Professor of New Testament
Literature, University of Chicago.

Rev. T. K. ΑΒΒΟΤΊ, B.D., D.Litt., formerly Professor of
Biblical Greek, now of Hebrew, Trinity College, Dublin.
[Ready, tos. 6d.

MARVIN R. VINCENT, D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature,
Union Theological Seminary, New York City.
[Second Edition, 8s. 6d.

WALTER Lock, D.D., Dean Ireland’s Professor of Exegesis,
Oxford ; Warden of Keble College.

Rey. A. NAIRNE, M.A., Professor of Hebrew in King’s
College, Londen.

Rev. JAMES H. Ropes, A.B., Instructor in New Testament
Criticism in Harvard University.

CHARLES Βιασ, D.D., Rector of Fenny Compton, Canon of
Christ Church, and Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical
History in the University of Oxford. [ Ready, tos. 6d.

S. Ὁ. F. Satmonp, D.D., Principal, and Professor of
Systematic Theology, United Free Church College, Aber-
deen.

Rev. ROBERT H. CHARLES, M.A., D.D., Trinity College,
Dublin, and Exeter College, Oxford.

Other engagements will be announced shortly.

EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.
Lonpon: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, ἃ CO. LTD.

ie & I. CLARK’S PUBLICATIONS.

Ghe International Theological Library.

EDITED BY
Principat 8. ἢ. F. SALMOND, D.D., anp Proressor C. A. BRIGGS, D.D.

‘A valuable and much needed addition to the theological literature of the English-
speaking nations.’—Academy.

The First Nine Volumes of the Series are now ready, viz.:—

(1) An Introduction to the Literature of the Old
Testament. By Professor S. R. Driver, D.D., Oxford.
Seventh Edition. Post 8vo, price 12s.

(2) Christian Ethics. By Newman Smytu, D.D., Author of ‘Old
Faiths in New Light,’ ete. Third Edition. 10s. 6d.

(3) Apologetics; or, Christianity Defensively Stated. By Professor
A. B. Brucr, D.D., Glasgow. Third Edition. 10s. 6d.

(4) History of Christian Doctrine. By Professor ἃ. P.
Fisuer, D.D., LL.D., Yale University. Second Edition. 12s.

(5) A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age.
By Professor A. C. McGirrert, D.D., New York. 12s.

(6) Christian Institutions. By A. V. G Aten, D.D., Pro-
fessor of Ecclesiastical History, Cambridge, Mass. 12s.

(7) The Christian Pastor and The Working Church.
By WasHinecton GuappEN, D.D., LL.D. 10s. 6d.

(8) The Theology of the New Testament. By Professor
Grorcr B. Stevens, D.D., Yale University. 12s.

(9) The Ancient Catholic Church [a.p. 98-451]. By
Principal R. Rainy, D.D. 12s.

(1) The Guardian says: ‘ By far the best account of the great critical problems con-
nected with the Old Testament that has yet been written. ... It is a perfect
marvel of compression and lucidity combined. A monument of learning and well-
balanced judgment.’

(2) The Bookman says: ‘It is the work of a wise, well-informed, independent, and
thoroughly competent writer. It is sure to become the text-book in Christian
Ethics.’

(3) The Expository Times says: ‘The force and the freshness of all the writings that
Dr. Bruce has hitherto published have doubtless led many to look forward with
eager hope to this work; and there-need not be any fear of disappointment.’

(4) The Critical Review says: ‘A clear, readable, well-proportioned, and, regarding
it as a whole, remarkably just and accurate account of what the course and
development of doctrine throughout the ages, and in different countries, has been.’

(5) The Literary World says: ‘A reverent and eminently candid treatment of the
Apostolic Age in the light of research.’

(6) The Christian World says: ‘ Unquestionably Professor Allen’s most solid perform-
ance; and that, in view of what he has already accomplished, is saying a great deal.

(7) The Baptist Magazine says: ‘We know of no treatise so comprehensive as this.
... In fact, there is scarcely a phase of pastoral duty which is not touched
upon luminously and to good purpose.’

(8) The Bookman says: ‘ We are surprised by the strength and brilliance of this book.

*.* Prospectus, giving full details of the Series, with list of Contributors, post free.

T) & D.'"CLARK’S PUBLICATIONS,

LATEST ISSUES.

A NEW WORK OF SPECIAL IMPORTANCE.

Just published, Second Edition, in One large 8vo Volume, price 16s.,

The Historical New Testament: Being the Literature of the
New Testament arranged in the order of its Literary Growth and
according to the Dates of the Documents. A New Translation,
Edited, with Prolegomena, Historical Tables, Critical Notes, and an
Appendix, by James Morrart, D.D.

In the preparation of the Translation the Author has had the valuable assistance
of Professor DENNEY, Dr, H. A. A. Kennupy, Professor Marcus Dons, Rey. Canon
GREGORY SMITH, Professor WALTER Lock, and the Rev. Lu. M. J. Bess.

‘The most important book on the credentials of Christianity that has appeared in
this country for a long time. It is a work of extraordinary learning, labour, and
ability.’—British Weekly.

Now ready, in One Volume, demy 8vo, price Qs.,

Bible Studies. Contributions, chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions,
to the History of the Language, Literature, and Religion of Hel-
lenistic Judaism and Primitive Christianity. By Dr. G. Apoir
DrtssmMann, Professor of Theology in the University of Heidelberg.
Authorised Translation (incorporating Dr. DEIssMaNN’s most recent
changes and additions) by Rev. ALex. Grieve, M.A., Ph.D.

‘In every respect a notable book. ... As to its value there can be no hesitation
about the verdict. ... Words, syntax, and ideas can all be tested over again by a
completely new apparatus of study, the lexicon of the New Testament can be enriched,
the grammar re-written, and the theology re-vivified and humanised.’-—Dr. J. RENDEL
Haruis in the Examiner.

The Children of Nazareth. By 1. Le Camus, Bishop of La
Rochelle. Authorised Translation by Lady Herperr. Feap. 4to,
handsomely bound, price 4s.

This is a charming little volume. The venerable Bishop dedicates it to ‘ My little
friends who wish to know how the child Jesus lived, prayed, worked, and even played
at Nazareth.’ It contains about one hundred beautiful illustrations from ‘ Kodak’
photographs taken on the spot. J/lustrated Prospectus free.

Now ready, Second Edition, in One large Volume 8vo, price 14s.,
Justification and Reconciliation. By Atsrecur Rirscat.
Edited by H. R. Macxinrosu, D.Phil., and A. B. Macaunay, M.A.

‘At last there is provided what has been a desideratum for years—a really reliable
translation of the great dogmatic work on ‘‘ Justification,” by which the most noted of
modern theologians chiefly made his mark on the thinking of his age.’—Critical Review.

*Dr. Mackintosh and his coadjutors have earned the gratitude of all theological
students in this country. . . . The present translation meets one of the most urgent
wants of the hour. Now the great systematic work of Ritschl is open to all.’—Prof.
J. Denney, D.D.

‘ Third Edition, Revised throughout, in post 8vo, price 6s.,
The Miracles of Unbelief. By Rev. Frank Batiarp, M.A.,
B.Sc., London.

‘ Written by an expert in scie: ce as well as theology, a fair-minded man who faces
religious difficulties, not ignores them, and one who knows how to reason out his case
like an accomplished advocate, without pressing it like an unscrupulous one. Mr.
Ballard has rendered valuable service to the cause of Christian truth, and given us an
excellent and useful book, deserving a large circulation.’—Professor W. T. DAvison
in the Methodist Recorder.

‘It is a perfect mine of quotation for men with little time for study, who are called,
as modern ministers are, to be not only visitors and workers but also preachers and
teachers. —Guardian.

St. Paul and the Roman Law, and other Studies on the
Origin of the Form: of Doctrine. By W. E. Barz, LL.D. Post
8vo, 4s. 6d.

ioe FT? CLARK'S PUBLICATIONS.

CONCORDANCE TO THE GREEK TESTAMENT. MOULTON-GEDEN.

A Concordance to the Greek Testament: According to the
Texts of Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf, and the English Revisers.
Edited by W. F. Moutron, D.D., and A.S.Gepren, M.A. In crown
4to (pp. 1040). Szconp Enpirion, Revised throughout. Price 26s.
net; or in half-morocco, price 31s. 6d. net.

*,* [twill be generally allowed that a new Concordance to the Greek Testament is much needed
in the interests of sacred scholarship. This work adopts a new principle, and aims at providing
a full and complete Concordance to the text of the Greek Testament as it is set forth in the
editions of Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf (8th), and the English Revisers. The first-named
has throughout been taken as the standard, and the marginal readings have been included. Thus
the student with any one of these three editions in his hands will find himself in possession of a
complete Concordance to the actual text on which he is engaged; whilethe method employed, it
may fairly be claimed, precludes the omission of any word or phrase which, by even a remote
probability, might be regarded as forming part of the true text of the New Testament. On the
other hand, passages disappear, as to the spuriousness of which there is practical unanimity
among scholars.

Professor W. SANDAY, D.D., LL.D., Oxford, writes: ‘There can be no question as to the
value of the new “Concordance.” It is the only scientific Concordance to the Greek Testament,
and the only one that can be safely used for scientific purposes.’

“It would be difficult to overpraise this invaluable addition to biblical study. ... For all
English students of the Greek Testament this great work is indispensable.’—Britisu WEEKLY.

Prospectus, with Specimen Page, free on application.

DILLMANN ON GENESIS.

Genesis: Critically and Exegetically Expounded. By A. Dittmany,
D.D., late Professor of Theology in Berlin. Authorised Translation.
In Two Volumes, 8vo, price 21s.

‘The most perfect form of the commentarius perpetuus to the Old Testament which
the 19th century produced.’—Professor BuppE, Strassburg.

‘ Dillmann’s commentaries are inimitable works for labourand insight, for the mass of
their contents, as for the thoroughness and fineness of their scholarship. ‘They form an
indispensable basis for all further works on the same subjects. . . . There is nota living
scholar of the Old Testament but follows him to his rest with the deepest reverence and
gratitude.’—Bookman.

St. Paul’s Conception of Christ; or, The Doctrine of the
Second Adam. Being the Sixteenth Series of the ‘Cunningham
Lectures.’ By Rev. Davin SomervitiE, D.D., Edinburgh. In
demy 8vo, price 9s.

‘By its keen and profound insight, by its sanity, and by its fulness of knowledge, the

volume will at once take its place as the best authority on that department of New
Testament theology with which it deals.’—Critical Review.

‘This is the work of an honest and careful student of St. Paul’s writings. . . . One of
the most solid contributions that has been made to the study of St. Paul’s Epistles for
a considerable time.’—Gwuardian.

The Christ of History and of Experience. Being the
‘Kerr Lectures’ for 1897. By Rev. Davin W. Forrest, D.D.,
Glasgow. In post 8vo, New and Cheaper Edition, price 6s.

‘ An exceedingly able treatment of a great and important subject.’—The late Professor

CALDERWOOD.

‘ An eminently stimulating and improving book.’—Glasgow Herald.
‘ Displays marked ability, and possesses unusual interest.’— Manchester Guardian.

‘, . . It is scarcely necessary, however, to specify particular passages in a book
which throughout exhibits literary and theological powers of a high order, and which
abounds in observations and criticisms which could only have been penned by a
masculine and fearless, but reverent, thinker.’—Literature.

T. & T. CLARK’S PUBLICATIONS.

The Christian Doctrine of Immortality. By Rev. 5. D.
F. Satmonp, D.D., Principal, and Professor of Systematic Theology,
United Free Church College, Aberdeen. New and Cheaper
Edition (the Fourth), Revised throughout, and Re-set. Post 8vo,
price 9s.

‘Dr. Salmond’s “ Christian Doctrine of Immortality” is an able, truth-loving, and,
from many points of view, comprehensive work.’—W. E. GLADSTONE.

‘This is beyond all doubt the one book on the transcendent subject of which it
treats. There is none like it—sound, frank, fearless, and yet modest in every page.’
— Methodist Times.

‘Principal Salmond has rendered a service which merits the amplest recognition.
Worthy of recognition are the courage which chose a subject bristling with difficulties,
the patience and resolution which have weighed, sifted, and disposed of these difficulties,
the method and scholarship which fit him to be a safe pioneer, the fairness of mind
which inspires confidence, the lucidity and completeness of treatment which tell of a
thorough digestion of the entire multifarious material connected with the subject.
The volume presents one of the very finest specimens of biblical theology that we
have.’—Professor Marcus Dons, D.D., in the Bookman.

‘The greatest work we have had for many a day on this great doctrine of Immor-
tality ’"— Expository Times.

Life after Death, and the Future of the Kingdom of God. By
Bishop Lars Nietsen Daunte, Knight of St. Olaf. Authorised
Translation. In demy 8vo, price 10s. 6d.

The late Rev. C. A. Berry, D.D., wrote: ‘Messrs. T. & T. Clark have enriched
modern theological literature by the publication of this book. The volume is a careful,
scholarly, and evangelical treatment of the doctrine of ‘‘ Last Things,” and bears
evidence on every page, not only of close and prolonged study, but of the profound
piety and charming spirit of the writer.’

A New Topographical, Physical, and Biblical Map
of Palestine. (Scale—4 miles to an inch.) Compiled from
the Latest Surveys and Researches, including the Work of the
‘nglish and German Palestine Exploration Funds. Showing all
identified Biblical Sites, together with the Modern Place Names.
Prepared under the Direction of J. ἃ. BarrHotomew, F.R.S.E.,
F.R.G.S., and Edited by Professor Grorczk Apam Smitu, M.A.,
LL.D., D.D., ete. With complete Index, compiled under the
supervision of J. G. Bartnotomew, F.R.S.E., F.R.G.S.

Prices : Mounted on cloth and in cloth case, with Index, 10s. 6d. ;
mounted on rollers and varnished, with Index separate, 15s.

This new Map has been designed to present in a clear and readily accessible
form the results of recent Surveys and Research in Palestine. It represents a com-
plete survey of the country as it exists at the present day, while superimposed upon
this are all the scriptural names of the past. The Map is drawn to the scale of
four miles to an inch, and includes the country from Beirut in the north to the
Arabah in the south, extending as far east as Damascus and Jebel Hauran. ΑἸ] the
modern place names are given, while the accepted identified Biblical sites have been
added in bolder lettering.

The Physical Relief of the country is effectively shown by colouring in contours,
and there are diagrammatic cross-sections illustrating the configuration of the
plateaux and the Jordan valley depression. Inset maps show the Environs of
Jerusalem and the Vegetation of Palestine. All the names on the Map, numbering
about 3180, are contained in the accompanying Index. Each place is indexed
under its modern as well as ancient name, and cross-references are given.

Besides meeting the special requirements of the student and the teacher, the
Map will be found invaluable as a Touring Map for Travellers in Palestine. It

shows all modern roads, railways, and places of interest.
/

ae ΝΕ

aie Nan
ne a

Τὸ of Ti of Toronto at

sali

POCKET ‘

Acme Library Card Pocket

Under Pat. ‘‘Ref. Index File’’
Made by LIBRARY BUREAU

ΠΝ
MS ΘΣ ΧΉΤΗ

“ 3
iiateetes GG it
ee

oes

᾿
2

Saceoens)

ns.

Saari
Sate
Soon

des

vy
*

poo
Mets

aye

δὴ
. Oe
ἱ
ees)
serene soit Bene
eaterer sean tys
i ΝΠ

τῷ
ρα
i) i a
at

<u
‘

“rr
τ

“Δ

eects =a se
Sie ae
VON

ὁ ae

;

τ
usd)

ἤδη

i "ἡ

τ ΑΝ

-
ie
aes

aE
ele
x

Pee

ana an
Py
us

i
i

eS
~—o

st
mae

oe ;

eerets
Aone

Pate
fr

nee
Se =
ot na Pea that
ἘΠ ΤΟΣ,
τα om

Ὧν
ἐᾷ
Ἷ

ἢ
iN ie ΠΝ
Ethics)

Ut} Ἷ Ἶ

ΩΝ

ΧΗ
‘A
eae ‘

oii

Sais
Ct
wad,
Oo,

ν Sees
eee rear
Sores

ἜΣΣΣ

Sees

“τὶ

=
2

i aati
a
as
qt Ἷ ἡ ΠΝ
ἡ ΕΙΣ ἡ
Ἶ ue iets aaah Sst ;
ΚΣ Τῇ ὟΝ
int a i isi ih
bana ONDER:

ον ee 443! Chet ot

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "A critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon"

See other formats