Philippians (Word Biblical Commentary) [Revised] 9780310521853, 0310521858

Citation preview

WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY

Editorial Board O ld Testament Editor: Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford (2011 - ) New Testam ent Editor: Peter H . Davids (2013 - )

Past Editors General Editors Ralph P. Martin (2012 - 2013) Bruce M. Metzger (1997 - 2007)

David A. H ubbard (1977 - 1996) Glenn W. Barker (1977 - 1984)

Old Testament Editors: Jo h n D . W. Watts (1977 - 2011)

Jam es W. Watts (1997 - 2011)

New Testament Editors: Ralph P. Martin (1977 - 2012)

Lynn Allan Losie (1997 - 2013)

Volumes 1 2 3 4 5 6a 6b 7a 7b 8 9 10 11

Genesis 1 - 1 5 ............... Gordon J. W enham Genesis 16 - 5 0 ............. Gordon J. W enham Exodus................................... Jo h n I . Durham L ev itic u s................................ Jo h n E . Hartley N u m b e rs................................... Philip J. B udd D euteronom y 1:1 - 21:9, 2nd ed. . . D uane L. Christensen D euteronom y 21:10 - 3 4 :1 2 ........... D uane L. Christensen Joshua 1-12, 2nd e d ................ Trent C. Butler Joshua 13-24, 2nd e d .............. Trent C. Butler Judges Trent C B utler Ruth - E sth er...................... Frederic W. Bush 1 Samuel, 2nd e d .................... Ralp h W. k l i n 2 S a m u e l..................................A. A. A nderson

28 Ezekiel 1 - 1 9 ............................ Leslie C. Allen 29 Ezekiel 20 - 4 8 .......................... Leslie C. Allen 30 D a n ie l.................................Jo h n E. Goldingay 31 H osea - J o n a h * * .....................Douglas Stuart 32 Micah - M alachi**................... Ralph L. Smith 33a Matthew 1 - 13...................Donald A. H agner 33b Matthew 14 - 28................ Donald A. H agner 34a Mark 1 - 8:26**...................R obert A. Guelich 34b Mark 8:27 - 16:20 ................... Craig A. Evans 35a Luke 1 - 9 :2 0 ...............................................Jo h n Nolland 35b Luke 9:21 - 18:34........................................ Jo h n Nolland 35c Luke 18:35 - 24:53 Jo h n Nolland 36 John, 2nd ed. . . . George R. Beasley-Murray 37a Acts 1 - 1 4 * .........................Stephen J. Walton 37b Acts 15 - 2 8 * ...................... Stephen J. Walton

12 1 Kings, .................... Simon J. Devries 38a Romans 1 - 8 ..................... .James D . G. D unn . ..................................................... ... 38 .‫ ״‬Romans 9 - 1 6 .................................James D . G. D unn 14 1 Chronicles Roddy Braun 39 1 Corinthians* Andrew D Clarke 15 2 Chronicles Raymond B Dillard 16 Ezra, N e h e m ia h .......... H . G . M . Williamson 40 2 Corinthians, rev. ed. . . . . .Ralph P. M artin 41 G alatians................ R c h a rd N. Longenecker 17 Job 1 - 2 0 .............................David J . A. Clines 18a Job 21 - 3 7 .......................... David J . A. Clines 42 E p h e s ia n s..........................Andrew T Lincoln 43 Philippians, rev. e d . .. .Gerald F. Hawthorn e, 18b Job 38 - 42 .......................... David J . A. Clines 19 Psalms 1 - 50, 2nd e d .......... Peter C . Craigie, rev by Ralph P Martin Marvin E Tate 44 Colossians, Philemon** . . . Peter T. O ’Brien 20 Psalms 51 - 1 0 0 ......................Marvin E . Tate 45 1 & 2 Thessalonians* * .................... F F Bruce 21 Psalms 101 - 150, rev. ed ......... Leslie C . Allen 46 Pastoral Ep is tle s ............William D . M ounce 22 Proverbs.............................. Roland E . M urphy 47a Hebrews 1 - 8 ......................... William L . Lane 23a E cclesiastes........................Roland E . M urphy 47b Hebrews 9 - 13....................... William L. Lane 23b Song o f Songs/L am entations . . . .D uane H . 48 J a m e s........................................Ralph R Martin Garrett, Paul R House 49 1 Peter J Ramsey Michaels 24 Isaiah 1 - 33, rev. e d ............John D . W. Watts 50 Jude, 2 P e te r* * ............ Richard J . Bauckham 25 Isaiah 3 4 - 66, rev. e d ..........John D . W. Watts 51 1, 2, 3, John, rev. e d ..........Stephen S. Smalley 26 Jerem iah 1 - 25 Peter C Craigie, 52a Revelation 1 - 5 David E Aune Page H . Kelley, Joel F. D rinkard Jr. 52b Revelation 6 - 1 6 ........................ David E . Aune 27 Jerem iah 26 - 52 ................. Gerald L. Keown, 52c Revelation 17 - 2 2 ......................David E . Aune Pamela J Scalise, Thomas G Smothers *forthcoming as of 2014 **in revision as of 2014

W O RD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY 4 3

Philippians Revised Edition

GERALD F. HAWTHORNE RALPH P. M a r t in General Editors: Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker Old Testament Editors: John D. W. Watts, James W. Watts New Testament Editors: Ralph P. Martin, Lynn Allan Losie

ZONDERVAN®

ZONDERVAN Philippians, Volume 43 Copyright © 2004 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Previously published as Philippians. Formerly published by Thomas Nelson, now published by Zondervan, a division of HarperCollinsChristian Publishing. Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 This edition: ISBN 978-0-310-52185-3 The Library of Congress has cataloged the original edition as follows: Library of Congress Control Number: 2005295211 All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission. Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc®. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. The author’s own translation of the text appears in italic type under the heading Translation. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher. The Graeca, Hebraica, and TranslitLS fonts used to print this work are available from Linguist’s Software, Inc., P.O. Box 580, Edmonds, WA 98020-0580 USA; tel. (206) 775-1130.

9780310521853_Philippians_vol43.indd 4

1/27/15 8:37 AM

This book is dedicated in gratitude to two special persons in the authors9lives Jane Hawthorne and Doreen M artin who, like the women of Philippi, have labored beside us in the work o f the gospel UXORIBUS CARISSIMIS

Contents Editors ’Preface Author's Preface to First Edition Preface to Revised Edition Abbreviations Commentary Bibliography General Bibliography

ix x xii xiv xxiv xxvi

I ntroduction

Authorship The Integrity of Philippians The Recipients and Their City Place and Date of Writing Paul’s Opponents and the False Teachers at Philippi Paul’s Purposes for Writing Philippians Outline of Philippians Aspects of the Theology of Philippians Text of the Letter Exegesis and Rhetorical Analysis, with Special Reference to Philippians 2:6-11 Christology in Philippians

T

ext and

xxviii xxx xxxiv xxxix 1 lv lix lx lxiii lxiv lxxiii

C o m m en ta r y

I. Introductory Section (1:1-11) A. Salutation (1:1-2) B. Thanksgiving and Prayer (1:3-11) II. News and Instructions (1:12-2:30) A. News about Paul (1:12-26) B. Instructions for the Church (1:27-2:18) 1. To Stability in the Faith (1:27-30) 2. To Harmony and Humility (2:1-4) 3. Kerygmatic Center of the Letter: Christ, the Supreme Encouragement to Humility and Unselfishness (2:5-11) Excursus: On Kenosis 4. Application: To Obedience, with Paul as Model (2:12-18) C. News about Timothy and Epaphroditus and Their Role as Models (2:19-30) 1. About Timothy (2:19-24) 2. About Epaphroditus (2:25-30) III. Digression: Warning against False Teachings with Paul’s Experience and Life as a Model to Follow (3:1-21) A. Warning against Circumcision and Pride in Human Achievements (3:1-3)

1 1 15 36 36 65 65 79 90 121 135 151 151 158 170 170

B. Paul’s Own Life,v i Past and Present: C so e t n An Answer to Opponents (3:4-11) C. Warning against Perfection Now (3:12-16) D. Paul’s Life: A Model to Imitate (3:17) E. Warning against Imitating O ther Teachers (3:18-19) F. Paul’s Hope in the Future and Unseen (3:20-21) IV. Exhortations to Harmony and Joy (4:1-9) V. Gratitude Expressed for the Philippians’ Generosity (4:10-20) VI. Conclusion (4:21-23)

178 202 215 220 227 236 256 278

Editorial Preface The launching of the Word Biblical Commentary brings to fulfillment an enterprise of several years’ planning. The publishers and the members of the editorial board met in 1977 to explore the possibility of a new commentary on the books of the Bible that would incorporate several distinctive features. Prospective readers of these volumes are entitled to know what such features were intended to be; whether the aims of the commentary have been fully achieved time alone will tell. First, we have tried to cast a wide net to include as contributors a num ber of scholars from around the world who not only share our aims, but are in the main engaged in the ministry of teaching in university, college, and seminary. They represent a rich diversity of denominational allegiance. The broad stance of our contributors can rightly be called evangelical, and this term is to be understood in its positive, historic sense of a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation and to the truth and power of the Christian gospel. Then, the commentaries in our series are all commissioned and written for the purpose of inclusion in the Word Biblical Commentary. Unlike several of our distinguished counterparts in the field of commentary writing, there are no translated works, originally written in a non-English language. Also, our commentators were asked to prepare their own rendering of the original biblical text and to use the biblical languages as the basis of their own comments and exegesis. What may be claimed as distinctive with this series is that it is based on the biblical languages, yet it seeks to make the technical and scholarly approach to a theological understanding of Scripture understandable by—and useful to—the fledgling student, the working minister, and colleagues in the guild of professional scholars and teachers as well. Finally, a word must be said about the format of the series. The layout, in clearly defined sections, has been consciously devised to assist readers at different levels. Those wishing to learn about the textual witnesses on which the translation is offered are invited to consult the section headed Notes. If the readers’ concern is with the state of m odern scholarship on any given portion of Scripture, they should turn to the sections on Bibliography and Form/Structure/Setting. For a clear exposition of the passage’s meaning and its relevance to the ongoing biblical revelation, the Comment and concluding Explanation are designed expressly to m eet that need. There is therefore something for everyone who may pick up and use these volumes. If these aims come anywhere near realization, the intention of the editors will have been met, and the labor of our team of contributors rewarded. General Editors: Bruce M. Metzger David A. Hubbard† Glenn W. Barker† Old Testament Editor: John D. W. Watts Associate Editor: James W. Watts New Testament Editor: Ralph P. Martin Associate Editor: Lynn Allan Losie

Author’s Preface [to First Edition] Four years with Philippians seems like a long time. And it is! Yet it is not time enough to grasp completely all of the richness locked away in this beautiful letter that Paul wrote to his friends at Philippi, nor to master adequately the mass of literature that scholars, ancient and m odern, have produced in an attem pt to express what Paul m eant by what he wrote. The Christ-Hymn itself (2:5-11), so majestic, so profound, could easily have absorbed the entire time allotted. And the literature on this single poem, so vast, so learned, could boggle far greater minds than mine. Thus to write this commentary has been an exercise in extreme pain and extreme pleasure. Ancient letters, by their very nature a conversation halved, are not at all easy to piece together and understand. This fact coupled with the great Apostle’s depth of thinking and depth of feeling expressed often in ambiguous and difficult Greek make the interpreter’s task most arduous. But when the clouds part and the brilliance of Paul’s ideas about God’s saving activity in Christ break through, when one at last begins to feel the intensity of Paul’s devotion to Christ and the sheer force of his appeal propelling him to follow the Savior—when all this happens as a result of painful mental toil, it constitutes rewards of incalculable delight, and the pleasure outweighs the pain. I am debtor to so many that like Paul I should m ention no names (cf. 4:21-23) lest inadvertently I should fail to m ention even a single person to whom I owe a great deal. But unlike Paul I will take the risk. First, I am grateful to Professor Ralph P. Martin for inviting me to take part in this venture, and for his own superb literary contributions to the overall understanding of Philippians. Then, too, I am greatly in debt to all those others who have gone before me, those many scholars of the first rank who long ago and more recently still have wrestled hard with the text of Philippians to interpret correctly and to express clearly its meaning. And if in places this commentary has but followed the thinking of others, I make no apologies, since old thoughts are new to the new and quickly passing generations. To republish a thought, then, is to give it new life; it is a kind of resurrection of the dead. As someone quipped, “Why should a good observation or rule be lost because it is imprisoned in some monstrous folio? It is good to repeat worthy thoughts in new books, because the old works in which they stand are not read.” Whenever I have borrowed another’s idea, I have done my best to indicate this and to give credit to whom credit is due. If by chance I have failed in this endeavor at any point, I apologize, and hereby own my indebtedness to everyone whose writings I have read. I am grateful, too, to my many students who tolerated me as I tested on them new ideas about Philippians. They were always patient and cheerful, but very ready to let me know the weakness of my arguments. I am certain I have been saved from many errors by their collected wisdom. Two former students in particular I wish to identify by name, John R. “Jack” Levison and Mark A. Rilling, both of whom have graduated with honors from Cambridge University, England, upon leaving Wheaton College. These young men allowed me to use them as sounding boards. They continuously supported me in my efforts, constructively criticizing, suggest-

ing bibliography—books and articles I A c had overlooked—prodding to greater efa r'sP o th u clarity and precision by their probing questions. I am also grateful to my college—W heaton College—and to its administrative officers, especially Dr. Ward Kriegbaum, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and Dr. William Henning, Dean of Arts and Sciences, for their continued interest and their determ ination to free two summers for me so that I might turn from teaching to writing. Finally, I owe a very great debt of gratitude for the generous financial assistance that has come to me through the G. W. Aldeen Research Fund. Gerald F. Hawthorne Wheaton, Illinois November 1982

i x

Preface to Revised Edition In some ways, of what follows, this preface has been the easiest part to be written. Dr. Gerald F. Hawthorne’s commentary appeared in 1983 and has proved its worth to a wide audience, which has been willing to read it carefully, as it deserves. The tide of biblical studies flows relentlessly, and Paul’s “friendship letter” to the church at Philippi has been studied with increasing attention since 1983. It is clear that a new edition of this commentary is called for—a task that can only be taken up with great reluctance, not only because of the intrinsic value of the first edition but also because no one individual can claim to have consulted, let alone read, the massive literature on this short epistle. One disclaimer is, therefore, in order. What appears in the new edition represents a commentary on the text in the light of recent literature (1983-2002) that the present reviser has actually seen and read, however cursorily.★ The approach to a revising enterprise ought to be stated for prospective readers. Is it worth investing in a new edition? What is the extent and scope of such revision? Fortunately the task is made easier by the now familiar layout of the Word Biblical Commentary series. The Bibliographyhas been updated with such pertinent references as the reviser has been able to consult; these include major commentaries, monographs, and articles appearing in scholarly journals since the time of Dr. Hawthorne’s earlier work. Occasionally a gap has been filled and some older references deleted. Then, the Translation is left virtually intact, with only an infrequent change, usually marked by square brackets to denote the first author’s expansion of the text. He has approved any m inor changes. The Notes have been altered only in the interest of updating. The same approach is true of the major section denoted as Comment. Here the reviser’s additions have been woven into the first edition by a process (well-known in Synoptic studies) of “conflation.” These additions have sought not to break the continuity of the original author’s commentary but to update the discussion and sometimes to add a new paragraph of recent discussions and applications. The last named is particularly true of the Explanation section, a segment that is variously employed by different authors throughout the WBC series. Insights from what is called Wirkungsgeschichte (literally “effective history,” or the history of the letter’s effects on those who heard [and still hear] it, as M. Bockmuehl describes

* It is regretted that, as this volume went to press, we were able to make only a passing reference to a Festschrift offered to Dr. Hawthorne. U nder the title New Testament Greek and Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Gerald F. Hawthorne, ed. A. M. Donaldson and T. B. Sailors (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), it has three essays devoted to the themes of Philippians, all of which are significant. They are “Philippians 1:28b, Once More,” by S. E. Fowl; “Transformation of Relationships: Partnership, Citizenship, and Friendship at Philippi,” by G. W. Hansen; and “Ephesus and the Literary Setting of Philippians,” by F. S. Thielman.

it, including the reception of a text and n its subsequent effect in the church’s E isd v R cto refa P history) are occasionally developed, and the reviser has not been averse to promoting a “devotional” thought in an epistle whose secondary themes of joy in suffering and life in Christ are so well known. My regret, on a personal note, is that Dr. Hawthorne was not available to carry out the revision in his own name and inimitable style. The present reviser can only trust that what he has contributed to what is virtually a new work has m et with his colleague’s concurrence. Dr. Hawthorne has seen the final draft and approved it. Places in the Introduction section and in the christological passage of 2:6-11 are obvious loci for scholarly and friendly disagreement, and here we must submit to the judgm ent of the reader. Yet we dissent from each other’s opinion only with reluctance and always con amove. So what is now offered is a jo int enterprise, published under the two writers’ names as a substantial revision of an earlier book, and so deserving of a place in anyone’s library as an example of cooperative study. What appeared in 1983 was good; what is due to appear, since this preface is written as the revision is underway, is (it is hoped) better in the sense of being more up to date; whether it is the best the two of us can make is doubtful, given that the final word in biblical scholarship can never be spoken. And how serviceable this new book will seem to be is left to the verdict of the present and future generations of readers. My heartfelt indebtedness is acknowledged to those who have labored with me in preparing this revision, in particular Barbara Hayes, Benjamin Schliesser, Roberto Bustamante, and Thomas C. Hanson, Sr. With all the recent New Testament contributors a special word of thanks goes to the managing copyeditor Melanie B. McQuere and associate editor Dr. Lynn A. Losie. In conclusion, some readers may lay down this revised edition and wonder if the present reviser who has sought to play the role of Philip Heseltine to Peter Warlock has, in fact, rather become a Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll! Ralph P. Martin May 2003

i x

Abbreviations A. General Abbreviations

A ad loc. ‫א‬ aliq. Ap. Lit. app. Arab. Aram. B b. BG C ca. cf. chap(s). cod., codd. col(s). contra d. D deut. lit. diss. dss

ed(s). e. g. Eg. esp. ET et al. f. , ff. fern. frg. FS Gk. Heb. Hitt. ibid. i.e.

in loc. infra

Codex Alexandrinus ad locum, at the place discussed Codex Sinaiticus aliqui, some [others] Apocalyptic Literature appendix, appendices Arabic Aramaic Codex Vaticanus Babylonian Talmud Berlin Gnostic Codex Codex Ephraeimi Syri circa, about confer, compare chapter(s) codex, codices column (s) in contrast to died Codex Bezae deuterocanonical literature

Lat. lit. LXX m masc. mg. MS (s) MT n; nn. n.d. NHC no., nos. NS NT OT P; PP. Par• Pers• Pesh. Phoen• Pl. P.Oxy.

Latin literally Septuagint Mishnah masculine margin, marginal manuscript(s) Masorettc text note, notes no date agHammadi Codex N num ber, numbers New Series New Testament Old Latin Old Testament p a g e pages Parallel Pcrsia’ Persian Peshitta Phoenician plural Oxyrhynchus Papyri

dissertation

Ps.

Pseudo

Dead Sea Scrolls (see §F.) edited by, edition (s), editor(s) exempli gratia, for example Egyptian especially English translations et alii, and others and the following (verse or verses, pages, etc.) feminine fragm ent Festschrift Greek Hebrew Hittite ibidem, in the same place id est, th at is in loco, in the place cited below

Q

(“Sayings” source in the Gospels) q.v. quod vide, which see rev. revised by, revision Sam. Samaritan sc. scilicet, namely Sem. Semitic ser. series sg. singular Sum. Sumerian s.v. sub verbo, under the word Symm. Symmachus Svriac t. Tosefta T g ( s ) . Tar gum( s) , Targumic T heod. Theodotion TR tran s.

T extus ReceP tus translation, translator,

Ugar.

translated by Ugaritic.

Univ. UP u. s. v, w Vg.

University University Press ut supra, as above verse, verses Vulgate

s n to ia rev b A

viz. vol., vols. vs. y.

videlicet, namely volume, volumes versus Yerusalmi (Jerusalem Talmud)

B. Abbreviations for Modern Translations and Paraphrases asv

beck

bruce

darby

gnb goodspeed

jb kjv knox

lb mlb

American Standard Version The New Testament, in the Language of Today, W. F. Beck The Letters of Paul: An Expanded Paraphrase, F. F. Bruce The Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Book of Revelation, Commonly Called the Nexv Testament: A New Translation from a Revised Text of the Greek Original, J. N. Darby Good News Bible The Complete Bible: An American Translation, E. J. Goodspeed Jerusalem Bible King James Version The Holy Bible: A Translation from the Latin Vulgate in the Light ofthe Hebrew and Greek Original, R. A Knox Living Bible Modern Language Bible (Berkeley Version)

moffatt

nab nasb

neb niv njps

nrsv

Phillips

rsv

rv tcnt

weymouth

williams

The New Testament: A New Translation of the Bible, James Moffatt New American Bible New American Standard Bible New English Bible New International Version Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The NewJPS Translation according to the Traditional Hebrew Text New Revised Standard Version The New Testament in Modem English, J. B. Phillips Revised Standard Version Revised Version The Twentieth Century New Testament The Neiv Testament in Modem Speech, R. F. Weymouth The New Testament: A Translation in the Language of the People, C. B. Williams

C. Abbreviations of Commonly Used Periodicals, Reference Works, and Serials

AB ABD

ABRL

Anchor Bible The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Ed. D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992. Anchor Bible Reference Library

AGJU

AJT AAQ ANRW

Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums AmericanJournal of Theology Andover Newton Quarterly Aufstieg und Niedergang der rÖmischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur

v x

ANTC AS A-S

ASNU

AsSeign ATANT

AThR AUS BA BAGD

BBB BBR BDAG

BDF

Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Ed. H. Tem porini and W. Haase. Berlin, 1972Abingdon New Testament Commentaries Asbury Seminarian G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 3d ed. Acts seminarii neotestamentici upsaliensis Assemblies du Seigneur Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments Anglican Theological Review American University Studies Biblical Archaeologist Bauer, W., W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2d ed. Chicago, 1979. Bonner biblische Beitrage Bulletin far Biblical Research Bauer, W., F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Chicago, 1999. Blass, F., A. D ebrunner, and R. W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, 1961 .

BeO i v x BETL

BFCT BHT Bib BibLeb BJRL

BNTC BR BSac BT BTB BU BWANT

BZ BZAW BZNW CBC CBET CBQ CCER CEB CGTC CJT CNT ConBNT

ConNT

Bibbia e oriente A s b n o t ia v e r b Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Beitrage zur Forderung christlicher Theologie Beitrage zur historischen Theologie Biblica Bibel und Leben Bulletin of thefohn Rylands University Library of Manchester Black’s New Testament Commentary Biblical Research Bibliotheca sacra The Bible Translator Biblical Theology Bulletin Biblische Untersuchungen Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur ZAW Beihefte zur ZNW Cambridge Bible Commentary Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology Catholic Biblical Quarterly Cahiers du Cercle Ernest Renan Commentaires evangeliques de la Bible Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary Canadian fournal of Theology Commentaire du Nouveau Testament Coniectanea neotestamentica or Coniectanea biblica: New Testament Series Coniectanea neotestamentica

CTM CurTM CV DAGR

DBR

DBSup

DC DLNT

DPL

DTT EB EC ED EDNT

EgT Encjud ERE

Concordia Theobgical s n to ia rev b A Monthly Currents in Theology and Mission Communio viatorum Dictionnaire des antiquité grecques et romaines. Ed. C. Daremberg and E. Saglio. 6 vols. Dictionary of Bible and Religion. Ed. W. H. Gentz. Dictionnaire de la Bible: Supplement. Ed. L. Pirot and A. Robert. Paris, 1928-. Doctor Communis Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments. Ed. R. P. Martin and P. H. Davids. Downers Grove, 1997. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Ed. G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, and D. G. Reid. Downers Grove, 1993. Dansk teologisk tidsskrift The Expositor’s Bible Ephemerides Carmeliticae Euntes Docete Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. Ed. H. Balz and G. Schneider. ET. Grand Rapids, 1990-93. Église et théologie Encyclopaedia Judaica. 16 vols. Jerusalem, 1972. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. E d. J. Hastings. 13 vols. New York, 1908-27. Repr., 7 vols., 1951.

EstBib ETL EV EvJ EvK EvQ EvT ExpTim FEUNTK

FF FRLANT

GJ Greg GTA GTT GuL HBT HDR HNT HNTC HPR HTKNT

HTR HTS

Estudios bíblicos vi x Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses Espnt et Vie EvangelicalJournal Evangelische Kommentare Evangelical (Quarterly Evangelische Theologie Expository Times Forschungen zur Entstehung des Urchristentums des Neuen Testaments und der Kirche Foundations and Facets Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alien und Neuen Testaments GraceJournal Gregorianum Göttinger theologischer Arbeiten Gereformeerd theologisch tijdschrift Geist und Leben Horizons in Biblical Theology Harvard Dissertations in Religion Handbuch zum Neuen Testament H arper’s New Testament Commentaries Homiletic and Pastoral Review Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Harvard Theological Review Harvard Theological Studies

HUT

ICC Int IVPNTC

JBC

JBL JETS JHC JRR JSNT JSNTSup JTC JTS

KEK

L&N

LCL LEC LQ LS LSJ

Herm eneutische U ntersuchungen zur Theologie International Critical Commentary Interpretation InterVarsity Press New Testament Commentary Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed. R. E. Brown et al. Englewood Cliffs,1968. Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Higher Cnticism Journal of Radical Reformation Journal for the Study of the New Testament JSNT: Supplement Series Journal for Theology and the Church Journal of Theological Studies Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar uber das Neue Testam ent (Meyer-Kommentar) Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. Ed. J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida. 2d ed. New York, 1989. Loeb Classical Library Library of Early Christianity Lutheran Quarterly Louvain Studies Liddell, H. G., R. Scott, and H. S. Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon.

i v x LTJ MM

MNTC

NA27

NCB NC1B Neot NIB NIBCNT

NICNT

NIDNTT

NIGTC

NKZ NovT NovTSup NRTh NTAbh NTD NTF NTS NTT

9th ed. with rev.A s suppl. n o t ia v e r b b Oxford, 1996. Lutheran TheologicalJournal Moulton, J. H., and G. Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament London, 1930. Reprint, Peabody, MA, 1997. Moffatt New Testament Commentary Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland, 27 th ed. New Century Bible New Clarendon Bible Neotestamentica The New Interpreter’s Bible New International Biblical Commentary on the New Testament New International Commentary on the New Testament The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Ed. C. Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, 1975-1985. New International Greek Testament Commentary Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift Novum Testamentum Novum Testamentum Supplements La nouvelle revue théologique Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen Das Neue Testament Deutsch Neutestamentliche Forschungen New Testament Studies Norsk Teologisk Tidsskrift

NTTS

New Testament Tools and Studies

OBT

Overtures to Biblical Theology Oxford Classical Dictionary. Ed. S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth. 3d ed. Oxford, 1996. Ohio Journal of Religious Studies Old Testam ent Library

OCD

OJRS OTL PC PerTeol PLut PNTC PRel PRSt PTMS PW

PWSup RAC

RB RE

ResQ RevExp RevistB RGG

RHPR

La Pensee Catholique Perspectiva teologica Positions Luthenennes Pelican New Testament Commentaries Philosophy and Religion Perspectives in Religious Studies Pittsburgh Theological M onograph Series Pauly, A. F. Paulys Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertumsivissenschaft. New edition G. Wissowa. 49 vols. Munich, 1980. Supplem ent to PW Reallexikon fu r Antike und Ghristentum. Ed. T. Kluser et al. Stuttgart, 1950-. Revue biblique Realencyklopadie fu r protestantische Theologie und Kirche Restoration Quarterly Review and Expositor Revista biblica Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Ed. K. Galling. 7 vols. 3d ed. Tubingen, 1957-1965. Revue d ,histoire et de philosophie religieuses

s n to ia rev b A

RHR RivB RNT RSPT

RSR RThom RTR RW

SANT SBL SBLDS SBLMS SBLSBS SBLSP SBT ScEs SCHNT

SE

SHAW

SJT SNTSMS

SO SQ ST

Revue de l ’histoire des religions Rivista biblica italiana Regensburger Neues Testament Revue des sciences philosophiques et theologiques Recherches de science religieuse Revue thomiste Reformed Theological Review Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testaments Society of Biblical Literature SBL Dissertation Series SBL Monograph Series SBL Sources for Biblical Study SBL Seminar Papers Studies in Biblical Theology Science et esprit Studia ad corpus hellenisticum Novi Testamenti Studia evangelica I, II, III (= TU 73 [1959], 87 [1964], 88 [1964], etc.) Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften Scottish Journal of Theology Society for New Testament Studies M onograph Series Symbolae osloenses Shane (Quarterly Studia theologica

i x

Str-B

SUNT

TBC TBT TCGNT2

TDNT

TEH THKNT

ThSt TLNT

TLZ TNTC TP TQ TS TSK TT TTZ TU

Strack, H. L., and P. x Billerbeck. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 6 vols. Munich, 1922-1961. Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments Torch Bible Commentaries The Bible Today B. M. Metzger. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2d rev. ed. London; New York, 1994. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Ed. G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Trans. G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids, 1964-1976. Theologische Existenz heute Theologischer Handkom m entar zum Neuen Testament Theologische Studien Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. C. Spicq. Trans, and ed. J. D. Ernest. 3 vols. Peabody, MA, 1994. Theologische Literaturzeitung Tyndale New Testam ent Commentary Theologie und Philosophie Theologische Quartalschrift Theological Studies Theologische Studien und Kritiken Teologisk Tidsskrift Trierer theologische Zeitschrift Texte und Untersuchungen

TW TynBul TZ UNT UUA

Theologie und A s b n o t ia v e r b Wirklichkeit Tyndale Bulletin Theologische Zeitschrift Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Uppsala Universitetsarsskrift

VCaro VD VE VS

Verbum earn Verbum domini Vox evangelica Verbum salutis

WBC

Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche M onographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wort und Wahrheit Westminster Theological Journal Wissenschaftliche U ntersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universitat Jena

WMANT

WoWa WTJ WUNT

WZUJ

ZKNT ZKT ZNW

ZTK ZWT

T. Zahn, ed., Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fu r katholische Theologie Zeitschrift fu r die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der alteren Kirche Zeitschrift fu r Theologie und Kirche Zeitschrift fu r wissenschaftliche Theologie

D. Abbreviations for Books o f the Bible s n to ia rev b A and the Deuterocanonical Books

OLD TESTAMENT Gen Exod Lev Num Deut Josh Judg Ruth 1-2 Sam 1-2 Kgs 1-2 Chr Ezra Neh Esth Job Ps(s) Prov Eccl

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1-2 Samuel 1-2 Kings 1-2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalm (s) Proverbs Ecclesiastes

Matt Mark Luke John Acts Rom 1-2 Cor Gal Eph Phil Col

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 1-2 Thess Mark 1-2 Tim Luke Titus John Phlm Acts of the Apostles Heb Romans Jas 1-2 Corinthians 1-2 Pet Galatians 1-2-3 John Ephesians Jude Philippians Rev Colossians

E. Deuterocanonical Books Bar Baruch Add Dan Additions to Daniel Pr Azar Prayer of Azariah Bel Bel and the Dragon Sg Three Song of the Three Young Men Sus Susanna 1-2 Esd 1-2 Esdras Add Esth Additions to Esther

Song Isa Jer Lam Ezek Dan Hos Joel Amos Obad Jonah Mic Nah Hab Zeph Hag Zech Mai

Ep Jer Jd t 1-2 Macc 3-4 Macc Pr Man Ps 151 Sir Tob Wis

Song of Songs Isaiah Jerem iah Lamentadons Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

1-2 Thessalonians 1-2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1-2 Peter 1-2-3 John Jude Revelation

Epistle of Jerem iah Judith 1-2 Maccabees 3-4 Maccabees Prayer of Manasseh Psalm 151 Sirach/Ecclesiasticus Tobit Wisdom of Solomon

i x

F. Abbreviations for Old Testament Pseudepigrapha i x and Early Christian Books A s b n o t ia v e r b

Apoc. Ab. Apoc. Mos. As. Mos. 2-3 Bar. 1-2-3 En.

4 Ezra Jub. L.A.B.

Ambrosiaster, Phil. Bam. 1-2 Clem. Did. Diogn. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. Herm. Mand. Herm. Sim. Herm. Vis. Ign. Eph.

OLD TESTAMENT PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Apocalypse of Abraham L.A.E. Life of Adam and Eve Apocalypse of Moses Let Ans. Letter of Aristeas Assumption of Moses Mart. Isa. Martyrdom and Ascension 2 (Synac)-3 (Greek) 0f Isaiah 15‫־‬ Apocalypse of Baruch Odes Sol. Odes of Solomon 1 (Ethiopic)- 2 (Slavonic)Pss. Sol. Psalms of Solomon 3 (Hebrew) Apocalypse of Sib. Or. Sibylline Oracles Enoch T. 12 Patr. Testaments of the Twelve 4 Ezra Patnarchs Jubilees T. Asher Testament of Asher Liber antiquitatum T.Benj. Testament of Benjamin biblicarum (PseudoT. Dan Testament of Dan Philo) T. Levi Testament of Levi EARLY CHRISTIAN BOOKS Ign. Magn. Letter to the Philippians Ign. Phld. Barnabas Ign. Pol. 1-2 Clement Ign. Rom. Didache Ign. Smym. Diognetus Ign. Trail. Iren. Haer. Ecclesiastical History Justin, 1 Apol. Shepherd of Hermas, 2 Apol. Mandate Dial. Shepherd of Hermas, Mart Pol. Similitude Pol. Phil Shepherd of Hermas, Tert. Praescr. Vision Ignatius, To the Ephesians

Ignatius, To the Magnesians Ignatius, To the Philadelphians Ignatius, To Poly carp Ignatius, To the Romans Ignatius, To the Smymaeans Ignatius, To the TraUians Irenaeus, Against Heresies First Apology Second Apology Dialogue with Trypho Martyrdom of Polycarp Polycarp, To the Philippians Tertullian, Prescription against Heretics

G. Abbreviations for Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Texts

CD

Cairo (Genizah text of the) Damascus (Document) Hev Nahal Hever texts Mas Masada texts Mird Khirbet Mird texts Mur Wadi Murabba'at texts p Pesher (commentary) Q Q um ran I Q 2Q 3Q etc. Numbered caves of Qumran yielding written material, followed by the

QL lQ apG enar lQ H a

lQ pH ab 1QM

number or abbreviated name of the text Qum ran literature Genesis Apocryphon from Qum ran Cave 1 Hodayot* (Thanksgiving Hymnsa) from Qumran Cave 1 Pesher Habakkuk from Qum ran Cave 1 Milhamah (War Scroll) from Qum ran Cave 1

IQS

lQSa

Serek Hayyahad (Rule of the Community) from Qum ran Cave 1 Appendix A (Rule of the Community) to IQS

s n to ia rev b A

lQSb lQ Isaab

Appendix B (Blessings) to IQS First or second copy of Isaiah from Qumran Cave 1

H. Greek and Latin Works

Aeschylus, Pers. Prom. Aristophanes, Ach. Aristotle, Eth. nic. Poet. Pol. Rhet. Augustine, Corrept. Cicero, Inv. Rab. Perd.

Persians Prometheus Bound Achamians Nichomachean Ethics Poetics Politics Rhetoric Admonition and Grace De inventione rhetorica Pro Rabirio Perduellionis Reo Corpus hermeticum

Corp. herm. Dio Cassius, Hist. Roman History Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. rom. Antiquitates romanae Euripides, Med. Media John Chrysostom, Horn 1 Tim. Homiliae in epistulam i ad Timotheum I. Philo

Planting

On Planting

J . Josephus

Ant. J.W. Life

Jewish Antiquities Jewish War The Life

Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. Plato, Apol. Ax. Gorg. Leg. Phaed. Phaedr. Phileb. Symp. Tim. Pliny, Ep. Ps.-Aristotle, Rhet. Alex. Quintilian, Inst. Seneca, Ep. Polyb. Sophocles, Ant. Strabo, Geogr. Suetonius, Claud. Nero Tacitus, Ann. Hist.

Vita Apollonii Apology of Socrates Axiochus Gorgias Laws Phaedo Phaedrus Philebus Symposium Timaeus Pliny the Younger, Epistulae Rhetone to Alexander Institutio oratona Epistulae morales Ad Polybium de consolatione Antigone Geographica Life of Claudius Nero Annales Historiae

i x

Commentary Bibliography The following list of commentaries includes those that have been most frequently cited in this volume. They will be cited by author’s name only in the text of the commentary. Alford, H. The Greek Testament. 4 vols. London: Longmans, Green, 1894. Barclay, W. The

Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975. Barth, K. The Epistle to the Philippians. Trans. J. W. Leitch. 40th anniv. ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2002. Beare, F. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians. 3d ed. HNTC. New York: H arper & Bros., 1976. Beasley-Murray, G. R. “Philippians.” In Peake's Commentary on the Bible. Ed. M. Black and Η. H. Rowley. New York: Nelson, 1962. Bengel, J . A. Gnomon of the New Testament. Trans. C. T. Lewis and M. R. Vincent. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Perkinpine & Higgins, 1860-62. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1971. Originally published under the title Gnomon Novi Testamenti, 2d ed. (Tübingen: Schramm, 1759). Benoit, P. Les ép îtres de saint Paul aux Philippiens, à Philémon, aux Colossiens, aux Ephésiens. Paris: Cerf, 1959. Biggs, C. R. D. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians. London: M ethuen, 1900. Bockmuehl, M. The Epistle to the Philippians. BNTC. London: A. & C. Black; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998. Bonnard, P. L ’épîtres de saint Paul aux Philippiens et I’épitre aux Colossiens. CNT 10. N euchâtel: Delachaux et Niestle, 1950. Bruce, F. F. Philippians. NIBCNT. 2d ed. Peabody, MA: Hendricks on, 1989. Caird, G. B. Paul’s Lettersfrom Pnson. NC1B. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1976. Calvin, J . Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Trans. J. Pringle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948. Collange, J.-F. The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Philippians. Trans. A. W. Heathcote. London: Epworth Press, 1979. Originally published as L ’epitre de saint Paul aux Philippiens, CNT 10 (Neuchatel: Delachaux et Niestle, 1973). Cousar, C. B. Reading Galatians, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians. Macon, GA: Smyth 8c Helwys, 2001. Craddock, F. B. Philippians. Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Atlanta: John Knox, 1985. De Boer, W. P. Die Bnefe des Paulus an die Philipper und an die Kolosser erklärt. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1974. Dibelius, M. An die Thessalonicher I, II. An die Philipper. HNT 11. 3d ed. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1937. Ellicott, C. J . A Cntical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians and Philemon. Boston: Draper, 1886. Ernst, J . Die Bnefe an die Philipper, an Philemon, an die Kolosser, an die Epheser. RNT 7. Regensburg: Pustet, 1974. Ewald, P ., and G. Wohlenberg. Der Bnef des Paulus an die Philipper. 4th ed. ZKNT 11. Leipzig: Deichert, 1923. Fee, G. D. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.---------. Philippians. IVPNTC 11. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999. Fitzm yer,J. A. “Philippians.” In Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed. R. E. Brown,J. A. Fitzmyer, and R. E. Murphy. 2 vols. in 1. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968. 2:247-53. Friedrich, G. Der Bnef an die Philipper. NTD 8. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962. Gnilka, J . Der Philipperbnef. HTKNT 10.3. 4th ed. Freiburg: H erder, 1987. Translated by R. A. Wilson under the title The Epistle to the Philippians (New York: H erder 8c H erder, 1971) . Grayston, K. The Epistles to the Galatians and to the Philippians. London: Epworth, 1957.---------. The Letters of Paul to the Philippians and the Thessalonians. CBC. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1967. Haupt, E. Die Gefangenschaftsbriefe. KEK. 7 th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1902. Heinzelmann, G. Der Bnef an die Philipper. NTD 8. 7th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955. Hendriksen, W. Philippians. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1962. H ooker, M. D. “Philippians.” In New Interpreter’s Bible. Ed. L. E. Keck. Vol. 11. Nashville: Abingdon, 2000. Houlden, J . L. Paul’s Letters from Prison. PNTC. Baltimore, MD: Penguin, 1970. Huby, J . Saint Paul, les epitres de la captivité.

VS 8. Paris: Beauchesne, 1935. Jones, M. Philippians. h p lg ib B ry ta en m o C Westminster Commentaries. London: Methuen, 1918. Kahlefeld, H. Der BHef nach Philippi. Frankfurt: Knecht, 1975. Keck, L. E. “The Letter of Paul to the Philippians.” In The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible. Ed. C. M. Laymon. New York: Abingdon, 1971. Kennedy, H . A. A. “The Epistle to the Philippians.” In The Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 3. Ed. W. R. Nicoll. 1903. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976. L igh tfoot,J. B. St Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan, 1894. Loh, I.-J., and E. A. Nida. A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. Helps for Translators 19. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1977. Lohmeyer, E. Der BHef an die Philipper, an die Kolosser und an Philemon. 10th ed. KEK 9. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1954. Marshall, I. H. The Epistle to the Philippians. London: Epworth, 1992. Martin, R. P. The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. TNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959; rev. ed., 1987.---------. Philippians. NCB. London: Oliphants; Greenwood, SC: Attic, 1976.-------- . Philippians. Rev. ed. NCB. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980. Reprint, Eugene, OR: Wipf 8c Stock, 1999. Melick, R. R. Philippians, Colossians, Philemon. Nashville: Broadman, 1991. Meyer, H. A. W. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Trans. W. P. Dickson and F. Crombie. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1875. Michael, J . H. The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. MNTC. London: H odder & Stoughton, 1928. Michaelis, W. Der Brief des Paulus an die Philipper. THKNT 11. Leipzig: Deichert, 1935. Morlet, R.-M. L ’epitrede P aul aux Philippiens. CEB 3. Vaux-sur-Seine: EDIFAC, 1985. Moule, H. C. G. The Epistle to the Philippians. CGTC. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1897. Müller, J . J . The Epistles of Paul to the Philippians and to Philemon. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955. Müller, U. B. Der Briefdes Paulus an die Philipper. THKNT 11.1. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlaganstalt, 1993. O ’Brien, P. T. The Epistle to the Philippians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. Osiek, C. Philippians, Philemon. ANTC. Nashville: Abingdon, 2000. P éry, A. L ’épître aux Philippiens. Paris: Delachaux e t Niestlé, 1958. Plummer, A. A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. London: Scott, 1919. Rainy, R. The Epistle to the Philippians. EB. London: H odder 8c Stoughton, 1893. Schenk, W. DiePhilipperbriefedesPaulus. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1984. Scott, E. F. “The Epistle to the Philippians.” In The Interpreter’s Bible. Ed. G. A. Buttrick et al. New York: Abingdon, 1955. 11:3 -1 2 9 . Silva, M. Philippians. Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Chicago: Moody Press, 1988. Reprint, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992. Soden, H. von. Der Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Philipper. Tü bingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1889. Synge, F. C. Philippians and Colossians. TBC. London: SCM Press, 1951. Thielman, F. Philippians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.---------. “Philippians.” In Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary. Vol. 3, Romans to Philemon. Ed. C. E. Arnold. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002. Tillman, F. “Der Philipperbrief.” In Die Gefangenschaftsbriefe des heiligen Paulus. Ed. H. Meimer and F. Tillmann. Bonn: Hanstein, 1931. Vincent, M. R. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon. ICC. Edinburgh: T 8c T Clark, 1897. Weiss, B. A Commentary on the New Testament. Trans. G. Schodde et al. New York: Funk 8c Wagnalls, 1906. Witherington, B ., III. FHendship and Finances in Philippi: The Letter ofPaul to the Philippians. New Testament in Context. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1994.

v x

General Bibliography Readers should also refer to the bibliography in M. Bockmuehl, The Epistle to the Philippians, BNTC (London: A. & C. Black; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998) 273-97. The following list includes titles later than 1998. Achtemeier, P. J ., J . B. Green, and Μ. M. Thompson. Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature and Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Aune, D. E. The New Testament in Its Literary Environment. LEC. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987. Bakirtzis, C., and H. Koester. Philippi at the Time of Paul and after His Death. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. B arker, G. W ., W. L. Lane, and J . R . M ichaels. The New Testament Speaks. New York: H arper & Row, 1969. Barrett, C. K. From First Adam to Last. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1962. Blevins, J . L. “Introduction to Philippians.” RevExp 77 (1980) 31123. Bloomquist, L. G. The Function of Suffering in Philippians. JSNTSup 78. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993. Bonhöffer, A. Epiktet und das Neue Testament. Giessen: Töpelm ann, 1911. Bormann, L. Philippi: Stadt und Christgemeinde zur Zeit des Paulus. NovTSup 78. Leiden: Brill, 1995. B ornkamm, G. The New Testament: A Guide to Its Writings. Trans. R. H. and I. Fuller. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973. Brown, R. E. An Introduction to the New Testament. ABRL. New York: Doubleday, 1997. Bultmann, R . Theology of the New Testament. 2 vols. Trans. K. Grobel. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1951, 1955. Carson, D. A., D. J . Moo, and L. Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992. Cullmann, O. The New Testament: An Introduction. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968. Dana, Η. E ., and J . R. Mantey. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1927. Danby, H. The Mishnah: Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes. London: Oxford UP, 1933. Davies, W. D. P aul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology. 5th ed. Mifflintown, PA: Sigler Press, 1998. Deissmann, A. Light from the AncientEast. Trans. L. R. M. Strachan. New York: Doran, 1927. Delling, G. “Philipperbrief.” In Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. 3d ed. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1957. Dibelius, M. A Fresh Approach to the New Testament and Early Christian Literature. New York: Scribners, 1936. Doty, W. G. Letters in Primitive Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973. Dunn, J . D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Dupont-Sommer, A. The Essene Writingsfrom Qumran. Trans. G. Vermes. Oxford: Blackwell, 1961. Ellis, E. E. Paul and His Recent Interpreters. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961. Enslin, M. S. Christian Beginnings: The Literature of the Christian Movement. 3 vols. New York: H arper & Row, 1956. Feine, P ., J . Behm, and W. G. Kümmel. Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. A.J. Mattilljr. Nashville: Abingdon, 1966. Fuller, R. H. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. London: Duckworth, 1966. Grant, R. M. A Historical Introduction to the New Testament. New York: H arper 8c Row, 1963. Guthrie, D. New Testament Introduction: The Pauline Epistles. 3d ed. Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1970. Harrison, E. F. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964. Holloway, P. A. Consolation in Philippians: Philosophical Sources and Rhetorical Strategy. SNTSMS 112. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001. Hunt, A. S., and C. C. Edgar. Select Papyri. 2 vols. New York: Putnam ’s Sons, 1932-34. Hunter, A. M. Introducing the New Testament. 2d ed. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1957. Jerem ias, J . New Testament

Theology: The Proclamation of fesus. Trans. J. Bowden. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1971. Kennedy, H. A. A. Sources of New Testament Greek: Or, The Influence of the Septuagint on the Vocabulary of the New Testament. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1895. Kim, S. The Origin of Paul’s

Gospel. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.---------. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Klijn, A. F. J . An Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. M. van der Vathorst-Smit. Leiden: Brill, 1967.

Koskenniemi, H. Studien zur Idee und Phraseologie a g lrp o eh ib B n y G des griechischen Briefes bis 400 n. Chr. Helsinki, 1956. Kümmel, W. G. Introduction to the New Testament. Rev. ed. Trans. H. C. Kee.

Nashville: Abingdon, 1975.---------. The Theology of the New Testament. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. Ladd, G. E. A Theology of the New Testament. Rev. D. A. Hagner. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. Lake, K., and H. J . Cadbury. The Beginnings of Christianity. Ed. F. J. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake. Vol. 4. New York: Macmillan, 1933. Martin, R. P. Carmen Christi: Philippians ii. 5-11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship. SNTSMS 4. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1967.---------. Carmen Christi: Philippians ii. 5-11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.-------- . A Hymn of Christ: Philippians 2:5-11 in Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship. [3rd ed. of Carmen Christi.] Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997.-------- . New Testament Foundations: A Guide for Christian Students. Rev. ed. 2 vols. Eugene, OR: Wipf 8c Stock, 1999.-------- . Reconciliation: A Study of Paul's Theology. Marshalls Theological Library/New Foundations Theological Library. London: Marshall, Morgan 8c Scott; Atlanta: John Knox, 1981. Reprint, Eugene, OR: Wipf 8c Stock, 1997. Marxsen, W. Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. G. Buswell. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968. McNeile, A. H. Introduction to the New Testament. Rev. C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon, 1953. Mengel, B. Studien zum Philipperbrief. WUNT 2.8. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1982. Michaelis, W. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Bern: Buchhandlung der Evangelischen Gesellschaft, 1946. Moffatt, J . An Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament. New York: Scribners, 1911. Moule, C. F. D. An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek. 2d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1959.---------. The Origin of Christology. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1977. Moulton, J . H ., W. F. Howard, and N. Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek. 4 vols. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1906 -1 9 7 6 . Oakes, P. Philippians: From People to Letter. SNTSMS 110. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001. Perrin, N. The New Testament: An Introduction. New York: H arcourt Brace, 1974. Peterlin, D. Paul's Letter to the Philippians in the Light of Disunity in the Church. NovTSup 79. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Peterman, G. W. Paul’s Giftfrom Philippi: Conventions of Gift-Exchange and Christian Giving. SNTSMS 92. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997. Pfitzner, V. C. Paul and the Agon Motif: Traditional Athletic Imagery in the Pauline Literature. NovTSup 16. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Pilhofer, P. Philippi. 2 vols. WUNT 2.8 7 ,1 1 9 . Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1 9 9 5,2000. Ramsay, W. M. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. New York: Putnam, 1898. Reed, J . T . A Discourse Analysis ofPhilippians: Method and Rhetoric in the Debate over Literary Integrity. JSNTSup 136. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Ridderbos, Η. N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Trans. J. R. DeWitt. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. Riddle, D. W ., and Η. H. Hutson. New Testament Life and Literature. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1946. Robert, A., and A. Feuillet. Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. P. W. Skehan. New York: Desclee, 1965. Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977. Schmithals, W. Paul and the Gnostics. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1972. Schnelle, U. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. 2d ed. Gottingen: Vandehoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1996. Schreiner, T. R. Paul, Apostle of God's Glory in Christ: A Pauline Theology. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001. Smyth, H. W. Greek Grammar. Rev. G. M. Messing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1956. Stauffer, E. New Testament Theology. Trans. J. Marsh. London: SCM Press, 1955. Thrall, Μ. E. Greek Particles in the New Testament. NTTS 3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962. White, J . L. The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter: A Study of the Letter-Body in the Non-Literary Papyri and in Paul the Apostle. SBLDS 2. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972.---------, ed. Light from Ancient Letters. FF. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. Whiteley, D. E. H. The Theology of St. Paul. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964. Wick, P. Der Philipperbrief: Derformale Aufbau des Briefs als Schliissel zum Verständnis seines Inhalts. BWANT 135. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1994. Wikenhauser, A. New Testament Introduction. Trans. J. Cunningham. New York: H erder & H erder, 1958. Zahn, T . Introduction to the New Testament. Trans. J. M. T rout et al. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1909.

vi x

Introduction Authorship Bibliography Barnikol, E. DerMarcionitische Ursprungdes MythossatzesPhil 2, 6-1. Kiel: Mühlau, 1932. Baur, F. C. Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ. London: Williams & Norgate, 1875. Best, E. “Bishops and Deacons: Phil 1:1.” SE IV (= TU 102 [1968]) 3 7 1-76. Enslin, M. S. Chnstian Beginnings. Evanson, E. The Dissonance of the Four Generally Received Evangelists. Ipswich: Jermym, 1792. H ooker, M. D. “Philippians 2 :6 -1 1 .” In Jesus und Paulus. Ed. E. E. Ellis and E. Grasser. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1 9 7 5 .1 5 1 -6 4 . Karris, R. J. A Symphony ofNew Testament Hymns. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996. McArthur, Η. K. “Computer Criticism.”

ExpTim 76 (1965) 367-70.---------. “Καí Frequency in Greek Letters.” NTS 15 (1969) 33949. Morton, A. Q., and J. McLeman. Christianity in the ComputerAge. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.---------. Paul, the Man and the Myth: A Study in the Authorship of Greek Prose. New York: H arper & Row, 1966. Seeley, D. “The Background of the Philippian Hymn (2:6-11 ).”JHC 1 (1994) 49-72. Völter, W. D. “Zwei Briefe an die Philipper.” 7T26 (1892) 10-44, 117-46. Whittaker, M. “A. Q. Morton and J. McLeman.” Theology 69 (1966) 567-68.

The letter to the Philippians claims Paul as its author (1:1), an association that rarely has been challenged since it was first made. And for good reason. In disclosing his innerm ost feelings (1:18-24), sharing autobiographical information (3:5-6), describing his present situation (1:12-13), naming his friends and co-workers (2:19-30), and referring to gifts sent him from Philippi to Thessalonica and elsewhere, including the place of his captivity (4:15-16; cf. Acts 17:1-9; 2 Cor 8:1-5), the author unconsciously and naturally draws a picture of himself that coincides precisely with what can be known of Paul from other sources (e.g., Acts and Galatians). In style and language, too, “no letter can make a stronger claim to be from Paul” (Enslin, Christian Beginnings, 3:280). And it deserves to be ranked with the Hauptbriefe, the “capital epistles” of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians—a status that P. Oakes (Philippians, 23) supports. An abundance of special Pauline vocabulary appears throughout Philippians. Phrases, ideas, and allusions to opposition of false teachers that show up here also appear in letters unquestionably written by Paul (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians). “In this epistle surely, if anywhere, the two complementary aspects of St. Paul’s person and teaching . . . both appear with a force and definiteness which carry thorough conviction” (Lightfoot, 74). Indeed, Lightfoot’s observation in his preface is so patently true, yet often forgotten, that it is worth reproducing. Though the Gospel is capable of doctrinal exposition, though it is eminently fertile in moral results, yet its substance is neither a dogmatic system nor an ethical code, but a Person and a Life.

Echoes of Philippians may be heard in the writings of Clement (ca. a .d . 95), Ignatius (ca. a .d . 107), Hermas (ca. a .d . 140) ,Justin Martyr (d. ca. a .d . 165), Melito

of Sardis (d. ca. a .d . 190), and Theophilus rsip o th u A of Antioch (later second century). xi Polycarp of Smyrna (d. ca. a .d . 155) addresses himself to the Philippians and directly mentions Paul as having written to them (Pol. Phil 3.2). Irenaeus (d. ca. a .d . 200), Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. a .d . 215), Tertullian (d. ca. a .d . 225), and later Christian writers not only quote from Philippians but assign the letter to Paul as well. Philippians appears in the oldest extant lists of nt writings—the Muratorian Canon (later second century) and the special canon of Marcion (d. ca. a .d . 160). There apparently never was a question in the minds of the early Christian leaders about the canonical authority of Philippians or its authorship. A few scholars, however, have questioned the Pauline authorship of Philippians, in whole or in part. E. Evanson (1731-1805) was the first to do so (Dissonance, 263), followed later by F. C. Baur (1792-1860) and the Tubingen school he founded. Baur’s historical studies led him to the conclusion that Paul wrote none of the epistles that bear his name except Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. This radical view, though ably set forth by persons of learning, was not convincing and disappeared, only to be revived in recent years by A. Q. Morton a n d j. McLeman. With the aid of computers, Morton and McLeman are able to do intricate and detailed studies. For example, they claim that they can readily count the num ber of sentences in each epistle that bears Paul’s name and at the same time the frequency of καί, “and,” in each sentence. On the basis of such analysis they can profess, to their own satisfaction, which of the letters were written by Paul and which were not. Their conclusions harmonize with those of Baur. Philippians is not among the genuine Pauline letters. The validity of Morton and McLeman’s methodology and the quality of their work have been severely criticized (see Η. K. McArthur, ExpTim 76 [1965] 367-70; idem, NTS 15 [1969] 339-49; M. Whittaker, Theology 69 [1966] 567-68). Therefore, their conclusions have not been widely adopted, nor are they likely to be. Here is an example of the way, in biblical study, ideas arise, have their day with limited appeal, and disappear without a trace. It is safe to say that most contemporary nt scholars consider that Paul did write Philippians and that the question of its genuineness has only historical significance (Gnilka). This statement, however, does not mean that all these scholars agree that Paul wrote all of Philippians. For example, W. D. Völter attempted to excise non-Pauline insertions in Philippians ( TT 26 [1892] 10-44, 117-46). Phil 1:1 b, with its m ention of bishops and deacons, is looked upon by some as an addition to the original letter (Riddle and Hutson, New Testament Life and Literature, 123; Schenk, 78-80; on this verse, see esp. E. Best, SE I V (= TU 102 [1968]) 371-76). Still others consider that 2:6-7 is a Marcionite interpolation (E. Barnikol, Marcionitische Ursprung). Many see the whole of 2:6-11 as a song to Christ, not originally written by Paul but modified and used by him as a call for humility, obedience, and service and adapted from a pre-Pauline Vorlage (original edition) (see R. P. Martin, Hymn of Christ; idem, New Testament Foundations, 2:25668, for details; see also M. D. Hooker, “Philippians 2:6-11,” for the problems involved in discovering pre-Pauline fragments in the Pauline letters). This literary feature of pre-Pauline fragments is now generally accepted, on grounds of contextual placement, literary features and style, and theological content. Its analysis goes under the name of tradition and redaction. See the popular treatm ent in R. J. Karris, Symphony. J. H. Michael (112) suggests the possibility that 2:19-24 was a brief Pauline note “written to correspondents whose identity can no

longer be determ ined.” P. Wick (Philipperbrief) x has divided the text into elaborately Itr inn c u d o sectioned parts, hypothetically (and improbably) assigned to separate units.

The Integrity of Philippians Bibliography Bahr, C. J . “The Subscriptions in the Pauline Letters.” JBL 87 (1968) 27-41. Bakirtzis, C., and H. Koester, eds. Philippi at the Time of Paul and after His Death. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Bormann, L. Philippi: Stadt und Christengemeinde zur Zeit des Paulus. NovTSup 78. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Bornkamm, G. “Der Philipperbrief als paulinische

Briefsammlung.” In Neotestamentica et Patristica. FS O. Cullmann. Leiden: Brill, 1962. 192202. B ruce, F. F. “St. Paul in Macedonia: 3. The Philippian C orrespondence.” BJRL 63 (1981) 260-84. Buchanan, C. O . “Epaphroditus’ Sickness and the Letter to the Philippians.” EvQ36 (1964) 157-66. Cook, D. “Stephanus Le Moyne and the Dissection of Philippians.” JTS 32 (1981) 138-42. Culpepper, R. A. “Co-Workers in Suffering: Philippians 2:19-30.” RevExp 77 (1980) 349-57. Dalton, W. J . “The Integrity of Philippians.” Bib 60 (1979) 97102. Delling, G. “Philipperbrief.” RGG. Vol. 5, cols. 333-36. Furnish, V. “The Place and Purpose of Phil. III. ”ATS 10 (1962-63) 80-88. Garland, D. E. “The Composition and Unity of Philippians: Some Neglected Literary Factors.” NovT27 (1985) 141-73. H arrison, P. N. Polycarp’s Two Epistles to the Philippians. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1936. Jew ett, R . “The Epistolary Thanksgiving and the Integrity of Philippians.” NovT 12 (1970) 40-53. Jones, M. “The Integrity of the Epistle to the Philippians.” Expositor, 8th ser., 8 (1914) 457-73. Klijn, A. F. J . “Paul’s Opponents in Phil III.” N ovT7 (1964—65) 278-84. Koperski, V. “The Early History of the Dissection of Philippians.” JTS 44 (1993) 599-603. ---------. The Knowledge of Christ Jesus My Lord: The High Christology of Philippians 3:7-11. CBET 16. Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996. Köster, H . “The Purpose of the Polemic of a Pauline Fragment (Philippians III) .”A TS 8 (1 9 6 1 -6 2 ) 3 1 7 -3 2 . Lake, K., and S. Lake. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Harper & Bros., 1 9 3 7 . Mackay,B.S. “Further Thoughts on Philippians.” NTS 7 (1 9 6 0 -6 1 ) 161-70. Michael, J . H. “The Philippian Interpolation: Where Does It End?” Expositor, 8th ser., 19 (1920) 4 9 -6 3 . Michaelis, W. “Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief kein Philipperbrief.” TZ1 (1945) 282-86.---------. “Teilungshypothesen b ei Paulusbriefen.” TZ 14 (1958) 321-26. Mitton, C. L. The Eormation of the Pauline Corpus of Letters. London: Epworth, 1955. Müller-B a rd o rff,J. “Zur Frage der literarischen Einheit des Philipperbriefes.” WZUJ7 (1957-58) 591-604. Peterm an, G. W. “‘Thankless Thanks’: The Epistolary Social Convention in Philippians 4:10-20.” TynBul 42 (1991) 261-70. Pollard, T . E. “The Integrity of Philippians.” NTS 13 (1966-67) 57-66. R ahtjen, B . D. “The Three Letters of Paul to the Philippians.” N TS6 (1959-60) 167-73. R eed ,J. T . Discourse Analysis. Refshange, E. “Literaerkritiske overvejelser til Filipperbrevet.” D TT 35 (1972) 186-205. Richardson, P. Israel in the Apostolic Church. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1969. Schmithals, W. Paul and the Gnostics. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1972. ---------. “Zur Abfassung und altesten Sammlung der paulinischen H auptbriefe.” ZNW 51 (1960) 225-45. Schweizer, E. “Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief ein Philipperbrief?” TZ 1 (1945) 90-105. V olter, W. D. “Zwei Briefe an die Philipper.” T T 26 (1892) 10-44, 117-46. Weiss, J . Earliest Christianity. 2 vols. New York: H arper Sc Row, 1952. Wick, P. Philipperbrief.

Although most interpreters agree that Paul wrote Philippians, by no means do all these agree about the question of integrity: Is Philippians a single letter or a compilation of several letters? The suggestion that Philippians is a composite letter was first made in the seventeenth century (so Collange; Koperski, JTS 44 [1993] 599-603), and this

suggestion has gained an increasing numTheIntgriyofPlpasber of supporters through the years (see Beare; Bornkamm, “Philipperbrief”; Collange; Gnilka; Köster, NTS 8 [1961-62] 317-32; Müller-Bardorff, WZUJ7 [1957-58] 591-604; Rahtjen, NTS 6 [1959-60] 167-73; Reed, Discourse Analysis; Schenk; Schmithals, Paul; idem, ZNW 51 [1960] 225-45; Wick, Philipperlmefi. The chronicle of this debate over unity and integrity is given in Koperski, JTS44 [1993] 599-603, and the later theories in O ’Brien and summarized in Koperski, Knowledge, 69-72. The reasons for believing that Philippians is actually one docum ent compiled from two or more letters are many and plausible: (1) If Rom 16 was originally a note addressed to Ephesus and 2 Corinthians was composed of at least two letters, then it is not an incredible thing to think of Philippians as a composite of previously existing letters. (2) One can readily imagine that Paul wrote more than a single letter to a community he loved as dearly as he loved the church at Philippi. If he did, were all these letters lost but one? (3) An ancient Syriac stichometry mentions two letters to the Philippians (E. Preuschen, Analecta [Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1910] 68, noted by Fitzmyer, 2:248). (4) Pol. Phil. 3.2 also states that Paul had written them letters cf. 11:3). (5) Polycarp’s own letter may itself be the end product of a compilation. If so, here is further confirmation of the practice of composing one letter out of several (P. N. Harrison, Polycarp's Two Epistles). (6) The disjointedness of Philippians itself raises the question of original unity. This is especially noticeable in the abrupt transition from 3:1 to 3:2, which introduces a section whose tone is markedly different from the rest of the letter. Since the letter as a whole is a model of warmth and friendliness, the furious attack launched in 3:2 against Paul’s opponents, whom he calls “dogs,” “evildoers,” and “mutilators,” seems out of place (J. Weiss, Earliest Christianity, 1:387; Schmithals, Paul, 71-72). (7) According to Schmithals, “Verses 3:1 and 4:4 fit together so exactly that upon sober reflection one must come to the conclusion that a later hand has pulled the two verses apart” (Paul, 72). This was done to insert a harsh letter (3:2-4:3) written by Paul at a different time (so Schmithals, Paul, 72-73). (8) The question of unity is further raised by the fact that Paul did not turn to thanking the Philippians for their gift until the end of the letter (4:10-20), unless it can be shown, on rhetorical grounds, that ancient letter writers chose to keep the “thank you” section until the close. See Reed, Discourse Analysis, 273-83, and earlier G. W. Peterman, TynBul 42 (1991) 261-70. Does this seem likely? Hardly. From this then arises the argum ent that 4:10-20 must be a separate earlier letter sent soon after Epaphroditus brought the gift, but carried back to Philippi by someone else since Epaphroditus fell ill (Muller-Bardorff, WZUJ7 [1957-58] 596-98). These, then, are the major reasons for seeing the letter to the Philippians as a composite, the work of an anonymous editor, who, aware of the existence of several notes from Paul to the Philippians, put them all together to form a “more imposing whole,” thereby increasing the importance of the Philippian correspondence at a time when Paul’s letters “were acquiring an eminently respectable status” (Collange, 7; cf. Feine et al., Introduction, 236; the latest discussion is Bormann, Philippi, 108-18, which divides the letter into three, but questions of why these divisions are required are largely passed over). Belief that Philippians is one letter composed of two or more earlier letters leads naturally to an attempt to isolate these letters and to interpret accordingly. Some scholars see Philippians made up of only two letters: Letter A = 1:1-3: la, 4:2-7,10-23, and Letter B = 3:16-

i x

4:1, 8-9 (Gnilka; cf. Bruce, BJRL 63 xi[1981] 260-84). O ther scholars Itr inn (e.g., c u d o Collange; Bormann, Philippi; and Bakirtzis and Koester, Philippi, 52-56) see Philippians made up of three letters: Letter A = 4:10-20 (or 4:10-23); Letter B = 1:1-3:la, 4:2-7, 21-23, and Letter C = 3 : 1 6 8 - 9 ,4:1‫־‬. Few scholars, however, can agree on the num ber of “letters” or on precisely what sections make up these “letters” (Beare; Lake and Lake, Introduction, 143; Michael, Expositor, 8th ser., 19 [1920] 49-63; Rahtjen, N TS6 [1959-60] 167-73; Refshange, DTTS5 [1972] 186205; Schmithals, Paul, 79 n. 58; see Wick, Philipperbrief, 39-54, for five letters). The case, then, for believing that Philippians is one letter made from several letters is considerable (and Wick’s study represents the ultimate bid to partition the letter), but not wholly convincing: (1) The fact that Romans and 2 Corinthians may be composite letters proves nothing about the composition of Philippians. Aside from 3:1 there are no telltale signs of a division such as appear in the seams of Rom 15:33/Rom 16:1 and, more especially, 2 Cor 6:14/6:15 and 2 Cor 7:1/2. (2) It is easy to imagine that Paul wrote more than one letter to the church at Philippi and that Paul himself may have alluded to this fact when he said: “It is no trouble for me to write the same things to you again” (3:1). But attempts to recover these letters remain wholly in the realm of conjecture (see Delling, RGG, vol. 5, cols. 333-36; Mackay, NTS 7 [1960-61] 161-70; Schweizer, TΖ 1 [1945] 90-105; and Michaelis, TZ 1 [1945] 282-86; idem, TZ 14 [1958] 321-26; as well as Bockmuehl, 21-22, for some wise comments). (3) Polycarp’s use of the plural “letters” when he rem inded the Philippians of the apostle’s having written to them may not in itself be strong proof that Paul wrote more than one letter to the church at Philippi. The plural may mean simply “a letter of im portance” (Lightfoot, 140-42), or it may refer to a collection of Paul’s letters sent to all churches, including the church at Philippi (Mitton, Formation), or it may simply be a guess on Polycarp’s part, inferred from his reading of Phil 3:1 that Paul said he would be writing “again,” i.e., that another letter was in his mind (Schnelle, Einleitung; 167; Wikenhauser, New Testament Introduction, 437; Martin [1976], 11-12). (4) The reference of the Syriac stichometry, Catalogus Sinaiticus, to two Philippian letters may be the result of accidental repetition (so A. Souter, Text and Canon of the New Testament [London: Duckworth, 1954] 209) and thus may offer no corroborating proof of a plurality of Pauline letters to Philippi. (5) P. N. Harrison’s thesis that the one letter of Polycarp is in reality a composite of two earlier letters has not gone unchallenged (see B. Altaner, Patrology [Freiburg: Herder, 1960] 111, for bibliography). (6) There is certainly a disjointedness about Philippians, and Paul does interrupt himself at 3:16. But this should not be surprising in a personal, almost conversational, letter written by a man accustomed to abrupt shifts in style (cf. Rom 16:16-19, which, of course, is disputed as to its Pauline authorship—see commentaries—and 1 Thess 2:13-16; see E. Strange, “Diktierpausen in den Paulus-Briefen,” ZNW 18 [1917-18] 115-16, cited by Martin [1976], 13). The change in tone from warmth and friendliness to harshness is startling only if one assumes that the opponents Paul denounces were fellow Pauline Christians, identical with those opponents already m entioned in 1:15-17. But 3:16-21 makes it clear that they were Jews or Jewish-Christian teachers (see later, Introduction,

Paul's Opponents and the False Teachers TheIntgriyofPlpasat Philippi) who were hostile to Paul’s gospel—reason enough for Paul to be indignant and to assert his authority (3:46; see Klijn, Introduction, 109-10; idem, NovT 7 [1964-65] 278-84; Schmithals, Paul, 82-122; Köster, N T S 8 [1961-62] 317-32). It should also be noted that the harsh tone of 3:2-6 leads up to and anticipates the most eloquent personal confession of faith and hope found anywhere within the writings of Paul—a confession that is totally consistent with Paul’s other intimate expressions found elsewhere in his letter to the Philippians. In addition, it is difficult to separate chap. 3 from the rest of the letter because the same terms, word roots, and motifs pervade all of its so-called separate parts (see Furnish, NTS 10 [1962-63] 80-88; Mackay, NTS7 [1960-61] 161-70; Pollard, NTS13 [1966-67] 57-66; Dalton, Bib 60 [1979] 97-102; Culpepper, RevExp 77 [1980] 349-57; and Garland, NovT 27 [1985]141-73). (7) If it is true that 3:1 and 4:4 fit together so perfectly that chap. 3 must be viewed as a later insertion from another Pauline letter, one cannot help asking why any intelligent scribe, bent on unifying the fragments, would have placed it here. And the same question may also be asked about the so-called letter of thanks (4:10-20). Why would a scribe, wishing to put the Philippian “letters” together into an ordered whole, place this “letter” at the end? (See later, pp. lxiv-lxxii, for some explanation of this feature, adduced on rhetorical grounds; the more fanciful reason for the editors’ locating 4:10-20 at the letter close is that it was the intention of the Philippians to erect an “attractive memorial [ein schones Denkmal] ” to themselves [so Bornkamm, “Philipperbrief,” 192-202].) Is not Bahr’s suggestion just as reasonable—that Paul, in the custom of his day, dictated the early part of the letter, but picked up the pen to sign it in his own hand, and in doing so wrote his own personal “thank you” for their gift (JBL 87 [1968] 38)? But that idea does not account for Paul’s delay to express acknowledgement until the close of the letter. The only explanation, unless canons of rhetoric dictated it, is to suppose that 1:3 should be rendered “I thank my God for all your remembrance of me, ”and see in μν6ία the Philippians’ “rem em brance,” i.e., their support, of Paul. See Comment on 1:3. Compilation theories, therefore, solve nothing. They merely shift the problem of order and organization from Paul to an unknown editor and raise questions impossible to answer: Why should three original letters be combined at all (Michaelis, T Z 14 [1958] 321-26) ?Were these earlier letters complete letters with salutations and signatures, or merely fragments? If they were complete letters, why were they not allowed to stand without modification since apparently length was not a criterion for preservation (e.g., Paul’s letter to Philemon)? If they were complete letters, what right did any editor have to eliminate their prescripts and postscripts? (8) From the beginning of its manuscript history there has been only one canonical letter to the Philippians. Admittedly, however, the earliest manuscript that includes Philippians is the Chester Beatty Papyrus ($P46) , dated about a . d . 200. There is, then, no compelling reason to doubt the integrity of Philippians. As Dibelius has noted, “all the peculiarities of the sequence of thought are comprehensible without assuming editorial work or interpolations. . . . The style of the whole corresponds not with the desire to express a homogeneous conception, but with the requirem ent proper to private speech” (Fresh Approach, 166-67). As a

i x

consequence, Philippians will be treated iv in this commentary as a single x Itr inn letter c u d o written by Paul. The exegesis of the text that follows will, therefore, be governed by this assumption, for any claim to be able to isolate separate letters and to identify the theology and Sitz im Leben of each proves to be an exercise in subjective criticism (see Richardson, Israel in the Apostolic Church, 111 n. 4).

The Recipients and Their City Bibliography Abrahamsen, V. A. Women and Worship at Philippi: Diana/Artemis and Other Cults in the EarlyChristian Era. Portland, ME: Astarte Shell Press, 1995. Bakirtzis, C., and H. Koester, eds.

Philippi at the Time of Paul and after His Death. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Bormann, L. Philippi. Stadt und Christengemeinde zur Zeit des Paulus. NovTSup 78. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Bruce, F. F. New Testament History. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971. Collart, P. Philippes, ville de Macedoine depuis ses originesjusqu ’à lafin de l'époque romaine. Vol. 1. Paris: de Boccard, 1937. Conzelmann, H. History of Primitive Christianity. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. Foakes-Jackson, F. J . The History of the Chnstian Church from Earliest Times to a .d . 461. 6th ed. Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1947. Haenchen, E. The Acts of the Apostles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971. Henle, F. A. “Philippi und die Philippergem einde.” TQ75 (1893) 67-104. Kennedy, H. A. A. “The Historical Background of the Philippians.” ExpTim 10 (1898-99) 22-24. Köstenberger, A. J . ‘W om en in the Pauline Mission.” In The Gospel to the Nations. FS P. T. O ’Brien, ed. P. Bolt and M. Thompson. Leicester: Apollos, 2000. 241-47. Lemerle, P. Philippes et la Macédoine orientale a Tepoque chretienne et byzantine. Paris: de Boccard, 1945. Malinowski, F. X . “The Brave Women at Philippi.” B T B 15 (1985) 60-64. McDonald, W. A. “Archaeology and St. Paul’s Journeys in Greek Lands.” BA 3 (1940) 18-24. Meeks, W. A. The First Urban Christians.‫ ־‬The Social World of the Apostle Paul. 2d ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2003. Mengel, B. Studien zum Philipperbrief. WUNT 2.8. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1982. Oakes, P. Philippians. Picard, C. “Les dieux de la Colonie de Philippes vers le Ier siecle de notre ère, d ’après les ex voto rupestres.” RHR86 (1922) 117-201. Pilhofer, P. Philippi. Vol. 1, Die erste christliche Gemeinde Europas. WUNT 87. Thbingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1995.---------. Philippi. Vol. 2, Katalog der Inschriften von Philippi. WUNT 119. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2000. Portefaix, L. Sisters, Rejoice: Paul’s Letter to the Philippians and Luke-Acts as Seen by First-Century Philippian Women. ConBNT 20. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1988. Ramsay, W. M. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. New York: Putnam, 1898. Schinz, W. H. Die chnstliche Gemeinde zu Philippi. Zürich: Orelli, Fü ssli, 1833. Schmidt, J . “Philippi.” PW (1938) 19, 2:2206-44. Schürer, E. A History of theJewish People in the Time ofJesus Christ. 5 vols. New York: Scribner, 1891.-------- . A History of theJewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. Rev. G. Vermes et al. 3 vols. Edinburgh: T &T Clark, 1973-87. Selwyn,E. C. “The Christian Prophets at Philippi.”Expositor, 6th ser., 4 (1901) 29-38. Sherwin-White, A. N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963. Thomas, W. D. “The Place of Women at Philippi.” ExpTim 83 (1971-72) 117-20. Weiss, J . Earliest Christianity. 2 vols. New York: H arper 8c Row, 1959. White, L. M. “Visualizing the ‘Real’ World of Acts 16: Toward Construction of a Social Index.” In The Social World of the First Christians. FS W. A. Meeks, ed. L. M. White and O. L. Yarborough. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. 234-61. Witherington, B. III. New Testament History: A Narrative Account. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001.

Paul addressed his letter to the Christians who resided in Philippi and to their “bishops and deacons” (1:1). At the time he wrote, Philippi was already an ancient and historic city. It was built and fortified in 358-357 b . c . by Philip II of Macedon

(the father of Alexander the Great) andTheR ynamed after him. The site Philip chose rC d tsa n cip for his new fortification was the old Thracian city of Crenides (or Daton) in northeast Greece (Macedonia). It was located about eight miles from the sea in a very fertile region that was enriched by an abundance of springs and by the gold that was mined there (Strabo, Geogr. 7.331, frg. 33-34: άρίστην έ'χβι χώραν‫ ׳‬καί 6ΰκαρπον καί ναυπηγία καί χρυσου μέταλλα, “it has the best land and richness of fruit and shipbuilding and gold mines”; see Schmidt, PW [1938] 19, 2:2212). After the Roman victory over the Persians in 168 b .c . Philippi became part of the Roman Empire and belonged to the first of the four regiones (pepiSeg), “districts,” of Macedonia (Schmidt, PW [1938] 19, 2:2213; cf. Acts 16:12). It also gained in importance because it was made one of the stations along the Via Egnatia, “Egnatian Way,” the main overland route connecting Rome with the East, stretching from the Adriatic coast to Byzantium. Philippi became world prom inent, however, as the place where the battle between Brutus and Cassius, the assassins of Julius Caesar and of Antony and Octavian, took place in 42 b .c . It was one of the decisive battles of history. Antony and Octavian emerged as the victors. When Octavian later defeated Antony at Actium (31 b .c .) and was accorded the title of Augustus (63 b .c . - a .d . 14), he rebuilt Philippi; established a military outpost there; filled it with Roman soldiers, veterans of his wars, and Antony’s partisans evicted from Italy; made it a colony (Colonia Iulia [Augusta] Philippensis; see Schmidt, PW [1938] 19, 2:2233-34; Bormann, Philippi, 14-19; but see the critique of this in Oakes, Philippians, 52-53); and gave it the ius italicum, “Italian law” (Lemerle, Philippes, 7-10), which represented the legal status of a Roman territory in Italy—the highest privilege obtainable by a provincial municipality (OCD, 559). Colonists, therefore, could purchase and own or transfer property and had the right to civil lawsuits. They were also exempt from both the poll tax and the land tax. Thus when Paul made his first visit to Europe, he purposely passed through the port city of Neapolis to begin preaching the gospel in the small but more important city of Philippi, of “the first district of Macedonia” (Acts 16:12, NA27reading πρώτης, “first,” a conjecture supported in some Alexandrian mss) . See H. Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 130, andH . Koester, “Paul and Philippi,” in Philippi, ed. Bakirtzis and Koester, 51, contra nrsv. Most translators follow either the standard text and read “the leading city of the district of Macedonia,” which is problematic because the Greek text is uncertain and the translation and its historical meaning are difficult (Bockmuehl, 13; Fee [1995], 25, does not face the difficulty that Amphipolis was the leading city of the district, and Thessalonica was its capital), or a conjectured reading of πρώτη, “leading,” and translate “a leading city of the district of Macedonia.” In this case πρώτη implies a title of honor (so K Lake and H. J. Cadbury in Beginnings of Chnstianity, 4:188). There are other variants in the textual tradition, so we cannot be precisely sure what Luke meant and will have to be content with a general sense. Philippi was “a first city of its region” in Macedonia (cf. Bormann, Philippi, 5 n. 16). See NA27for the textual data about this translation problem and Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 93-95, for a good explanation and solution of the difficulty. See also TCGNT2, 393-95; C. Zuntz, “Textual Criticism of Some Passages of the Acts of the Apostles,” Classica et Mediaevalia 3 (1940) 36-37; and most lucidly C. S. C. Williams, Alterations to the Text of the Synoptic Gospels and Acts (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1951) 61-62.

v x

The textual and interpretative problemsxv i involved in Acts 16:12 are still debated. Itr inn c u d o They are several. On one side, the historical credibility of Acts is under suspicion, and some (like Schenk, 339-40) think that the geography of Acts and so the itineraries of Paul, especially the visit to Philippi in Acts 16:12, are Lukan fabrications woven from Paul’s letters (e.g., 1 Thess 2:2 and the traditions of Paul’s sufferings in the Pastorals [2 Tim 3:10-11]). Because Acts 16:10 opens a “we” section in the Acts narrative, a lot turns on our attitude toward Luke as an eyewitness of, or participant in, these events (see S. E. Porter, The Paul of Acts, WUNT 2.115 [Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1999]) and our assessment of the historiographic, epigraphic, and archeological evidence under current review. Admittedly Luke writes with a distinct Tendenz or bias (Bormann, Philippi, 220 n. 42; Mengel, Studien, 5, 6, 211), but that concession in no way rules out his claim to be a reliable narrator, and, where he can be tested, his witness to geographical and cultural data relating to the Macedonian mission holds up very well. We may refer to the treatments of 1 Thessalonians and Acts 17 in the works of F. F. Bruce (1 2 Thessalonians, WBC 45 [Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982]; Commentary on the Book of Acts, rev. ed., NICNT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988]) and the six volumes of The Book ofActs in Its First Century Setting, edited by B. W. Winter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993-2001). On the other hand, the textual data have been variously assessed, and as is often the case, we have to decide on the basis of “probability. ”We opt for the translation “a first or leading city of its region, ” noting with Bockmuehl (13-14, citing Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:162) that the Greek term represents the Latin regio, “region” or “district.” Macedonia was divided into four such administrative subprovinces. The im portant matters, for the exegesis of Philippians, are the Lukan words “colony, ” and “city, ” in the sense of civitas, “comm onwealth,” giving to Philippi its awareness of Romanitas, “Romanness.” How far we may accept Luke’s knowledge as accurate—and there is some archeological and inscriptional evidence to support it, not least the Greek and Roman monuments found in situ—is a m atter for discussion (recently ventilated by Oakes, Philippians, 14-40, with reference to the status of Roman settlers). This city was inhabited predominantly by Romans (Dio Cassius, Roman History, 47.42-49); whether they were veterans of the Roman army is not certain. Some colonies, such as Capua and Nuceria, founded in 57 b .c ., did receive veterans as new settlers; Puteoli was merely given the status of colonia, “colony,” in 60 b .c . But many Macedonian Greeks and some Jews lived in Philippi as well, though there is only one inscription using the word “synagogue. ” The inhabitants were a people proud of their city, proud of their ties with Rome, proud to observe Roman customs and obey Roman laws, proud to be Roman citizens (cf. Acts 16:21). Philippi was a reproduction of Rome. Yet as to the status and legal privileges of towns in the empire not much is certain. Nero founded colonies in Campania, but Pompeii and Tegeanum in Lucania had titles and privileges that are unclear. The story of Paul’s arrival in Philippi and the beginning of the church there is told in dramatic fashion by Luke to underscore heavily the significance of the transition of the gospel mission from Asia Minor to Europe (Acts 16:6-40; see Conzelmann, History of Pnmitive Chnstianity, 96). For some scholars, as we note, this story is so heavily obscured by legends that it cannot be trusted as a historical source for details concerning Paul or the founding of the church at Philippi (see

Haenchen, Acts of the Apostles, 504; Perrin, y New Testament, 106). For others “this rC d tsa n cip eR h T episode contains nothing unworthy of credence” (Weiss, Earliest Christianity, 1:282), and their research has shown the essential trustworthiness of the information Luke provides here (Sherwin-White, Roman Society, passim; Ramsay, St. Paul, 221; and the summary by Martin [1976] 7-9, to be updated now by C. J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, WUNT 2.49 [Tubingen: MohrSiebeck, 1989]). The cultural, historical, and religious background is discussed in Bormann, Philippi, and Bockmuehl, 6-10, as well as the geography of Paul’s possible routes by the west gate into the city by the southwestern wall (see on this latter point Bockmuehl, 14-15). In any case, whatever historical value one places on the account, Acts does say that Paul made his journey to Philippi along with Silas, Timothy, and Luke as the result of a night vision he had. In it Paul saw someone standing and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us” (Acts 16:9). Upon reaching Philippi, these missionaries spent several days in the city before the first Sabbath came round. Luke gives no hint of what they did in the interim, or where they stayed. Were they looking for work? Studying the town? Getting acquainted with the customs and practices of the people? Sizing up the composition of the population? Observing evidences of religious interest? Apparently the religion of the Philippians at this time was distinctively syncretistic. Indigenous Thracian deities coexisted with the imperial cult and the classical Greco-Latin gods, as well as those from Egypt, Syria, and elsewhere (see Collart, Philippes, 389-486; Collange, 2; Bockmuehl, 6-8; Beare’s commentary was one of the few m odern works, in 1959, to describe the non-Christian religious milieu of Philippi and its gods and goddesses). When the Sabbath did come, however, Paul and his companions went out of the city to the riverside, where they expected to find a Jewish place of prayer (Acts 16:13). Some have understood these words to mean that there were too few Jews in Philippi to have a synagogue of their own and that what Jews there were held their services in the open air beside the Gangites or Angites River (Blevins, RevExp 77 [1980] 312; but this assumption is erroneous; see Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:165-74, esp. 168 n. 14). Others see in these remarks a quite different meaning—almost certainly “a house of assembly, in fact a synagogue, [for] there is evidence elsewhere that such places were usually, for convenience of religious ablutions, built close to water” (Weiss, Earliest Chnstianity, 1:281; but see also Collart, Philippes, 319-22; McDonald, BA 3 [1940] 20; and for a different perspective see L. M. White, ‘4Visualizing the ‘Real’ World of Acts 16,” 234-61). The first convert to Christianity was Lydia, a God-fearer a pagan woman who had been impressed with the lofty teachings of the Jewish religion and who had attached herself to the synagogue. She was in Philippi to sell cloth that had been dyed in her home town of Thyatira in north Lydia (Asia M inor). Guild workers and dyers at Thyatira are m entioned in inscriptions (RE, 5:550; Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:177; cf. 2:693). It is conceivable that this woman’s real name was not Lydia but that she bore the title “the Lydian” as a surname to some other name (Weiss, Earliest Chnstianity, 1:281). She is not m entioned in Paul’s letter to the Philippians, unless Euodia or Syntyche (Phil 4:2) is this Lydian woman. On Lydia, see Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:174-82, who casts doubt on the identity of this person as a “dyer of purple” and what he regards as alleged

vi x

epigraphical and prosopographical evidence i v x (cf. C. K. Chrysantaki, “Colonia Itr inn Iulia c u d o Augusta Philippensis,” in Philippi, ed. Bakirtzis and Koester, 26 n. 122). Nevertheless, responding to the gospel and putting her faith in Christ, Lydia was baptized. She and her family became the first Christians in “Europe” (Acts 16:14— 15), and the fledgling Christian church of Philippi began to meet in her home (16:15, 40). How many others were added to the church before Paul was forced to leave Philippi is not indicated. But quite likely Paul and his companions stayed on in Philippi, in spite of the pain and insults they had to face (cf. 1 Thess 2:2), and preached and taught for a longer period of time than one might expect from reading the Acts account. If this is so, then the num ber of converts may have been many, though gathered in a house community (see Acts 16:40), and their growth in the knowledge of the faith considerable. Certainly Paul left behind a “strong” church that continued to show its fidelity to God and its love and concern for the apostle and was able to contribute financially to the Pauline mission (2 Cor 8:1-3). The other Philippian converts mentioned in Acts were the jailer and his family (Acts 16:30-33; on the term ‘jailer” [vv 23, 27], see Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:197-98, and on a negative view of his “historicity,” see Haenchen, Acts of the Apostles, 499-504). At the climax of Luke’s dramatic story this Roman soldier rushed into the prison where Paul and Silas had been bound and tremblingly begged them to tell him what he must do to be saved. Their answer was “Believe in the Lord Jesus [or, Jesus as Lord].” The jailer responded positively to this initial message and the teaching that followed it (cf. Acts 16:32), was baptized, and demonstrated his faith by deeds of kindness (Acts 16:33-34). Other names of members of this Philippian community that are mentioned—Epaphroditus, Euodia, Syntyche, and Clement (Phil 2:25; 4:23)—indicate that the first church on European soil was made up largely of Gentiles (see Schinz, Chnstliche Gemeinde, and more recently on their social and cultural background see the literature in Meeks,First Urban Chnstians;L. M. White, “Visualizing the ‘Real’World of Acts 16,”234-61; Pilhofer, Philippi; Bockmuehl; Oakes, Philippians) . Women seem to have played a major role in the Philippian church (Malinowski, B T B 15 (1985) 60-64; Portefaix, Sisters, Rejoice [on this title, see Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:41-44]; Köstenberger, “Women in the Pauline Mission,” 241-47), not only in meeting the physical needs of the missionaries, but also in working side by side with them in the proclamation of the gospel μοι, “who fought at my side in the spread of the gospel” [Phil 4:3]; see W. D. Thomas, ExpTim 83 [1971-72] 117-20). Lydia, who welcomed Paul into her home and first provided for him in those earliest days, probably should get the credit for rallying these women and for keeping alive the cordial and intimate relations that existed between Paul and the rest of the Philippian Christians. Paul stayed in touch with the Macedonian churches through Timothy (Acts 19:21-23; Phil 2:19-20), and he himself visited them on at least two other occasions—probably the autum n of 54-55 and again a short time later in the spring of 55-56 (Acts 20:1-3; see Feine et al., Introduction, 228). We may suppose he made every effort on these trips to visit his friends at Philippi (Acts 20:6) in order to instruct and encourage them. In any case, they rem ained loyal to Paul; sent him gifts on several occasions (Phil 4:15-16); and, long after his death, continued strong in the faith he preached (see Pol., Phil). Paul’s trouble at Philippi began when he freed a slave girl (calling out that Paul and Silas were “servants of the Most High God ” [Acts 16:17]; see

Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:182-88) from an evil rig spirit that enabled her to predict the fW to D d cen la P future and so make money for her owners (Acts 16:19-21). Furious, these men seized Paul and Silas, dragged them before the authorities (στρατηγοί), and charged them with teaching customs that were against Roman law (the nature of those charges is much discussed). Then, in case their charge should fail, they took advantage of an apparent pervasive anti-Jewish sentiment (see Bruce, New Testament History, 291-304; W itherington, New Testament History, 261) by adding, “These m enarejew s” (Acts 16:19-21). Paul and Silas were whipped publicly without a trial and thrown into prison where the jailer fastened their feet between heavy blocks of wood (tradition links this site, which became a center for the cult of Paul, as part of Basilika A with the idea that there could have been a prison on this spot, but this is doubtful, whatever the popular tourist guidebooks say). This incident highlights several significant things: (1) The Christian church was not yet distinguished from Judaism by outsiders, so hostile feelings against the Jews were readily transferred to Christians. (2) Paul could have appealed to his Roman citizenship in order to avoid a flogging. He did not, perhaps because he was caught up in an upsurge of popular animosity at Philippi, as subsequently (we argue, see later) at Ephesus. Theodor Mommsen’s suggestion that a Jew who was a Roman citizen might well be reluctant, on ethnic grounds, to insist overmuch on his Roman privileges may be the reason (Gesammelte Schnften [Berlin: Weidmann, 1907] 3:440, cited by Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 66). Paul at this time may have considered that he was a Jew before he was a Roman; yet, according to Acts 16:37, he will appeal to his Roman citizenship. (3) And so, although Paul would not (of could not) claim Roman citizenship to spare himself physical suffering, he would and did claim it to clear Christianity from any possible reproach by the Roman government. Personal preferences must now be sacrificed to make sure that future contacts between Christianity and Rome might be positive and the gospel not impeded.

Place and Date of Writing Bibliography Bakirtzis, C., and H. Koester, eds. Philippi at the Time of Paul and after His Death. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Bowen, C. R. “Are Paul’s Prison Letters from Ephesus?” A JT24 (1920) 112-35, 277-87. Buchanan, C. O. “Epaphroditus’ Sickness and the Letter to the Philippians.” EvQ 36 (1964) 157-66. Cadoux, C. J . “The Dates and

Provenance of the Im prisonm ent Epistles of St. Paul.” ExpTim 45 (1933-34) 471-73. Coppieters, H. “Saint Paul fut‫־‬il captif a Ephese pendant son troisème voyage apostolique?” R B 16 (1919) 408-18. Dacquino, P. “Data e provenienza della lettera ai Filippesi.” RevistB 6 (1958) 224-32. Deissmann, A. “Zur ephesinischen G efangenschaft des Apostels Paulus.” In Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay. Ed. W. H. Buckler and W. M. Calder. Manchester: M anchester UP, 1923.121-27. Dockx, S. “Lieu etdate de l’epitre aux Philippiens.” RB 80 (1973) 230-46. Dodd, C. H. “The Mind of Paul, Part II.” In New Testament Studies. Manchester: M anchester UP, 1953. 96-128. Duncan, G. S. “Chronological Table to Illustrate Paul’s Ministry in Asia.” NTS 5 (1958-59) 4 3 -4 5 .---------. “A New Setting for Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians.” ExpTim 43 (1931-32) 7 -1 1 .---------. “Paul’s Ministry in Asia—The Last Phase.” NTS 3 (1956-57) 211-18.---------. St. Paul’s Ephesian Ministry. London: H odder & Stoughton, 1929. ---------. “Were Paul’s Imprisonment

i x

Epistles Written from Ephesus?” ExpTim 67 (1955-56) l x 163-66. Feine, P. Die Abfassung Itr inn c u d o des Philipperbriefes in Ephesus. BFCT 20.4. Gü tersloh: Bertelsmann, 1916. Ferguson, J . “Philippians, John and the Tradition of Ephesus. ”ExpTim 83 (1971) 85-87. Gunther, J . J . Paul: Messenger and Exile. Valley Forge, PA: Judson, 1972. Harrison, P. N. “The Pastoral Epistles and D uncan’s Ephesian Theory.” NTS 2 (1955-56) 250-61. Hinshaw, V. “The Provenance of Philippians: A Problem of Critical Introduction.” Ph.D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1964. Johnson, L. “The Pauline Letters from Caesarea.” Exp Tim 68 (1957-58) 24-26. Käsemann, E. “Die Johannesjü nger in Ephesus.” ZTK49 (1952) 144-54. Translated by W. J. Montague as “The Disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus,” in Essays on New Testament Themes (London: SCM Press, 1964) 136-48. Knox, J . Marcion and the New Testament. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1942. Knox, W. L. St. Paul and the Church of the Gentiles. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1939. Lisco, H. Vincula Sanctorum: Ein Beitrag zur Erklärung der Gefangenschaftsbriefe des Apostels Paulus. Berlin: Schneider, 1900. Malherbe, A. J . “The Beasts at Ephesus.” In Paul and the Popular Philosophers. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989. 79-89. First published in JBL 87 (1968) 71-80. Manson, T. W. “St. Paul in Ephesus: The Date of the Epistle to the Philippians.” BJRL 23 (1939) 182-200. Reprinted in Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, ed. M. Black (Manchester: Manchester UP, 1962) 149-500. Martin, R. P. “The Opponents of Paul in 2 Corinthians: An Old Issue Revisited.” In Tradition and Interpretation in theNew Testament. FS E. E. Ellis, ed. G. F. Hawthorne and O. Betz. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. 279-89. Michaelis, W. Die Datierung des Philipperbnefes. NTF 1.8. Gü tersloh: Bertelsmann, 1933. ---------. Die Gefangenschaft des Paulus in Ephesus und das Itinerar des Timotheus. NTF 1.3. Gü tersloh: Bertelsmann, 1925. Mitton, C. L. The Epistle to the Ephesians. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951. Ogg, G. The Chronology of the Life of Paul. London: Epworth Press, 1968. Paulus, Η . E. G. Introductionis in Novum Testamentum capita selectiora. Jena: Sumptibus Goepferdtii, 1799. Reicke, B. “Caesarea, Rome and the Captivity Letters.” In Apostolic History and the Gospels. Ed. W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970. 277-86. Robinson, J . A. T. Redating the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976. Rowlingson, D. T. “Paul’s Ephesian Im prisonm ent.” AThR 32 (1950) 1-7. Schmid, J . Zeit und Ort der paulinischen Gefangenschaftsbriefe. Freiburg im Breisgau: H erder, 1931. Spitta, F. Zur Geschichte und Literatur des Urchristentums. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907. Stanley, D. M. Christ’s Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology. Rome: Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 1960. Suggs, M. J . “Concerning the Date of Paul’s Macedonian Ministry.” N ovT4 (196061) 60-68. Wansink, C. S. Chained in Christ: The Experience and Rhetoric of Paul’s Imprisonments. JSNTSup 130. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. W edderburn, A. J . M. “Paul’s Collection, Chronology and History.” NTS48 (2002) 95-110. Wood, J . T. Discovenes atEphesus. London: Longmans, Green, 1877. Reprint, Hildesheim; New York: Olms, 1975.

From the second-century Marcionite prologues attached to Paul’s epistles (cf. J. Knox, Marcion and theNew Testament, 170; see also the subscriptio to some Greek mss in NA27 [Phil 4:23]) until the eighteenth century, everyone accepted without question the “fact” that the Philippian letter was written from Rome. Now, in the words of a more recent writer, it seems impossible to decide the place where the Philippian epistle originated with any degree of certainty (Wikenhauser, New Testament Introduction, 436). In addition to the traditional location (i.e., Rome), Caesarea, Ephesus, and even Corinth have been suggested as cities from which Paul wrote Philippians, and each of these suggestions is supported by substantial arguments. The plethora of suggestions makes it likely that we can never know for certain. The best conclusion is that one location has the “balance of probability” (Dibelius, 98: “Therefore a definite solution of this problem can hardly be reached because, even if we consider it difficult to imagine its [the letter’s] having

been composed at Rome, the EphesianPlacendD rig hypothesis still rests on mere supposifW to tion”) . That may be so, yet we should register the opinion that recent scholarship has taken a more positive attitude to Paul’s Ephesian trial (so R. E. Brown, Introduction, 496, and more cautiously Carson et al., Introduction, 321) and the close relation of Philippians to Paul’s Corinthian letters. See the evidence in the commentary that follows. A. Rome. The traditional case for Rome, as we shall see, has still been made by commentators such as Bruce, O ’Brien, Fee [1995], Silva, and other writers, e.g., Wick (Philipperbrief, 191), with Bockmuehl (32) concluding that “the case for Rome remains the least problematic.” If his remark is the best that can be said for Rome, it cannot be right for him to confess earlier (27) that “there are overwhelming difficulties with an Ephesian origin of this letter,” when most of those “difficulties” have been successfully surmounted by proponents of an Ephesian dating, leading H. Koester to conclude, “this letter . . . was not written from Rome, but from Ephesus” (“Paul and Philippi,” in Philippi, ed. Bakirtzis and Koester, 52; see later). There are, however, certain fundam ental factors that must be considered before even a tentative conclusion about place and date can be reached. Some of these include (1) the fact that Paul was in prison when he wrote (Phil 1:7, 13, 17; 2:17; 4:14); (2) the evidence that Paul faced a trial that could end in his death (1:19-20, 2:17) or acquittal (1:25; 2:24); (3) the information that there was a praetorium 1:13) and there were “those who belonged to Caesar’s household” 4:22) in the place that Paul wrote; (4) the witness that Timothy was with Paul (1:1; 2:19-23); (5) the fact that extensive evangelistic efforts were going on around Paul at the time he wrote to the Philippians (1:14-17); (6) the promise that Paul soon planned to visit Philippi if he was acquitted (2:24); and (7) the indication that several trips were made back and forth between Philippi and the place from which Paul wrote Philippians—all within the time of his imprisonment. We may address this last point: (a) news traveled to Philippi of Paul’s arrest; (b) the Philippians therefore sent Epaphroditus to Paul with a gift to aid him in his distress; (c) news of Epaphroditus’s illness was sent back to Philippi; (d) word that the Philippians were greatly concerned about Epaphroditus reached Paul (see 2:25-30); and (e) Paul hoped to send Timothy to the Philippians and get encouragem ent back from them through Timothy before he himself set off for Philippi (2:19, 24; note the adverb nrsv “soon,” but better translated “quickly”; see Silva, 7, who underplays the force of this adverb and dismisses the test of distance from Philippi as a “pseudo problem ,” yet he is in error in thinking that Timothy and Epaphroditus traveled as “imperial couriers” averaging in part fifty miles a day [Silva, 6 n. 4]). Rome, as the place from which Philippians was written (ca. a .d . 60-62) , it is held, meets most of these fundamental points and thus still has many advocates (Buchanan, EvQ 36 [1964] 157-66; Dodd, “Mind of Paul”; Harrison, NTS 2 [1955-56] 250-61; W. L. Knox, St. Paul; Reicke, “Caesarea, Rome”; Schmid, Zeit und Ort; and most of the commentators, mainly Anglo-Saxon and conservative). In Rome, Paul was a prisoner under house arrest (custodia libera) for at least two years (Acts 28:30; but see Johnson, ExpTim 68 [1957-58] 24). He had soldiers guarding him (28:16), yet he was free to send letters and to receive Jewish leaders and anyone else who came to see him or bring him gifts (28:17, 30). He was also free to preach the gospel, and he

li x

readily took advantage of this opportunity xliso that evangelism thrived in Rome Itr innunder c u d o Paul’s direction (28:31; but this is an inference, for there is no mention of this kind of evangelism in Acts 28). From Rome, Paul had no higher court of appeal; here he would stand trial before Caesar, and here his fate would ultimately be decided— death or acquittal. The expressions “the . . . praetorium ” (Phil 1:13) and “those of the imperial household” (4:22) are most easily and naturally understood if Rome is assumed as the place of writing Philippians—the Imperial or Praetorian Guard, on the one hand (cf. Tacitus, Hist. 4.46; Suetonius, Nero 9; MM, 553), and the large num ber of people, slaves and free, in the employ (not in the family) of the emperor, on the other hand (see BDAG, 695). In Rome there was a church sufficiently large and of sufficiently diverse composition to divide up into factions over Paul and his teaching (Phil 1:14-17). Yet we must bear in mind that Paul was largely unknown at Rome, both by Jews (Acts 28:21) and maybe by Christians there, when he wrote Romans. As to Paul’s claim that his presence was known to the entire Praetorian Guard, we know that Agrippina found them crucial to her plans in Rome in a .d . 51. These men formed cohorts as the chief bodyguard of the emperor, guarding his chamber by night and watching over him in Rome as well as accompanying him on his journeys. Founded by Augustus with two leading men to command the guard, they were always in danger of conspiring against the Princeps, “Leader.” At N ero’s accession in a .d . 54 there were twelve cohorts controlling the city from their barracks on the Viminal Hill (Suetonius, Nero 9; cf. Tacitus, Ann. 13.3, 4, 10). The Praetorian Guard represented a great number. Are we to suppose that all of them knew of Paul’s imprisonment, as Phil 1:13 explicitly says, or is Paul hyperbolic in his language? When the emperor traveled, obviously a fewer num ber would accompany him, and so it is feasible to find some support for Paul’s writing to be located in the provinces, in Syria or Asia. The same question is raised about “the imperial household” (Phil 4:22), where a vast army of military personnel and civil servants in the imperial city may be contrasted with the smaller detachments in Caesarea or Ephesus. The strongest objection to a Roman origin for Philippians (so Collange) is the distance between Rome and Philippi. It is difficult to fit all the known trips back and forth between these cities into the two-year span of Paul’s imprisonment in Rome. Indeed it is nearly impossible, as the Comment section on Phil 2:25-30 will show by calculating the travel times between Antioch and Rome, based on Ignatius’sjourney in the early second century. Even if we concede that Antioch is farther away from Rome than Philippi, the travel time is considerable and the journeys “enorm ous” (Deissmann’s word). It is difficult to understand how Paul could speak so easily about sending Epaphroditus, a recently very ill man, back to Philippi (2:25-30) and about dispatching Timothy there as well with the expectation of his quick return (2:19) if the distance was really as great as the distance between Rome and Philippi, some 730 land miles, plus one or two days’ sea voyage across the Adriatic. O ther objections to a Roman origin stem (1) from the fact that there is no indication that Timothy was with Paul in Rome (but see Phil 1:1, which, of course, begs the question), (2) from the hope that Paul planned to visit Philippi upon his release from prison (2:24) when earlier his expressed intent was to be finished with the East and to focus his attention on new mission fields in the West, especially Spain (Rom 15:24-28; but see Grant, Historical Introduction, 90), and (3) from the assumption, drawn from Phil 1:30 and 4:15-16 (cf. also 1:26; 2:12, 22), that Paul

is here stating that he had not been back to rig Philippi since he and Timothy founded fW to D d cen la P the church there (so Michaelis, cited by Feine et al., Introduction, 230)—an impossible statement if Paul was writing from Rome since he had in fact twice been to Philippi between its founding (Acts 16) and his trip to Rome (Acts 20:1-6). This disparity leads T. W. Manson, BJRL 23 (1939) 190 (= Studies, 157) to comment, “If Philippians was written from Rome, Paul’s remarks on the subject of the gift sent from Philippi (see Phil 4:10, ‘you had no opportunity to show’ your kindness) cannot be construed except as a rebuke, and a sarcastic rebuke at that.” B. Ephesus. In 1900 H. Lisco (Vincula Sanctorum) first suggested that Paul may have written his letter to the Philippians from Ephesus (ca. a .d . 54-57). Since then, many scholars have followed his lead and developed his suggestions with detailed arguments (Bowen, AJT 24 [1920] 112-35; Deissmann, “Zur ephesinischen Gefangenschaft”; Duncan, St. Paul's Ephesian Ministry; Ferguson, ExpTim 83 [1971] 85-87; Hinshaw, “Provenance”; Michaelis, Gefangenschaft; Rowlingson, AThR 32 [1950] 1-7; and a few commentators—Bonnard, Gnilka, Collange). Some of these arguments are the following: (1) The references to the “praetorium ” can allude to the residence of any provincial governor (and do so exclusively in the rest of the n t : Matt 27:27; Mark 15:16; John 18:28, 33; 19:9; Acts 23:35), and “those of the imperial household” can refer to slaves or freedmen in the imperial service located in Rome, Ephesus, or elsewhere (J. T. Wood, Discoveries at Ephesus, app. 7, 18; McNeile, Introduction, 182 n. 3). (2) Timothy was with Paul in Ephesus as he was when Paul wrote Philippians (Acts 19:22; Phil 1:1, thereby making Acts agree with Paul), and the projected trip of Timothy to Philippi (Phil 2:19) from Ephesus harmonizes with his recorded itinerary in Acts (19:22). (3) The relatively short distance between Ephesus and Philippi favors an Ephesian origin for Philippians. The distance between the two cities could have been traversed in a week’s time so that the m ention of several journeys in the letter to the Philippians is no longer a problem. (4) It is certain that extensive evangelistic activity went on in and around Ephesus during Paul’s long stay there (Acts 19:10, 25, 26; cf. Phil 1:12-14) and that contention over Paul and his teaching was intense, especially on the part of the Jews (Acts 19:8-9). (5) Acts does not say that Paul was imprisoned in Ephesus, but this fact does not tell against the possibility that he was: (a) Acts makes no attem pt to record every imprisonm ent Paul experienced, citing only three of these (Acts 16, Philippi; Acts 23, Caesarea; and Acts 28, Rome), (b) Paul says he was often in prison (2 Cor 11:23), and Clement of Rome specifies how often this was—seven times (1 Clem. 5:6). (c) 2 Cor 1:8-10, coupled with Acts 20:18-19, indicates that in Asia Paul suffered extreme hardships even to the point of despairing of life, (d) The mysterious reference to Paul fighting with wild beasts in Ephesus (1 Cor 15:32), if it is not to be taken literally since he did not die in the arena, ought to be taken figuratively of his imprisonm ent (so Marxsen, Introduction, 65). (e) A rupture occurred in Paul’s relations with the Jews at Ephesus because he preached the gospel (Acts 19:8-9), and the motive for Paul’s imprisonment, hinted at in Phil 1:12-13, 16, was the preaching of the gospel. This, plus Paul’s sharp attack on the Jews (if they are in his sights) in Phil 3:2-6, makes it conceivable that Paul’s Jewish adversaries were the ones who had him put in jail, (f) Acts 19:11-12 tells of miracles of healing taking place at Ephesus as the result of handkerchiefs and scarves being carried from Paul’s body to the sick. This can more easily be understood on the hypothesis that Paul was in jail at

li x

the time and so unable to heal the sick personally liv x (so Stanley, Christ’s Resurrection, Itr inn c u d o 66 n. 23; but this is a piece of fantasy and guesswork). (6) The language, style, and ideas of Philippians are closer to those of the epistles in the Ephesian period of Paul’s ministry—especially the Corinthian correspondence written from Ephesus— than to those of his other prison epistles written either from Caesarea or Rome at a later date—Colossians and Philemon and maybe Ephesians (yet these attributions are all contested). This last-named argum ent is often passed over in the commentaries. Alert readers of this commentary should note how often Paul’s allusions tally with the problems that beset his relationships with alien teachers at Corinth (2 Cor 11:4, 13-15), who are certainly to be identified with Jewish Christian preachers (and maybe itinerant missionaries from Jerusalem) claiming to be sent by super-apostles (see survey of Paul’s opponents in 2 Cor 11 in Martin, 'O p p o n e n ts of Paul,'' 279-89). The fatal flaw, it is alleged, in the Ephesian imprisonm ent hypothesis is that it is totally built on conjecture. And Hinshaw (“Provenance”) , who has provided one of the most thorough historical surveys for the provenance of Philippians and who himself decides for Ephesus, is forced to admit that the attempts to show how the data of Philippians fit into an Ephesian milieu better than into a Roman one are mostly of neutral value. On the other hand, additional research (see later under Comment on 2:25-30 for bibliographical data) since the original contributions of Deissmann, popularized by G. S. Duncan, accounts for these so-called flaws. O ther objections to the Ephesian origin of Philippians are as follows: (1) The silence of the letter about the “collection” for the poor in Jerusalem, a m atter of supreme importance to Paul when his ministry in Ephesus was drawing to a close, is difficult to explain. It is m entioned in every other letter known to have been written from this period, except Galatians; and Romans was written when Paul was on the eve of his last journey as a free person. Thus it is hard to imagine that Paul, so ardent and single-minded in soliciting funds for the needy, would say nothing at all about this project to the Philippians, but would, on the other hand, accept their personal gift to him (Phil 2:26; 4:10-20; see Schmid, Zeit und Ort, 114, referred to in Martin [1976], 34, who responds). (2) Paul speaks harshly about the Christians who are around him, with the exception of Timothy (Phil 2:19-21). But this seems strange when most likely his best friends, Aquila and Priscilla, were in Ephesus when he was (Acts 18:2,18, 24-26; 1 Cor 16:19; a lot can happen in three years, however, and we know only a little of what transpired during Paul’s Ephesian ministry; also Rom 16:3-4 may be traced to Ephesus when the couple nearly died for Paul). (3) The church in the city from which Paul writes to the Philippians was a divided church—some standing with him and others against him (Phil 1:15-17) —a factor that does not answer to the situation in Ephesus, a church founded by Paul and under his control (Scott; but see E. Käsemann, ZTK 49 [1952] 144—54). (4) If Paul was imprisoned in Ephesus, how could he be facing the possibility of immediate death for his crime (Phil T. 19-20) when he had the right as a Roman citizen to appeal his case to the em peror—a right he exercised in Caesarea (Acts 25:10)? G. S. Duncan, however, answers this by citing the evidence of social anarchy when there was a breakdown of law and order following the assassination of the procurator Julius Silanus in a . d . 54, i.e., in the years Paul was threatened at Ephesus (2 Cor 1:8-10; 1 Cor 15:32 [details in Martin (1976), 48-50]). (5) Finally, C. L. Mitton has demonstrated clearly that parallel ideas,

phrases, and vocabulary are spread throughout rig fW to D d cen la P all of Paul’s letters, so that it is difficult, if not impossible, to say what letter is early and what letter is late simply on this basis alone (Epistle to the Ephesians, 322-32). As a counterpoint to this, however, only in 2 Cor 11:13-15 does Paul express himself so vehemently against “false apostles, deceitful workers”—phrases that are reminiscent of Phil 3:2, “evil workers,” indicating some degree of common relationship between those opponents in 2 Corinthians and Philippians. C. Corinth. That Paul wrote Philippians from Corinth (ca. a . d . 50) was first hinted at by G. L. Oeder in 1731 (see Martin [1976], 44), but it was a suggestion that did not gain widespread support. Recently it has been revived and championed by Dockx (RB 80 [1973] 238-43). His argum ent includes the following elements: (1) There was a proconsul in Corinth (Acts 18:12) and consequently a “praetorium ” and “a household of Caesar” (“des gens de la maison de Cesar”; cf. Phil 1:13; 4:22). (2) Corinth is not as far from Philippi as is Ephesus. Therefore the frequency of journeys to and fro that are hinted at in Philippians is still more easily accounted for. (3) Seemingly Paul wrote Philippians before his polemic with the Jewish Christians emanating from James (but this is doubtful; note that there is no reference to his apostleship in Philippians, a fact explained by the classification of Philippians as a friendly family letter—see later). Therefore, it is likely that the letter was written before 1 Corinthians, which was written at the beginning of Paul’s stay in Ephesus, and thus written likely while he was still in Corinth. (4) One can understand that the Philippians wanted to continue sending regular gifts to Paul but were prevented from doing so (Phil 4:10) because of Paul’s rapid flight from Thessalonica to Berea to Athens and then the winter stop in Corinth. Climatic conditions would have prevented the Philippians from assisting Paul until the opening of the sea and resumption of regular travel. Since the Philippians then came to Paul’s aid as soon as possible (in spite of the time reference in Phil 4:16, “repeatedly,” which suggests a lapse of time between his leaving Philippi and writing his letter), the quick arrival of Epaphroditus and his companions ought therefore to be placed in Corinth and not in Ephesus. (5) 2 Cor 11:9 is seen as an allusion to the arrival of Epaphroditus with the gift from the Philippians for Paul and to Paul’s “thank you” note sent to them in return (cf. Phil 4:15). (6) Paul, meeting severe opposition in Corinth and in “mortal danger,” received divine encouragem ent and the promise of safety through a dream (Acts 18:10). The parallels between this nocturnal call to courage and that which came to Paul in prison in Jerusalem (Acts 23:11) are so similar that one is perm itted to suppose that Paul’s enemies in Corinth had arrested him, put him in prison, and threatened him with death (Dockx, RB 80 [1973] 243). Comforted by this vision in the night, however, he could be confident of release and could write to the Philippians these words: “I know that I shall remain and continue with you all” (1:25). According to Dockx, the Corinthian hypothesis is far more plausible than the Roman one and is at least as plausible as the Ephesian hypothesis. Yet it faces insurmountable odds. The major difficulty with placing the writing of Philippians in Corinth is that the theory is wholly based on speculation with no evidence to support it. There is no m ention anywhere of a Corinthian imprisonm ent for Paul, nor any mortal danger, nor is there sufficient correlation between the other parts of Dockx’s thesis and the facts called for by the statements in Philippians. Again, as against

lv x

the Ephesian hypothesis, Paul’s harsh remarks i lv x about those around him Itr inn (Phil c u d o 2:19-20) make no sense when one realizes that during his time in Corinth Priscilla and Aquila, his most trusted friends (cf. Rom 16:3, 4), were with him there (Acts 18:1-2, 18). The time factor (in Phil 4:16), m entioned above, militates decisively against the theory. D. Caesarea. In 1799 Η. E. G. Paulus proposed for the first time that Caesarea was the place of the origin of Philippians (Introduction). In m odern times his proposal has been taken up and developed by F. Spitta, Zur Geschichte und Literatur; Lohmeyer, 3-4, 15-16, 40-41; J. J. Gunther, Paul, 98-120; Johnson, ExpTim 68 (1957-58) 24-26; and most clearly by Robinson, Redating, 60-61. These are the more im portant arguments: (1) Luke specifically states that Paul was imprisoned in Caesarea in the praetorium of Herod (Acts 23:35). This was a palace built by Herod the Great but used in n t times as the residence of the Roman procurator and as the headquarters of the Roman garrison in Palestine. This specific statement corresponds, then, with Paul’s phrase in Phil 1:13, ev δλω τω πραιτωρίω και τοΐς λοιποίς* πάσιν, “in the whole praetorium and to all the rest.” One is not compelled to believe, however, that the phrase e v δλω τω πραιτωρίω can only mean a body of people and not an official residence (so Reicke, “Caesarea, Rome,” 283; yet the phrase can mean either, so it is inconclusive, just as there are many branches of the Mukhabarat, the intelligence service, overarching the military as a sort of Praetorian Guard for the ruling family in Arab-Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia and Iraq). It is rather a hyperbolic statement by which Paul triumphantly asserted that the news of his imprisonm ent for Christ had become known in the entire (δλω) palace; i.e., it had not escaped the notice even of the procurator himself. And indeed it had not (Acts 24:24-26). The phrase και τοΐς‫ ־‬λοιποί s πάσιν, “and to all the rest,” could easily refer to the soldiers garrisoned in Caesarea (or elsewhere, indeed) who were attached to the praetorium. Furthermore, this statement of Luke’s, that Paul was put in the praetorium of Herod, harmonizes with Phil 4:22, where the expression “those of the imperial household,” meaning any num ber of administrative staff in the employ of the emperor, refers to those administrative personnel involved in the governing of Judea from Caesarea. (2) It is clear also from Acts that Paul’s imprisonm ent was a long one, at least two years (Acts 24:27), allowing time for several communications to pass from Philippi to Caesarea and back (but the journey time presents a roadblock to this view since it is about the same as from Antioch to Rom e). (3) Luke says, too, that the Roman governor, Felix, gave orders that the centurion should keep Paul in custody but allow him some liberty (Acts 24:23: ayca 1 9 , “open arrest”? See Josephus, Ant. 18.6.10 §235, and K. Lake and H. J. Cadbury in Beginnings of Chnstianity, 4:304) and prevent none of his friends from attending to his needs (Acts 24:23). This is in complete accord with the statements in Phil 2:25-30 and 4:10-20, but falls foul of the plain remark in Phil 2:20-21 that Paul has only Timothy to trust. (4) Furthermore, Phil 1:7 implies that Paul had already been given a hearing and that he had made a defense (απολογία) of himself and his preaching of the gospel, while Phil 1:16 indicates that Paul still lay in prison (κβΐμαι) in spite of his defense. This harmonizes with events that took place in Caesarea. There Paul defended himself before the Roman governor Felix for preaching the gospel

(Acts 24:27), yet rem ained a prisoner for two rig years subsequent to this defense. The fW to D d cen la P story of Paul in Rome, on the other hand, concludes by describing him as a prisoner without even hinting that he had made any defense before any governm ent official (Acts 28:16-31). If Acts, however, is trustworthy, there was no capital charge against Paul at Caesarea (Acts 23:31-32), and the nature of detention there was not life threatening (contrast Phil 2:17). (5) At the time Paul wrote to the Philippians he was confident (in his brighter moments) that he would be released from prison (1:24-26) and would soon visit them on his journey west (2:24; cf. Rom 1:13-15; 15:23-29). Here again is a close correlation between the statements in Philippians and those in Acts (19:21; 23:11). Paul’s projected westward journey loomed extremely large in his thinking because he believed that there was no more place for him to work in the East (Rom 15:20, 23,24, a decisive pointer against Roman provenance, pace Bruce, xxiv, who can only tamely remark that Paul’s travel plans were never inflexible; Bruce does not note that Paul is most careful to clarify his motives and changes of travel promises in 2 Cor 1). Thus, to assume that Paul later changed his mind and made plans to return east from Rome would be a most perplexing assumption and one entirely without foundation in fact (see Robinson, Redating, 6). It is not unreasonable, however, to assume that Paul would want to stop off on his way west to see old friends, especially those as loyal and as generous as the Philippians had been to him. (6) Paul’s bitter attack in Phil 3:2-6 was probably directed against Jewish or Jewish-Christian opponents (see the discussion below for details). The tone here is markedly different from the tone Paul used against those fellow Christians who opposed him and who preached the gospel for the purpose of adding to his troubles (Phil 1:15-18). The bitterness of his attack, therefore, harmonizes with the “fanatical and unrelentingjew ish opposition Paul encountered in Jerusalem and Caesarea” (Robinson, Redating, 61; cf. Acts 21:37-26:32; 28:19) rather than with his experience with the Jews in Rome. The only statements Luke makes about the Jews in Rome indicate that they treated Paul fairly, although they did not all believe his message (Acts 28:21-28; see Robinson, Redating, 61). This argum ent is only valid, however, if the warnings of Phil 3:2 are directed to nonChristian Jews. (7) The fact that there is no m ention in the Philippian letter about the “collection” and that Paul was now willing to accept a personal gift from the Philippians argues for a period after the collection was completed and delivered to the poor in Jerusalem, i.e., when Paul was in custody in Caesarea. The absence of this theme of the “collection” in Philippians is often regarded as damaging to the case for a provenance in Ephesus, especially since Paul’s time in Ephesus would have been a period in his life when he was preoccupied with this ministry tojerusalem . A.J. M. W edderburn, NTS4S (2002) 95-110, esp. 102, gives the latest statement of this argument. Yet his objections can be answered. There may well be a plausible reason to account for the silence in Philippians if it was indeed written from Ephesus. We know Paul mentions the collection in 1 Cor 16 and then alludes to it (in 2 Cor 8:6,10) when Titus has brought good news of the disaffection being resolved at Corinth. If the letter to Philippi came out of the period when Paul was facing an uncertain future at Ephesus in his three years there (a .d . 52-54) and his standing as an apostle at Corinth was challenged, this would reasonably explain his silence.

lvi x

If distance from Philippi is the major objection i lv x for considering Rome as the site Itr inn for c u d o the origin of Philippians (so Collange), then there exists no possibility for suggesting Caesarea in its place. Caesarea is comparable to Rome in its distance from Philippi. But as E. F. Scott pointed out, too much can be made of this matter of distance and of the number of trips assumed to be required by statements in the epistle (7; cf. Reicke, “Caesarea, Rome,” 284, who contends that the epistle presupposes only two journeys; but this cannot be). But even if the journeys are as numerous as suggested, all of them could be fitted into two years (Guthrie, New Testament, 147; cf. Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. 7.10, who says that the distance from Puteoli [the Port of Rome] to Corinth was crossed in a record-breaking five days). The most difficult aspect of this matter of distance, however, is the supposition that Paul planned to send Timothy to Philippi with the expectation that he would return in a short time bringing news about the Philippians—a return that would take place even before Paul made his own trip to Philippi (Phil 2:19; 2:24). The flaw in this argument lies in the fact that though Paul expected to send Timothy to Philippi soon, there is no statement in the text that requires the interpretation that he expected him back soon. If Paul were still in prison, he could wait; time was no factor. If he were released, it may be assumed he would go himself and join Timothy in Philippi. The evidence from the movements of Epaphroditus, however, has to be factored in, and, if so, it will produce the following reconstruction. Deissmann (“Zur ephesinischen Gefangenschaft,” 121-27) first elaborated the point of the great distance and frequent journeys and communications between Philippi and Rome, which are required by the internal evidence of the letter itself. He gives a list of no less than five journeys to and from the place of Paul’s confinement, together with an extra four trips envisaged in the future plans of Paul. These are given as follows: a. Timothy travels to be at Paul’s side at the place of his captivity. He is not m entioned in the journey to Rome (Acts 26-28) but was with the apostle when the letter was composed (Phil 1:1). b. A message is sent from the scene of captivity to Philippi to say that Paul is a prisoner and is in need (Phil 4:14). This is inferred from the way Paul writes to the effect that the reader knew Paul was in trouble (lit. “affliction”). c. After the collection of a love gift at Philippi, it is brought by Epaphroditus, who travels from Philippi to the place of the im prisonment (Phil 4:18). d. Epaphroditus falls sick, and news of this somehow reaches the church at Philippi (Phil 2:26). e. Paul now receives a message that the Philippians have heard of their m essenger’s sickness, and he is able to report that this news has had a painful effect on Epaphroditus himself (Phil 2:26).

The journeys that are planned according to inferences in the letter are: a. Epaphroditus’s journey to bring the letter to Philippi (Phil 2:25, 28). b. Timothy’s journey in the near future from the place of Paul’s confinem ent to Philippi (Phil 2:19). c. Timothy’s return to Paul so that he “may be cheered” when he learns of their state during Timothy’s visit in Philippi (Phil 2:19). d. Paul’s journey in the near future (Phil 2:24).

Deissmann remarks that “those enormous rig journeys” cannot be fitted into the fW to D d cen la P period of Acts 28:30, that the use of the adverbs “soon” (Phil 2:19, 24) and “immediately” (2:23) gives the impression that the distance between the place of writing and the city of Philippi is not great, and that such rapid and repeated travel is more likely to be possible, in the time of imprisonment, if the apostle is captive at a place nearer to Philippi than Rome. He names Ephesus as the most likely alternative. This outline should be compared with one (much abbreviated) offered by R. E. Brown, Introduction, 493-94. a. Paul was in prison (Phil 1:7, 13, 17). b. Where he was imprisoned, there were members of the Praetorian Guard (1:13), as well as Christians among “the imperial household” (Phil 4:22). c. Paul mentions the possibility that he might die (Phil 1:19-21; 2:17): Would his death come as a condemnation at the end of his imprisonment? Or as a missionary’s always possible fate? d. Yet he also hopes to be delivered (Phil 1:24-25; 2:25). e. Timothy was with Paul (Phil 1:1; 2:19-23). f. Christians with different motives in this area, some envious of Paul, have been em boldened to speak the word of God (Phil 1:14-18). g. There have been frequent contacts between Paul and Philippi through messengers back and forth: 1. News reached the Philippians of Paul’s imprisonment. 2. They sent Epaphroditus with a gift (Phil 4:15); but staying with Paul, he became ill, even to the point of death (2:26, 30). 3. News reached the Philippians of Epaphroditus’s illness. 4. Epaphroditus heard that this news distressed the Philippians. 5. Paul had sent or is now sending Epaphroditus back to Philippi (Phil 2:25-30). 6. Paul hopes to send Timothy soon (Phil 2:19-23), and indeed to come himself (2:24). W. Marxsen (Introduction, 64) makes the statement that there is no evidence of a church in Caesarea as proof against its being the city from which Paul’s letter to the Philippians originated. But this statement does not seem to fit the facts: (1) Caesarea was a large, beautiful, and new city, built by Herod the Great in 25-13 b .c . Josephus describes its palaces, temples, theaters, hippodrom e, aqueducts, and other m onumental structures (Ant. 15.9.6 §§331-41; see PW 3.1:1291-94). It is hard to imagine (but it is no more than a supposition, of course), therefore, that Christian missionaries would have neglected this key city in their strategy to spread the gospel. (2) This apart, Luke does record that Peter preached to the Gentiles in Caesarea at the invitation of the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 10). (3) In addition, Philip the evangelist first visited Caesarea (Acts 8:40) and later settled there to live and preach with his virgin daughters, who themselves were active in the Christian proclamation (Acts 21:8-9). (4) Furthermore, Luke records that some of the disciples from Caesarea accompanied Paul as he journeyed toward Jerusalem (Acts 21:16). This last statement in itself could imply (a) that the church in Caesarea was of a fair size, (b) that some of its members were extremely loyal to Paul, and (c) that some may have been less than enthusiastic about him. Again, it may be a possible conjecture, but no more. A major objection to Caesarea is the fact that wherever Paul was when he wrote Philippians, he was facing the possibility of death (Phil 1:20; 2:17), as we noted. This,

however, could not be true, so it is assumed, 1 if he were in any place but Rome iI c u d o r t n or Ephesus. As a Roman citizen he had the right of appeal to Caesar, and he could easily have staved off the death penalty in the provinces by such an appeal. Yet, as Robinson points out, the Acts account makes clear that Paul’s life was in constant danger in Caesarea (and, he may have added, at Ephesus; cf. Acts 21:31, 36; 22:22; 23:30; 25:3, 24; 26:21) and that he was protected from death only because he was in Roman custody. But if the Jews could have proved that he had really brought a Greek into that part of their temple that was forbidden to Gentiles (cf. Acts 21:28; see Reicke, “Caesarea, Rome,” 281 and n. 3), “then, even as a Roman citizen, he would, under Jewish law, have been liable to death” (Robinson, Redating, 60; see Josephus, J. W. 5.5.2 §§193-94; Ant. 15.11.5 §417; note Paul’s own words to Festus: “If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die” [Acts 25:11]). But since he knew he was innocent of this charge and he knew the authorities were convinced of his innocence, he could confidently expect release in order to go about his business of strengthening the churches and preaching the gospel. This statement and hope are true if Paul wrote in Caesarea or Ephesus, but not Rome. That no plans for missionary journeys, such as those anticipated in Phil 2:24, were possible after Paul appealed to Caesar (see Beasley-Murray, 985) is hardly an argum ent against the Caesarean origin of Philippians. Paul, up until the last moment, expected to be set free. Therefore, he planned missions and wrote of his plans. Only at the last moment, when he feared that Festus would hand him over to the Jews, did he finally make his appeal to the emperor. Not all questions can be answered or all problems solved, and to paraphrase Origen, “Only God knows where Philippians was really written.” Yet it seems best for the sake of the understanding and explanation of Philippians to make a decision about where it was written and to interpret the text in the light of that decision. Hence, the assumption made in the first edition of this commentary was that Philippians was written by Paul from prison in Caesarea about a . d . 59-61. Robinson is correct in thinking that Caesarea, as the place of origin for Philippians, has been too quickly abandoned; he finds it preferable to Ephesus, and “Rome has little to be said against it, precisely because the evidence is so th in ” (Redating, 61; see Kümmel, Introduction, 329). For the revision of this commentary, we have summarized the objections to Paul’s writing the letter from Rome or Caesarea and have espoused the proposal of an Ephesian provenance (which is in keeping with the trends of recent scholarship). Further bibliographical details will be found in R. P. Martin (1987), 20-38; idem (1980), 36-57. In this, as in other debated topics, let the reader decide.

Paul's Opponents and the False Teachers at Philippi Bibliography Barnett, P. “O pponents of Paul.” DPL. 644-53, esp. 652 (with bibliography). Baumbach, G. “Die Frage nach den Irrlehren in Philippi.” Kairos 13 (1971) 252-66.---------. “Die von Paulus im Philipperbrief bekämpften Irrlehrer.” In Gnosis und Neue Testament. Ed. K. W. Tröger. Gü tersloh: Mohn, 1973. 293-310. DeVries, C. E. “Paul’s ‘Cutting’ Remarks about a Race: Galatians 5:1-12.” In Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Ed. G. F.

Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.P et 115-20. Doughty, D. J . “Citizens of Heaven: n o p l’sO u a Phil 3:2-21 as a Deutero-Pauline Passage.” NTS 41 (1995) 102-22. Friedrich, G. “Die Gegner des Paulus im 2. Korintherbrief.” In Abraham unser Vater. FS O. Michel, ed. O. Betz, M. Hengel, and P. Schmidt. Leiden: Brill, 1963. 181-215. Georgi, D. Die Gegner des Paulus im 2. Korintherbrief. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1964. Translated by Harold Attridge et al. under the title The Opponents of Paul in Second Connthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986). Gnilka, J . “Die antipaulinische Mission in Philippi.” BZ9 (1965) 258-76. Gunther, J . J . St. Paul’s Opponents and Their Background. NovTSup 35. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Holladay, C. R. “Paul’s Opponents in Phil. 3.” ResQ 3 (1969) 77-90. Jew ett, R. “The Agitators and the Galatian Congregation.” NTS 17 (1970-71) 198-212.---------. “Conflicting Movements in the Early Church as Reflected in Philippians.” NovT 12 (1970) 362-90. Klijn, A. F. J . “Paul’s O pponents.” N ovT7 (1964-65) 278-84. Koester, H. “The Purpose of the Polemic of a Pauline Fragment (Philippians III).” NTS 8 (1961-62) 317-32. Linton, O. “Zur Situation des Philipperbriefes.” In AdolfJülicher zum Achtzigjähngen Geburtstage 26. Januar 1937. ConBNT 2. Uppsala: Das neutestamentliche Seminar, 1936. 9-21. Martin, R. P. “The O pponents of Paul in 2 Corinthians: An Old Issue Revisited.” In Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament. FS E. E. Ellis, ed. G. F. Hawthorne and O. Betz. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. 279-89. Richardson, P. Israel in the Apostolic Church. SNTSMS 10. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1969. 111-17. Rigaux, B. “Révélation des mystères et perfection à Qumran et dans le Nouveau Testam ent.” N T S 4 (1957-58) 237-62. Schmithals, W. Paul and the Gnostics. Abingdon: Nashville, 1972. 58-122. Sumney, J . Identifying Paul’s Opponents: The Question of Method in 2 Connthians. JSNTSup 40. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990.-------- . ‘Servants of Satan, ’ ‘False Brothers’and Other Opponents ofPaul. JSNTSup 188. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Chap. 5. Tiede, D. L. The Charismatic Figure as Miracle Worker. SBLDS 1. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972. Tyson, J . B. “Paul’s O pponents at Philippi.” PRSt 3 (1976) 82-95. O p p o s it io n t o P a u l

Paul was facing opposition to himself while in prison. Strangely, this opposition came from fellow Christians as well as from the outside world (Phil 1:28-30). Paul called them “brothers” and said that they spoke the word of God and preached Christ (1:14-17). But these “brothers” did so with impure motives—envy (φθόνος), rivalry (έ'ρις), and selfish partisanship (έριθβία)—hoping thereby to add to Paul’s suffering (1:15-17). Although Paul could joyfully accept the results of their conduct—the fact that Christ was being preached (1:18)—it is impossible to imagine that he could have believed that their attitude and actions were right. Perhaps, then, the force of Paul’s personal feeling against his opponents came to the surface in his harsh words contained in 2:21: “All seek their own interests, not the interests of Jesus Christ”—a verdict that throws light on the Philippian situation, referred to in 2:1-4, and is the clue to his use of an already existing hymn in 2:6-11 and the models of Timothy and Epaphroditus (see Comment on 2:5-11; 2:19-24; 2:25-30). One cannot say with certainty who these opponents were. A. Christian Missionaries with a Divine-Man Theology. Some have suggested that they were Christian missionaries with a divine-man theology who believed that humility, meekness, imprisonment, and suffering were proofs that Paul was no apostle (or divine man) since these weaknesses, which Paul experienced, showed that he knew nothing of the trium phant power of Christ. According to Jewett, “The divine-man concept in the Hellenistic world assumed a correspondence between the missionary and the god he served” (NovT 12 [1970] 368; see also

li

Georgi, Opponents;Friedrich, “Gegner”; and li the survey in Martin, “O pponents”). Itr inn c u d o This particular identification of Paul’s opponents assumes (1) that the divine-man idea in the Hellenistic world has been satisfactorily dem onstrated (but see Baumbach, Kairos 13 [1971] 252-66; idem, “Irrlehrer,” 293-310; and Tiede, Charismatic Figure), (2) that this divine-man concept was sufficiently well formulated within the Christian church so as to be considered a theology adopted by a band of itinerant missionaries, and (3) that Ephesus was the place of Paul’s imprisonment, because these missionaries were surely the same as those Paul contended with when he wrote the Corinthian letters (Jewett, NovT 12 [1970] 364). The same opponents are then identified with the teachers in Rom 16:17-20 in view of some common lexical links (e.g., Rom 16:18 par. Phil 3:19), and some support for this identification is found if Rom 16 is a note to the church at Ephesus (see Martin, New Testament Foundations, 2:194-96). B. ChristianJudaizers. Others have suggested that Paul’s opponents while he was in prison were Judaizers: Jewish Christians who taught that in addition to believing in Christ one must also keep the Jewish law, including regulations about food and drink and especially the rite of circumcision (cf. Meyer, Lightfoot; but see Beare). Paul had been hard on these teachers, who at least claimed to come from James, and even on Peter, who was influenced by them (cf. Gal 2:11-3:5). Paul said that they preached “another gospel” that was not good news (Gal 1:6-7), they frustrated the grace of God (Gal 2:21), they bewitched people (Gal 3:1), and they sought their own interests, not those of Christ (Phil 2:21). They in turn would surely have been opposed to Paul, seeking, whenever possible, to stop him from proclaiming what they regarded as a partial gospel. They would likely, therefore, have taken advantage of Paul’s imprisonment, seeing it as a means to achieve their goal. If he had been put in prison because of the gospel, they would proclaim the gospel in order to keep him there and curtail his activities. It is true that Paul’s most intense struggle with the Judaizers was much earlier (ca. a .d . 54-57), but the virility of this movement kept it alive as an active force for years beyond the Apostolic Conference. It could still have been strong in Caesarea in a . d . 59 and is certainly in the background of Paul’s correspondence written from Ephesus and Macedonia in a . d . 52-54. The Judaizing menace was present at Rome (in his Roman epistle, written from Corinth, and, we have noted, especially in Rom 16, arguably written from Ephesus in view of its textual problem s). Although it may not be possible to identify with certainty those who opposed Paul while he was in prison, it is certain, however, that Paul was not concerned about himself and the threat to his own life (in spite of Phil 1:20-21; 2:17). He would gladly accept the consequences of Christians preaching Christ for whatever motive they might do this, if only Christ would be preached (1:18). What concerned him was the threat to his friends at Philippi and to their faith. It was this concern that caused Paul to promise destruction (απώλεια, 1:28; cf. 3:19) for those who opposed the Philippians, who made them afraid, and who attem pted to undermine their firmness in the gospel (1:27-29). It was this concern that caused him to turn on these same persons so suddenly and fiercely in 3:2 (see Klijn, Introduction, 109; idem, NovT 7 [1964-65] 278-84; Martin [1976], 22, however, does not think that the opponents m entioned in 1:28 have any relation to the ones in chap. 3 because the danger in 1:28 is real while the false teachers are only on the horizon in chap. 3).

F a lse T P ete a c h e r s n o p l'sO u a

li

Who were the false teachers in chap. 3? (We may note, but only in passing, the unlikely view of Doughty, NTS 41 [1995] 102-22, that 3:2-21 does not address real opponents but is a later insertion into the text.) Paul calls them by the term κύων, “dog” (3:2), a word intended not to describe but to insult (Koester, NTS 8 [196162] 317-19). To a Jew it meant the ignorant, the godless, the heathen, “die Nichtisraeliten” or non-Israelites (Str-B 3:621-22). Paul also says that they are τούς κακούς έργάτας, “those evildoers” (3:2). This is an expression too vague to be helpful in identifying the false teachers since it could refer to any num ber of adversaries. Paul’s next remark, however, narrows the field. The false teachers are people who were urging, or who were intending to urge upon, the Philippians the necessity of circumcision: βλέπετε τήν κατατομήν, ημείς γάρ έσμεν ή περιτομή, “watch out for the incision. For we are the circumcision” (3:2-3). In a bitter, aggressive, ironic play on words—κατατομή/περιτομή, “incision/circumcision”— Paul claims circumcision for Christians, denies it to Jews, and supplies the latter instead with a new jeering title of his own coinage” (Beare, 104; Koester, TDNT 8:109-11; see De Vries, “Paul’s ‘Cutting’ Remarks”). The three titles together— “dogs,” “evildoers,” “mutilators”—seem heavy with irony and thus seem to point, according to one interpretation, to non-Christian Jewish missionaries “who think they are clean, and do good and are inborn members of God’s people (cf. Rom 2:1729), but who have converted these features into the opposite through their opposition to the gospel” (Richardson, Israel, 114) or, according to an alternative interpretation, to Jewish-Christian missionaries (in view of Paul’s similar remarks in Galatians and 2 Corinthians). A. Non-Christian Jewish Missionaries. Paul’s difficulties in Thessalonica, Berea, Corinth, and Ephesus, after he left Philippi (Acts 16), came from Jews who were not convinced by his message and who considered him a menace to their own religion (Acts 17:5,13; 18:6; 19:9). A possible source of the trouble threatening the Philippians, then, may have been non-Christian Jews, possibly from Thessalonica (Richardson, Israel, 113; Klijn, Introduction, 109-10). Paul attempts to combat this threat from the opponents by claiming that a right standing (δικαιοσύνη) before God is achieved not through hum an effort, by painstakingly obeying the law and practicing circumcision, but rather by abandoning all confidence in these external things and staking one’s life wholly upon Jesus Christ. The passionate autobiographical section, which begins with “circumcised the eighth day” (Phil 3:5), is Paul’s way of proving the validity of his claims: “I personally have found this to be true! I had all the advantages of a Jew. I appraised their real value. I found them to be less than nothing when compared to Christ” (3:5-9). B. Gnostic Christian Missionaries. The middle part of chap. 3 (w 12-16) has been used to develop a theory that the Philippians also faced a second set of opponents—gnostics (“gnostische Schwärmerei,” or “gnostic enthusiasts,” according to Friedrich, 120). (The term “enthusiasm” carries a pejorative meaning in German Lutheran scholarship since it goes back to Luther’s struggle with radicals in his own fold, like the group around Carlstadt, Müntzer, and the people involved in the Peasants’ Revolt of 1525. See A. G. Dickens, Reformation and Society in Sixteenth Century Europe [London: Thames and Hudson, 1966] esp. 69-73.) They believed and taught that perfection could be attained on earth without waiting for, or without any need for, the resurrection.

It is not necessary, however, to see in these liv verses opponents differentItr innfrom c u d o those already m entioned in 3:2-3. The idea of “perfection” was not foreign to Judaism, “which states repeatedly that a person who has been circumcised and is true to the law can reach perfection” (Rigaux, NTS4 [1957-58] 238, cited by Klijn, Introduction, 109). In w 12-16, therefore, Paul may be seen to continue his attack againstJewish, rather than gnostic, opponents. Though they may offer immediate perfection, it is an earthbound (επίγεια) perfection (3:19) and comes to an end with the earth without any prospect of bodily transfiguration. Christ, however, offers true “perfection” and the promise of a new body, like his own glorious body, although this perfection cannot be attained this side of the resurrection (3:21; cf. 3:11). The expressions “their god is their belly” and “their glory is their sham e” need not mean Paul is addressing heretical libertinists with gnostic tendencies, who arose out of the Philippian church itself (so Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, 82-84). Rather, it is possible to see these remarks as allusions to Jewish practices involving foods for the belly that could and could not be eaten, on the one hand (cf. Rom 16:18, with the comments of C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, HNTC [New York: Harper & Row, 1957] 285), and circumcision that on occasion was considered a mark of shame and disgrace, on the other (cf. Hab 2:16 l x x ; Hos 4:7; Mic 1:11; Nah 3:5; Sir 4:21). Paul, then, may be seen to set his face against a single set of opponents in chap. 3: Jews who had their own missionaries proclaiming a message of righteousness and perfection that was attainable now simply by submitting to circumcision and complying with certain laws. Theirs was a seductive message because it offered visible and tangible tokens of God’s favor in the present, not in the future and invisible world. Paul begins with bitterly harsh words his attack against these adversaries who would underm ine the faith of the Philippians (3:2). He concludes his opposition to them with tears (3:18; Lohmeyer, 153, denies this, but cf. Rom 9:1-2). He weeps for these enemies of the cross (cf. Rom 11:28), for their end will be destruction (απώλεια, Phil 3:19; cf. 1:28, but here the setting may be different, as an alternative interpretation will suggest below). The apostle continues and concludes his polemic against the Jewish emissaries by contrasting the Christians’ πολίτευμα, “colony,” with that of Judaism (3:2021). πολίτευμα, “commonwealth,” “state,” “colony,” refers to “a group of people who live surrounded by an ethnologically different population and lead a more or less independent existence” (Klijn, Introduction, 110). The Jews outside of jerusalem had their own πολιτεύματα, “colonies,” in the many cities of the GrecoRoman world where they were perm itted to live according to their own laws. But theirs were earthly “colonies” and time-bound as a consequence. The Christians’ πολίτευμα, “colony,” by contrast, is in heaven and is thus eternal. Hence, there should be no incentive to turn to Judaism because the one who knows God through Jesus Christ is the “circumcision,” will achieve perfection and bodily transfiguration at the resurrection, and is a citizen of a heavenly colony that is eternal yet lies in the future. (Bornkamm, New Testament, 104; Fuller, Critical Introduction, 37; Koester, NTS 8 [1961-62] 317-32; Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics; Martin, New Testament Foundations, 2:205-8, all agree that Paul fights against only one group of adversaries. They do not agree, however, that this group was composed of Jews.)

C. Jewish-Christian Missionaries. Another e o l'srp u a P suggestion of the identity of the lv Philippians’ opponents recognizes that the identity markers of Judaism played a role in political and religious conflicts in which Jewish Christians were involved in both Judea and Asia in the midperiod of Paul’s career, and Pauline Christians were under pressure from Jewish Christian nomists to declare their ancestral loyalty (see Jewett, NTS17 [ 1 9 7 0 1 9 8 - 2 1 2 [71‫) ־‬. This setting of chap. 3 orients Paul’s warnings to what he regarded as a menace to his congregations in Galatia, Philippi, and Corinth—all in the Ephesian period. When he came to Rome, the struggle for his gospel in Galatia and at Corinth and at Philippi was a thing of the past. Any explanation of the problem in chap. 3 has to address the entire chapter, as Gnilka observed (21214‫) ־‬, and seek to answer three questions: What is the true circumcision? In what does the true knowledge of God exist? Is perfection possible in this life?Jewett (NovTl 2 [1970] 362 9 0 ‫ ) ־‬answers these related issueswith the view that these teachers claimed to offer “perfection ”by a denial of the future hope of a Parousia of Christ, and this was linked with membership in the true Israel by the puberty rite of circumcision, as in Galatia. If we add in the evident claim that Christians could enjoy a life exempted from hardship, strife, and loss—on the ground that they were already raised with Christ to a “heavenly life” here and now—then the complete picture is covered in the entire third chapter. This view helps account for the role of suffering in the letter (see Introduction, Exegesis and Rhetorical Analysis), explains why Paul sets himself and his associates as models of obedience in suffering, and throws light on the call to serious moral ideals that require strenuous effort to attain (Phil 3:1215‫) ־‬. Such ethical endeavors can only be achieved as life is lived in obedience to Christ’s lordship since he came to his enthronement as Lord only along a path of suffering (2:611‫) ־‬. Thus, the Philippians’ opponents can be understood to beJewish Christians who used their identity badges to prove their essential Jewishness and promised an immediate salvation with its corollaries of ethical indifference and a claim to “perfection” now, based on a realized eschatology. It may be well to paint in broad strokes the rival views so that readers may come to their own conclusions. Table 1 below is intended for that purpose. All agree that the vehemence of 3:18-21 is paralleled only in Gal 1:6-11 and 2 Cor 11:1315‫ ־‬. The issue is how to classify the identity and nature of the Philippian agitators.

Paul's Purposes for Writing Philippians Bibliography Garland, D. E. “The Composition and Unity of Philippians.” NovT 27 (1985) 141-73. Peterlin, D. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. Peterm an, G. W. Paul’s Gift from Philippi. R eed, J . T. Discourse Analysis. Schoon-Janssen, J . Umstrittene “Apologien”in den Paulusbriefen. GTA 45. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991. Swift, R. C. “The Theme and Structure of Philippians.” BSacl41 (1984) 234-54. Watson, D .F. “A Rhetorical Analysis of Philippians.” NovT 30 (1988) 57-88. Wick, P. Philipperbrief.

In assuming that the letter to the church at Philippi is a unity (see above, pp. xxx‫ ־‬xxxiv, one is not thereby forced to conclude that Paul had only one purpose in mind when he wrote this letter (against those who divide up the letter

Table 1. As ethnicJews

Various Identitieslv i of the Philippian Agitators As Judaizers

Itr inn c u d o

As Gnostic Christians

1. Their fate is 1. They are, says Paul, to be 1. They deny Paul’s “destruction” enemies of his gospel of theology of the because they reject sola gratia, sola fide, “by cross so they are the Messiah. grace and faith only.” its enemies. Their 2. Their god is κοιλία, 2. Circumcision, their badge, hopes are pinned “belly” (food laws). cuts them off from the on the exalted 3. Their ground of Messiah (Gal 5:4). They Christ, and they boasting is what claim circumcision leads profess to be raised they claim to to perfection, but Paul already with him. be their δόξα, denies this since they are Hence, no sufferings “glory,” but Paul sees still dominated by σάρξ, and no resurrection. it as no better than its “flesh” (= self), and have 2. κοιλία, “belly,” is opposite, “shame.” their “mind” on earthly their immorality, 4. They represent the realities. says Paul, and they Jewish Dispora, a 3. Their alleged heavenly are libertine. community of Israel, life now denies Paul’s 3. Their salvation is alwhich Paul contrasts future eschatology and is ready achieved, and with the heavenly offended by Paul’s so no progress is πολίτευμα, “colony.” sufferings, which (he says) thinkable. Indeed are a sign of his true status. their self-designation is τέλειοι, the “perfeet ones,” which Paul disowns.

and see each part as addressing different issues, e.g., W. Schmithals—see above, pp. xxx-xxxii). Indeed his purposes were many: (1) The simplest purpose to imagine is that, having a deep affection for the Philippians (cf. Phil 4:1), he wanted to write them. So when an opportunity came to have a letter taken to them (2:25-28), he wrote. It is also true that every letter has a situation, i.e., an occasion that calls it forth, as rhetorical criticism has rem inded us. See later, Introduction, Exegesis and Rhetorical Analysis. (2) Paul wrote also to bring them up to date on the news about himself, about his present situation, and about the prospects for his future, namely, that he was in danger and was suffering but was at the same time rejoicing and optimistic (1:12-26; 2:24). (3) Paul wrote to inform them of the erroneous but seductive tenets of some menacing ideas and to plead with them to follow him and his teaching as a pattern for living rather than to follow these teachers (3:2-21). (4) Paul wrote to encourage the Philippians to stand firm for the faith of the gospel, to inspire in them complete dedication to the will of Christ in spite of any crucible of suffering they might find themselves in—whether because of persecution that might come upon them from a hostile world (1:28-30), or because of the possibility of experiencing a martyr’s death for refusing to bow before any Lord but Jesus (2:11). Lohmeyer (5-6) saw this as the overriding purpose for Paul’s

writing to the Philippians and as a consequence e o l'srp u a P considered the letter addressed to them as a tractate on martyrdom written by a martyr to a community of martyrs. His key passage was 1:7, giving maximum value to the adjective συγκοινωνούν, “sharers together with” (26). Although Lohmeyer’s contribution had a profound impact on such Christians as Dietrich Bonhoeffer and perhaps other modern Christian martyrs, it is a thesis that cannot be wholly m aintained without straining the exegesis of the text (cf. Gnilka, 95 n. 12). (5) Paul wrote the Philippians to tell them about Epaphroditus, their messenger whom they sent to minister to his needs. Epaphroditus had been desperately ill; he had now recovered; he had not failed in his mission although he was returning home; and he was worthy of a place of very great honor among them, perhaps a place of leadership, for risking his life to carry out their orders and fulfill the work of Christ (2:25-30). (6) Paul wrote them to correct division within their ranks. He was proud of the Philippians and asked “for nothing better than to have his work judged by the record of this one church” (2:16; 4:1; Scott, 12). Yet he was keenly aware that all was not well within it. The fellowship was fractured, not so much by doctrinal (though these elements have been detected; see Peterlin, Paul's Letter to the Philippians) but by personal differences—differences arising out of rivalry, vanity, selfishness, and animosity. Repeatedly, therefore, Paul encourages them to unity (1:27; 2:2-4; 4:2) and sets before them the ideal of Christian “perfection” (3:1216), which is not sinlessness, as though “inability to sin” (posse non peccare) were attained in this life, but rather complete dedication to the will of God (cf. Dante, “In His will is our peace” = shalom), which later Paul will elaborate in Rom 12:12. Here τελ^ιότης, “perfection,” is expressed in the twice-repeated adjective 6ύάρ6στον, “pleasing [to God], ”and we may invoke the example of Epaphras, the Colossian pastor (Col 4:12) who prays that his people may stand “mature [tcXcioi] . . . in everything that God wills” ( n r sv ) . (7) Paul wrote to exhort the Philippians to rejoice irrespective of circumstances (Phil 2:18; 3:1; 4:4). He could do this, for he himself rejoiced, although in prison and facing the possibility of an unnatural death (1:18-20). χαρά, “joy,” and Xaipciv, “rejoice,” occur sixteen times in this letter. Bengel summarizes Paul’s intent in his succinct phrase: “Gaudeo, gaudete” (“I rejoice; so you rejoice”). (8) Paul wrote them to express his thanks for their gift of money (presumably it was a money gift; it may have been help of another kind, e.g., clothing) to ameliorate his situation in prison (4:10-20). This, however, surely cannot be the sole purpose for writing the letter, or even the chief purpose, because Paul leaves it to the last to mention (except for the reference discussed in 1:3) and then expresses his gratitude, as Dibelius remarked, “in that form of thankless thanks” (Fresh Approach, 164). Perhaps Paul’s words here constitute a delicate way of saying “I did not need your gift, but I appreciate the Christian love that prom pted it. ” (See Peterman, Paul's Gift from Philippi.) Philippians bears all the characteristics of a very personal letter, though with rhetorical patterns following some literary conventions of the day, where the reasons for writing are various and numerous. It is like a chat, the subject matter changing without notice, as in an informal conversation between friends. For this reason an outline of the letter is not easy to make. The letter follows no logical progression. Swift changes of topic and even of tone come as no surprise.

lvi

Philippians is the antithesis of Romans (or i Galatians; see H. D. Betz’s elaborate lv Itr inn c u d o discussion of the literary composition of Galatians in his commentary on that epistle [Galatians, Herm eneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) 14-25]). Recent study, however, has viewed Philippians as more structured and artistically designed than was earlier believed. Some commentaries (Bockmuehl, 40) follow outlines that simply relate to the contents, while studies in rhetorical criticism offer much more elaborate proposals. We may set down a few of the latter type for comparison, as summarized by Wick, Philipperbrief: (1) Swift (B Sac41 [1984] 234-54) presents the following analysis: 1:1-2 Salutation 1:3-11 Prologue 1:12-26 Biographical Prologue 1:27-4:9 Body 1:27-30 Introduction 2:1-4:1 Central Unit 4:2-9 Consolatory Unit 4:20 Epilogue

(2) Garland (NovT 27 [1985] 141-73) argues for the letter’s unity and sees elaborate examples of inclusio;e.g., in 1:12-26, προκοπή, “progress,”appears in 1:12 and again in 1:25 to complete the “inclusion”; similarly with the root πολιτ-, for “be a citizen, citizenship,” in 1:27 and 3:20-21. Phil 3:1-21 is a digression; then Paul returns to his main theme, to call Euodia and Syntyche to unity (4:2-3). Thus there are three components to the rhetorically framed letter (akin to Aristotle’s rubric of “a beginning, a middle, and an end” [Poet. 1450b.26, cited in Martin, Hymn of Chnst, 34 n. 2]). (3) Watson (NovT 30 [1988] 57-88) also champions the epistle’s unity, and divides it thus: 1:3-26 Exordium (Proem) 1:27-30 Narratio 2:1-3:21 Probatio (Demonstration) 2:1-11 The first development of the propositio 2:12-18 The second development of the propositio 2:19-30 Digression 3:1-21 The third development of the propositio 4:1-20 Peroratio 4:1-9 Repetitio 4:10-20 Adfectus

Obviously this model differs from the two earlier arrangements, both in description and division. (4) Schoon-Janssen (Umstrittene “Apologien” in den Paulusbriefen) criticizes Watson and is suspicious of Schenk, who bases his rhetorical analysis on a collection of separate letters. (Letter A consists of 4:10-20 with conclusion at 4:21-23. Letter B contains a prescript, 1:1-2, and expression of thanks and prayers, 1:311. An Inform ation Bulletin begins with 1:12-26, leading to the principal concern of Paul in 1:27-2:18, which is followed by plans to send his associates, 2:19-30; this is developed into expressions of joy in 3:1 + 4:4-17. Letter C is a

fragment of a warning letter, 3:2-4:3, 8,O e9.) In a sage comment Schoon-Janssen lix tlin u remarks that “when Schenk tries to support a partition-theory by rhetorical analysis, Watson, using the same methods, tries to prove a unity” (141). (5) Such skepticism leads Wick (Philipperbrief) to seek a combination of rhetorical and epistolary conventions in the construction of Philippians, and he regards the question of the combination of these two elements as “very fruitful” (173). We should therefore find in the letter a set of multiple themes, arranged in parallels (note his tables of 2:13-18 par. 4:4-8 and 2:19-30 par. 4:10-20; but some of these word occurrences are overdrawn, as Reed, Discourse Analysis, notes; see below, pp. lxxi-lxxii), with no fewer than five separate letters in which the center point of the third letter (at the middle of canonical Philippians) is the hymn of 2:6-11 (Wick, Philipperlmef, 61). These variegated themes offer a theological “point of view,” expressed as Imitation of Christ, Joy in the Lord, and Fellowship, especially in this letter but common to other Pauline letters (Wick, Philipperlmef, 191).

Outline of Philippians This outline assumes the letter’s unity along with similar outlines in O ’Brien, Fee (1995), and shorter commentaries. I. Introductory section (1:1-11) A. Salutation (1:1-2) B. Thanksgiving and prayer (1:3-11) II. Information bulletin: news and instructions (1:12-2:30) A. News about Paul (1:12-26) B. Instructions for the church (1:27-2:18) 1. To stability in the faith (1:27-30) 2. To harmony and humility (2:1-4) 3. Kerygmatic center of the letter: Christ, the supreme encouragement to humility and unselfishness (2:5-11) 4. Application: to obedience (2:12-18) with Paul as model C. News about Timothy and Epaphroditus (2:19-30) and their role as models 1. About Timothy (2:19-24) 2. About Epaphroditus (2:25-30) III. Digression: warning against false teachings with Paul’s experience and life as a model to follow (3:1-21) A. Warning against circumcision and pride in human achievements (3:1-3) B. Paul’s own life, past and present: an answer to opponents (3:4-11) C. Warning against perfection now (3:12-16) D. Paul’s life: a model to imitate (3:17) E. Warning against imitating other teachers (3:18-19) F. Paul’s hope in the future and unseen (3:20-21) IV. Exhortations to harmony and joy (4:1-9) V. Gratitude expressed for the Philippians’ generosity (4:10-20) VI. Conclusion (4:21-23)

Aspects of the Theology lx of Philippians

Itr inn c u d o

Bibliography Barrett, C. K. FromFirst Adam to Last. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1962. Bauckham, R. J . God

Crucified: Monotheism and Chnstology in the New Testament. Didsbury Lectures 1996. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. Bornkamm, G. Paul. Trans. D. M. G. Stalker. New York: H arper & Row, 1971. Brucker, R. “Chnstushymnen ”oder “epeidiktischePassagen ”?Studien zum Stilwechsel im Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt. FRLANT 176. Göttingen: V andenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997. Bultmann, R. Theology of the New Testament. Trans. K. Grobel. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1951. 1:185-352. Cerfaux, L. Chnst in the Theology of St. Paul. Trans. G. Webb and A. Walker. New York: H erder & H erder, 1959. Conzelmann, H. An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament. Trans. J. Bowden. New York: H arper 8c Row, 1969. Cullmann, O. The Chnstology of the New Testament. Trans. S. C. Guthrie and C. A. M. Hall. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959. Davies, W. D. Paul and RabbinicJudaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology. 5th ed. Mifflintown, PA: Sigler Press, 1998. De Lacey, D. R. “Image and Incarnation in Pauline Christology—A Search for Origins.” TynBu130 (1979) 1-28. Dunn, J . D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Ellis, E. E. “Dating the New Testam ent.” NTS 26 [1980] 487-502. ---------. Paul and His Recent Interpreters. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961.---------. Paul’s Use of the Old Testament. London: Oliver 8c Boyd, 1957. Feine, P. Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments. 8th ed. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1951. Fitzmyer, J . A. “Pauline Theology.” JBC 2:800-822. Hengel, M. Judaism and Hellenism. Trans. J. Bowden. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. Hengel, M., and A. M. Schwemer. Paul between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997. Hopkins, K. (with P. J . R oscoe). Conquerors and Slaves. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1978. Jerem ias, J . “Key to Pauline Theology.” ExpTim 76 (1964-65) 27-30. Kim, S. The Ongin of Paul’s Gospel. 2d ed. WUNT 2.4. Tübingen: MohrSiebeck, 1984.---------. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Klausner, J . From Jesus to Paul. Trans. W. F. Stinespring. New York: Macmillan, 1943. Knox, W. L. St. Paul and the Church of the Gentiles. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1939. Kreitzer, L. J . “‘When He at Last Is First!’: Philippians 2:9-11 and the Exaltation of the Lord.” In Where Chnstology Began: Essays on Philippians 2. Ed. R. P. Martin and B. J. Dodd. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998. 111-27. Kümmel, W. The Theology of the New Testament. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. Ladd, G. E. A Theology of the New Testament. Rev. by D. A. Hagner. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. Longenecker, R. N. Paul, Apostle of Liberty. New York: H arper & Row, 1964. Marshall, 1. H. “Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity.” NTS 19 (1972-73) 271-87. M oule, C. F. D. The Ongin of Chnstology. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1977. Munck, J . Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. Trans. F. Clarke. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1959. Nock, A. D. St. Paul. New York: H arper & Row, 1963. Pfitzner, V. C. Paul and the Agon Motif: Traditional Athletic Imagery in the Pauline Literature. NovTSup 16. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Ridderbos, Η. N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Trans. J. R. DeWitt. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. Schlosser,J . “La Figure de Dieu selon l’épître aux Philippiens.” N TS41.3 (1995) 378-99. Schoeps, H. Paul. Trans. H. Knight. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961. Schweitzer, A. The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle. Trans. W. Montgomery. London: A. & C. Black, 1931. Stauffer, E. New Testament Theology. Trans. J. Marsh. London: SCM Press, 1955. Stuhlmacher, P. Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Vol. 1, Grundlegung: VonJesus z u Paulus. 2d ed. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997. Whiteley, D. E. H. The Theology of St. Paul. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964. Wright, N. T. The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1991.

Further bibliography on Pauline theology may y be found in M artin, R . P. New Testament lg h fT ecto sp A Books for Pastor and Teacher: Revised and Updated to 2002. Eugene, OR: W ipf 8c Stock, 2002 .

Paul’s writings in general do not provide a systematic presentation of his thought. And this is especially true of his letter to the Philippians. Intensely intimate, it lacks formality. Paul sets down his ideas as they come to him, and they are primarily concerned with personal matters—himself, his friends, Timothy and Epaphroditus, and the problems and generosity of the Philippian community. It is a far cry from being a theological treatise. And yet unconsciously he writes theologically, or christologically, for his mind is saturated with thoughts of Christ, God, the social world, salvation, the Spirit, the eschatological hope of the resurrection, the Parousia, the new world, and so on. And all this is on the background of life in a town in the Roman province of Macedonia (so Oakes, Philippians, 77-84) and a scene where the Philippians are under duress and their sufferings call out for a theodicy (Phil 1:28-30). The background for Paul’s thought was not primarily Hellenistic philosophy or Hellenistic mystery religions, as has been believed and taught for a long while (see Fitzmyer, JBC 2:802-3; Nock, St. Paul; Stauffer, New Testament Theology, 35-36; Whiteley, Theology, 1-8; and more recently Marshall, NTS 19 [1972-73] 271-87; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism; Ellis, NTS 26 [1980] 497). Paul was born into a Jewish home that rigidly adhered to traditional Jewish beliefs and customs (Phil 3:5). He was sent “to the holy city of his people to attend the law school, before the world outside the ghettos could gain possession of his affections” (Stauffer, Theology, 35). He attended the school of Hillel; studied under Rabbi Gamaliel (according to Acts 22:3); joined the order of strict observance of the law, the Pharisaic order (cf. Phil 3:5-6); and earned the confidence of his superiors (see Hengel and Schwemer, Paul between Damascus and Antioch). Paul had a promising career as a teacher of the law until the Damascus-road experience. While on a mission to Damascus to persecute the church, he encountered—or better, in his own words, he “was seized by” (Phil 3:12)—the exalted Lord of the church, Jesus (Acts 9:1-8), and the whole course of his life was radically altered. He who had persecuted Jesus now preached Jesus. The effects of this encounter never wore off (see Kim, Origin of Paul’s Gospel). When Paul wrote to the Philippians many years later, and perhaps near the end of his career or in the mid-50s, he still stressed the overwhelming and lifeshattering importance of Christ. Never once did he himself regret giving up everything to gain Christ, and he had no compunction about urging others to follow his example (Phil 3:7-8, 17). One might say that Paul was obsessed with Christ, because for him Christ was everything (1:20-21). His Lord was divine and preexistent, humble to the point of becoming hum an and dying on a cross, exalted to heaven, adored by the universe and all its powers, and given a new name that was above all names, Lord (κύριος, 2:6-11). This centrality of Jesus Christ in the universe, in the world, in the life of both church and congregation, vibrates throughout the letter to the Philippians, but not in any formal way. Rather, even the great christological hymn (2:6-11) is introduced as an illustration of what the Christian’s life should be like—humble, self-giving, a life for others lived under the exalted lordship of the cosmic Christ. And the

i lx

intimate personal testimony of what Christlxim eant to Paul is seemingly the inevitable Itr inn c u d o outcome of a passionate denunciation of false teachers. Had he not become so agitated, the curtain of his inner life might not have been drawn aside so completely so that the dramatic encounter between Christ and his people might be seen on display in Christ’s lordship, which sets the pattern for his people both to confess his authority and live out what life in fellowship in conformity to him means. This conformity is not to his example, as though Paul’s call were “Do whatjesus did” (an impossible feat!), but to the way of life he showed in his obedience, which in turn requires a corresponding submission to his authority (2:5, 12). As 2:6-11 is the centerpiece of the letter and its Christology governs the tenor of what Paul writes, so Paul and his colleagues are the hum an models of suffering and sacrifice. They have “caught” this from their Lord, and such examples of selflessness and altruism, seen in Timothy’s “worth” (2:22) and Epaphroditus’s sacrifice (2:27-30), are a powerful rebuke to the self-centeredness and arrogance of some of the Philippian t Paul does not elaborate on howjesus Christ effects this in a believer. Christ died a death on a cross (2:8), but Paul does not say here that it was for “our sins” that he died, as in the traditional gospel (1 Cor 15:3). Rather he (or rather, the quoted hymn) says tm possiblywas encourag edbsupreme ytheirleaders. (1:;.25-) em rupbcJC lifeogdns,thaw A atbers, death the display of obedience on Christ’s part as a paradigm for Christians to accept and practice (2:12). Incorporated in Christ by faith, Christians are found to be “right with God,” that is, not having a “righteousness” (i.e., a right relationship) of their own earning as a relationship based on covenant fidelity, but having the righteousness that comes from faith in Christ, given by God in response to faith (3:9). Christ alone is sufficient to put men and women right with God. Jesus Christ, now in heaven, will come again to deliver Christians and transfigure their bodies, making them like his own resplendent body (3:21). The day of Christ’s return, the day of transfiguration, is near (4:5; on one view of this text, see below, Comment on 4:5). Jesus Christ was the central “fact” of Paul’s life, from the Damascus encounter to the destiny of his martyrdom, and this reality can be seen cropping up everywhere in his brief letter to the Philippians. Jeremias wrote that “the hour of Damascus is the key to Pauline theology” (ExpTim 76 [1964-65] 30, echoed by later writers such as Stuhlmacher and Kim). Yet there are some interesting restraints here as well as those that are characteristic of Paul elsewhere: (1) Paul never addressesjesus Christ directly, either in a prayer or in thanksgiving. He does not call on him to bear witness to any aspect of his own conduct, nor does he direct his doxology to him, even if the hymn of 2:6-11 is sung in his honor as an encomium, a laus Christi, “praise of Christ” (Brucker, “Christushymnen” oder “epeidiktische Passagen”? 319). Even Paul’s final salutation, “May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you each one” (4:23), seems to be a studied avoidance of any kind of direct address to Jesus. Only God the Father is the object of prayer and thanksgiving (1:3; 4:6). Only God is called on to bear witness (1:8). Only God receives the doxology of praise (2:11; 4:20); only God is directly addressed. (2) Paul is careful to distinguish between God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (1:2). Jesus is never called “God” (Θ6ός) in Philippians (but see 2:6 and cf. Rom 9:5 and 2 Thess 1:12, both debated). The “fruit of righteousness” is produced through Jesus Christ, but it is for the glory and praise of God (1:11; cf. 2:11).

Christians are called “children of God” (2:15), i lx not of Christ. RighteousnessItr inncomes c u d o from (έκ) God through (δια) faith in Christ or through the faithfulness of Christ (3:9). God calls his people by Christ (3:14). God is the God of peace (4:9) who brings peace to them in/by Christ (4:7). Why this distinction? Why this restraint in vocabulary on the part of an apostle so obviously committed to the lordship of Jesus Christ? Perhaps it was due to the influence of Jewish monotheism on Paul, the former Pharisee (cf. 1 Cor 8:5-6). Convinced as Paul was from the Christencounter on the Damascus road thatjesus was divine, on a par with but not God himself (cf. Phil 1:1; 2:6,11), and one to be worshiped by the church as well as by the cosmos (2:10), he, nevertheless, could not quickly or easily bring himself to transfer to Jesus a title that he regarded to be exclusively that of Israel’s covenant God; hence scholars call Paul’s Christology “christological m onotheism ” (see Moule, OHgin; Wright, Climax; De Lacey, TynBul30 [1979] 1-28; Bauckham, God Crucified; Kreitzer, “When He at Last Is First!” for helpful suggestions in this difficult area of names for Jesus).

Text of the Letter Bibliography Aland, K. Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments. Berlin: de

Gruyter, 1963.---------. Studien zur Überlieferung des Neuen Testaments und seines Textes. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1967.58-60,91-136. Aland, K., M. Black, et al., eds. The Greek New Testament. 4th ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1993. Bockmuehl, M. The Epistle to Philippians. 40-41. Metzger, B . M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration. 3d ed. New York: Oxford UP, 1992. Nestle, E., K. Aland, and B. Aland, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. Silva, M. Philippians. 21-27.

No major difficulties are posed by the textual tradition of Philippians. The oldest witness to the Greek text of this letter is the Chester Beatty Papyrus ($p46) , dating from about a . d . 200, now kept in Dublin. It contains Phil 1:1, 5-15, 17-28, 30; 2:1-12, 14-27, 29-30; 3:1-8, 10-21; 4:2-12, 14-23. The other papyri, 46‫ א‬A B D Ρ Φ 33 81 and Latin and Sahidic versions). The ιηίΜτών νεκρών, “o f the dead,” though the more com mon phrase, eliminates the striking emphasis o f έξανάστασιν . . . εκ, “resurrection . . . from .” It must be considered secondary.

Form/Structure/Setting In this section, linked as it is to the previous one by the cognate noun πατοίθησιν, “confidence” (π 6 ποιθότ€ 9 , “p u ttin g co n fid en ce” [v 3 ].. .π6ποιθησιν, “co nfidence” [v 4 ]), Paul begins to explain to his friends why he has spoken so harshly against the Jewish opponents. Using himself, “an authentic Jew ” (Benoit, cited in M artin [1959], 141), as an exam ple, he draws back the curtain on his past religious life to p erm it the Philippians to understand, n o t abstractly b u t con cretely, what it m eans to consider oneself no longer religious except through the Spirit, no longer able to boast except in C hrist Jesus, and no longer able to rely on hu m an privilege or achievem ent to gain favor with God (see B arth). O ne is no t surprised, therefore, to note the p rep o n d eran ce o f the first-person singular p ro n o u n ru n n in g th ro u g h o u t this section. Such a p h en o m en o n n o t only accords well with the highly personal character o f Philippians, b u t it accentuates the intensely personal nature of P aul’s own religious experience. Nowhere else in his letters does Paul m ake so clear, and with such feeling, how vitally im portant the person o f Christ was to him and how trem endous was the im pact of the resurrected Christ u p o n his life and outlook as he does here in these verses. H ere is “one of the m ost rem arkable personal confessions which antiquity has bequeathed to u s” (B onnard, as q u oted by M artin [1959], 140). But as a preface to this hum ble confession of reliance upon Christ, Paul, in what seems to be a rather surprising way, first presents his own pedigree, listing his heritage

182

Philippians 3:4-11

and achievements as bases for personal boasting (καύχημα; cf. v 3) or as grounds for showing that he is “somebody” (cf. Betz, O n Self-Praise”; on the whole subject of “boasting,” see R. Bultmann, 72)ΛΓΓ3:645-54). Paul may be doing this to “put down” his adversaries since the form he uses is somewhat reminiscent of epideictic oratory— a speech form designed to praise or blame (on this them e in Paul and the moralists, see P. Marshall, Enmity in Corinth). Topics for such oratory on which praise was founded—descent, education, wealth, kinds of power, titles to fame, citizenship, and so on—could also serve as bases for blame (see Rhetorica ad Herennium [LCL 403] 17375; Plato, Gorg. 477C; Phileb. 48E; Leg. 697B, 727A-C; Aristotle, Eth. nic. 1.8 § 1098b; Ps.‫־‬ Aristotle, Rhet. Alex. § 1440b. 13). Hence, Paul in praising himself may simply be attem pting to diminish the status of his opponents by implicitly faulting them for not being his equal. Paul uses the ancient technique of comparison (βγω μάλλορ, “I m ore than they” [v 4]) in his favor and to the disadvantage of those with whom he compares himself (see H. D. Betz, Galatians, H erm eneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979] 303; and on this rhetorical feature in the “Fool’s Speech” [Narrenrede] see Zmijewski, DerStil der paulinischen “Narrenrede, ”discussed in R. P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC 40 [Waco, TX: W ord Books, 1986] 356-424). W hether this can be satisfactorily dem onstrated may n o t be certain. But one thing can be said with assurance: Paul recounts m atters o f his descent, rights and privileges, titles o f distinction, and so on at this crucial po in t in his letter n o t really to exalt him self (boasting about him self is distasteful to the apostle— 2 Cor 11:1629; 12:1-10) b u t to m ake clear to all that when he proceeds to disparage personal assets th at can m ake one p ro u d and self-reliant, he does so n o t because he is a “have-not,” a frustrated person lashing ou t in envy owing to his own lack of resources or achievem ents, but because he is one who, although having everything, learn ed he had nothing when he did n o t have Christ. T here are them es and words in this section that link it with earlier parts of Philippians and th at argue still m ore strongly for its integrity (see Mackay, N TS 7 [1961] 161-63; Pollard, N TS 13 [1966-67] 57-59; G arland, N o vT 27 [1985] 14173). For exam ple, the expression “being found in hum an fo rm ” (Phil 2:8) is echoed in the words “that I may be found in h im ” (3:9). T he purpose o f God in exalting Jesus— th at every being should openly and gladly acknowledge him as L ord (2:11)—is answered by P aul’s confession “C hrist Jesus my Lord” (3:8; this is a notew orthy title since it is the only place in the generally accepted Pauline letters w here Paul refers to “my L o rd ”). T he rare word κέρδος, “gain ,” is found in both 1:21 an d 3:7. H o ulden (106) observes: More broadly, it is certainly the case that the themes of humility and obedience are common to both parts of the epistle. 2:1-11 and 3:8 make the parallel between Christ’s self-abasement and Paul’s own personal surrender of what was dearest to him on the worldly plane. (Yet it may be argued that this appeal to a suggested parallelism fails because, while C hrist’s refusal to grasp his prize was affirm ed, P aul’s choice h ad different results; see M artin, Hymn of Chnst, 145-46.) T here is thus no good reason for separating this section from the rest of Philippians or for failing to consider it a p art of the m ain body o f the letter. The strong emotions so apparent in w 1-3 continue in w 7-11. Once again Paul

Comment

183

expresses his feelings most powerfully in a rhetorical fashion that is almost poetic— short verbless phrases, rhythmic expressions successively introduced with κατά, “according to,” chiasm (esp. in v Sd-9a;so Schenk, 310), polysyndeton, hapax legomena (words used only once in the n t or in Paul), a piling up of conjunctions, the careful choice of tense, the extended fuguelike playing with the themes of profit (κέρδος, “gain”; Kcp8aivc1v, “to gain”) and loss (ξημία, “loss”; ξημιοϋν, “to lose”)—both are commercial terms—and so on. Thus, with all his considerable skill with words, Paul shares with the Philippians the all-surpassing worth of Christ Jesus his Lord. Once again he employs the tools of the rhetorical schools to serve him in powerfully expressing his conviction that no person profits who does not surrender to Christ and no person loses who surrenders everything for Christ. For a study of the Pauline uses of prepositions in this passage, see Reed, Discourse Analysis, chap. 5. Comment 4 καίπβρ έγώ έχων πεποίθησιν και έν σαρκί, “A lthough I have good reasons for putting confidence in myself, I will n o t do so. ” Paul has said (v 3) that believers, those who alone can rightly lay claim to the title “the circum cision,” are those who, am ong o th er things, do n o t rely on themselves to earn the favor of God. T heir “confidence ”for this does n o t lie at all within themselves (ούκ έν σαρκι π6ττοιθότ6ς, “who p u t no confidence in ourselves”) . In fact, an even stronger ren d erin g may be m andated by P aul’s use of σαρξ, “flesh,” for “self-life”: “We have no confidence in any object o f tru st.” In this case Paul is referring to the “badges” of his Jewish heritage, o f which circum cision is selected as an exam ple. A nd yet, surprisingly, having ju st m ade this im portant statem ent, he proceeds to write “although I have good reasons for p utting confidence in myself” (π6ποίθησις can m ean “ground o f confidence ” as well as “confidence ”; BDAG; V incent). 11 is n o t p ro p e r to weaken this rem ark by translating it “though I m ight have confidence” or “I could have confidence,” and so on (cf. kjv, gnb, jb ), for the construction indicates that Paul fully intends to say that he does indeed (καίπ6ρ) have whatever it takes to boast in or rely u pon himself. But his sentence is elliptical—a subordinate participial phrase w ithout a m ain verb upon which it can depend. And the ellipse m ust be supplied from the context before it becom es clear what Paul is driving at, e.g., ού 8 έσομαι ττ€ττοιθώς ev σαρκί, “but I will n o t p u t confidence in myself. ” T he apostle for a m om ent “places him self on the same standing g ro u n d ” with the Jews (Lightfoot) or Judaizers to show th at he is fully on a par with the best of them . But he im m ediately removes him self from th at place, refusing to trust in himself, that is, in his self-life, his σαρξ, “flesh.” Why? Because he has discovered through his en co u n ter with the living Christ that nothing he received by way of heritage or did by way o f hum an achievem ent can be the m eans of life or the grounds of his righteousness before God—only the redeem ing significance of C hrist’s death and resurrection can becom e these for him or anyone (see Ridderbos, Paul, 138). Thus, although as an authentic Jew he has every reason to rely u po n him self (ev σαρκί, “in the flesh,” “in m yself’) and m ake a p ro u d claim to his identity m arkers as a pious, Torah-abiding Pharisee, he will n o t do this! 61 τ ις δοκβΐ άλλος πβποιθέναι ev σαρκί, έγώ μάλλον, “But if any o th er people think th at they have reasons for confidence in themselves, I have m ore reasons than they.” Paul refuses to rely u p o n him self to establish the righteousness

184

Philippians 3:4-11

dem an d ed by God n o t because he thinks th at he is inferior to anyone else, lacks a p ro p e r pedigree, o r is devoid o f significant accom plishm ents, if that is what it takes. W ithout hesitation the apostle proceeds to say that he possesses personal advantages g reater than (εγώ μάλλον, “I m ore than [they]”) any others who consider (δοκεΐ, “th in k ”) th at they have grounds for boasting in themselves. T he them e o f “boasting” (καυχάσθαι) has links with 2 C or 10-13, which places Paul in opposition to the “emissaries from Jam es,” who are b ra n d ed in 2 Cor 11:4,13-15 as S atan’s envoys. Since 2 C orinthians was w ritten shortly after P aul’s n ear death at Ephesus (1 Cor 15:32; 2 C or 1:8-10, 4:11), this may suggest (1) th at the opposition in Philippians is from the Judaizers, i.e., Jewish messianists who appealed to Jam es, the L o rd ’s brother, as th eir authority, and (2) th at the letter to the Philippians was com posed in Ephesus (see Collange, Enigmes; b u t cf. also Collange, 17-19). 5 πε ριτομή οκταήμερος, “I was circum cised on the eighth day of my life. ” Paul now begins to list his advantages, the first of which is contained in a terse verbless expression, lit. “with respect to circum cision an eighth‫־‬day‫־‬e r.” περιτομ ή, “circum cision,”a n o u n with passive force in the dative case (here a dative o f reference: “with respect to ”; BDF §197), is coupled with οκταήμερος, an adjective n o t found elsewhere in the n t b u t used subs tan tivally here to m ean “an eighth-day p erso n ” (cf. J o h n 11:39). T ogether the words describe one who was circum cised on the eighth day o f his life. With only two words, then, the apostle has m ade for him self the p ro u d est claim any Jew could m ake, namely, th at in strict conform ity with the law he was circum cised on precisely the right day (Gen 17:12; Lev 12:3; cf. Luke 1:59; 2:21). Unlike Ishm ael, who was circum cised w hen he was th irteen years old (Gen 17:25; contrast Gen 21:4), as were his descendants (cf. Josephus, Ant. 1.12.2 §§213-14), an d unlike h eath en proselytes to Judaism who were circum cised as adults, Paul was circum cised on the eighth day by parents who were m eticulous in fulfilling the prescriptions o f the law. He was a true Jew, a Jew by birth. H e was no proselyte converted to Judaism in later life, no ‘Johnny-com e-lately,” we may say. εκ γένους ’Ισραήλ, “I am an Israelite by birth. ” Next, Paul proudly affirms that he descended from the nation of Israel. He m eans by this that he possessed all the rights and privileges of G od’s chosen people because he belonged to them by birth, not by conversion. ’Ισραήλ, “of Israel,” a genitive of apposition, refers here to the race (γένος) and n o t to the patriarch. It was the sacred nam e for the Jews as the nation o f the theocracy, the people in covenant relationship with God (J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, 7th ed. [London: Macmillan, 1881] 224; Rom 9:4; 11:1; 2 Cor 11:22). The nam e Israel calls to m ind the glorious history of an illustrious nation (see G. von Rad, K G. Kuhn, and W. Gutbrod, TD N T3:356-91) and was of such continuing significance that apparently Hellenistic Jews, or m ore likely Jewish Christians as in 2 Cor 11:22, used it prom inently in their propaganda efforts (Georgi, Opponents, 46-49; Collange; Martin [1976]; Bruce; O ’Brien). φυλής Β ενιαμίν, “I belong to the tribe of B enjam in.” Again there is a note of pride expressed as the apostle writes these words; for the tribe of Benjam in, tho u g h small (Ps 68:27), was nevertheless highly esteem ed: (1) Its p ro g en ito r was the younger o f the two sons born to Rachel, Ja c o b ’s favorite wife (Gen 30:23, 24; 35:16-18). (2) O f all the sons o f Jacob, only Benjam in was born in the Prom ised Land (Gen 35:9-19; see Str‫־‬B 3:622) and singled out as a tribe specially “loved by Yahweh” (D eut 33:12; Fee [1995], 307). (3) From this tribe cam e Israel’s first

Comment

185

an o in ted king (whose nam e the apostle carried; Beare, Moule; cf. 1 Sam 9:1-2). (4) T he holy city o f Jerusalem and the tem ple were within the borders o f the territory assigned to B enjam in (Judg 1:21). (5) T he tribe o f Benjam in rem ained loyal to the house of David at the time o f the break-up o f the m onarchy (1 Kgs 12:21). (6) After the exile, Benjam in and Ju d ah form ed the core o f the new colony in Palestine (Vincent; cf. Ezra 4:1). (7) T he tribe o f Benjam in always held the post o f h o n o r in the army, a fact that gave rise to the battle cry “B ehind you, O B enjam in!” (Judg 5:14; Hos 5:8). (8) T he fam ous M ordecai, responsible for the great national deliverance com m em orated in the feast o f Purim , was a Benjam ite (Esth 2:5). (9) Benjam in resisted the inroads that pagan culture m ade am ong the o th er tribes and rem ained “p u re ” (Gnilka). (10) It is possible th at respect for Benjam in can be traced fu rth er back to an even earlier period than that indicated in the references cited above (see Parrot, Abraham, 42-51; Collange). Paul, then, seems to revel in the fact th at he is a Benjam ite (as in Rom 10:1; 11:1). He seems also to have in h erited the good qualities of strength, courage, purity, and loyalty th at characterized his tribe. Ε β ρ α ίο ς 6ξ Εβραίων, “I am a H ebrew b o rn of H ebrew parents.” In addition, Paul can say th at he is a “H ebrew o f H ebrew s.” H e may have m eant by this that he was a “H ebrew b o rn of H ebrew p aren ts” (jb; note the force of the preposition 6 k, “from ,” “o u t o f ’) , i.e., that there was no non-Jewish blood in his veins. O r he may have m ean t that, like his parents and grandparents before him , he was b ro u g h t up to speak the H ebrew language (Moule, ExpTim 70 [1958-59] 100-102; Str‫־‬B 3:622; b u t see also W. G utbrod, TDNT 3:389-90) and carefully to observe the Jewish national way o f life. H e may, then, in effect be contrasting him self with the Hellenists, who were Jews who usually spoke G reek and who allowed their style of life to be affected by Gentile custom s and culture (Acts 6:1; 22:2; cf. 2 Cor 11:22; the identity o f “H ellenists” in early Christianity continues to be debated; see H engel, “Between Jesus and P aul”; C. C. Hill, DLNT, 462-69). A lthough Paul him self was b o rn outside o f Palestine (in Tarsus) an d therefore could rightly be labeled a H ellenist, he in essence rejects this label, because n o t only was he the son o f Pharisees (Acts 23:6), who saw to it that he was educated precisely in the ways o f the Jewish law in Jerusalem u n d e r a H ebrew teacher (Acts 22:3), b u t he him self gladly ad o pted the H ebrew language as his own language (Acts 21:40; 22:2) and accepted the customs and m an n er o f life o f his forefathers (Acts 26:4-5). Paul claims, therefore, to be a H ebrew o f Hebrews, one belonging to the elite o f his race, tracing his ancestry beyond Tarsus to Palestine (see van U nnik, Tarsus or Jerusalem? 46-47). While this may be taken to have provided a safeguard against the influences of hellenization by the protective walls of Jewish tradition (D ibelius), this alleged “p ro tec tio n ” o f Second Tem ple Judaism in a cocoon o f isolation may be less than once thought, as the walls o f cultural and linguistic separation have now been shown to be porous (I. H. Marshall, N TS 19 [1972-73] 271-87; H engel, Judaism and Hellenism). Paul may have been a “true Jew ,” yet at the same time he was o pen to G reek influences em anating from the Diaspora. κατά νόμον Φ αρισαίος, “With regard to the Jewish law Iwas [and am] aP harisee.” Paul turns now from the things that he enjoyed as a result of his birth and upbringing to describe those advantages he possessed by virtue of his own choice and diligence. He does this with a series o f three terse phrases, none of which has a verb and each of which begins with the preposition κατά, “according to,” “in relation to,”

186

Philippians 3:4-11

“concerning,” “as far as it concerns,” “in respect to,” and so on. The first of these, lit. “according to law, a Pharisee,” m eans “with regard to the Jewish law I was [and am] a Pharisee.” A lthough the word Φ αρισαίος, “Pharisee,” is used ninety-nine times in the n t , this is its only occurrence outside the Gospels and Acts. T he Pharisees were a “small” religious party in Paul’s day (Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 §§32-45; 18.1.3 §§1215;/. W. 2.8.14 §§162-63), but they were the strictest o f the Jewish groups (Acts 26:5) as far as adherence to the law was concerned. Not content merely to obey the law of Moses, the Pharisees bound themselves also to observe every one of the myriad of com m andm ents contained in the oral law, the interpretive traditions o f the scribes (see O ’Brien, 375-76). The m ost ardent of the Pharisees scrupulously avoided even accidental violations o f the law and did m ore than they were com m anded to do (Caird; M oor e, Judaism, l:66;Jerem ias ,Jerusalem, 246-67). Paul, a son o f Pharisees (Acts 23:6) and a disciple of the great Pharisee Gamaliel (Acts 5:34; 22:3), chose to be a Pharisee him self and set him self to be the most earnest of the earnest observers o f the Jewish law (Gal 1:14). Phansee for Paul was n o t a term of reproach bu t a title o f honor, a claim to “the highest degree o f faithfulness and sincerity in the fulfillm ent o f duty to God as prescribed by the divine T o rah ” (Beare). O n P aul’s revised attitude to T orah religion see 2 Cor 3:1-18, yet Acts portrays him as still continuing to claim Pharisee status, “7 am a Pharisee” (23:6); Paul would have added: n o t a converted Pharisee, bu t a com pleted one. 6 κατά £ήλος διώκων την έκκλησίαν, “W ith regard to zeal I was a persecutor o f the c h u rch .” But Paul was n o t satisfied with m erely keeping the law. His zeal as a Pharisee drove him to persecute the church (lit. “according to zeal, a persecutor o f the ch u rch ”) . ίή λ ο ς, “zeal,” for God, for the purity of his covenant com m unity, for his law, m arked the true servant of God (cf. Num 25:1-18; Ps 106:30, 31; Sir 45:23; 4 Macc 18:12; cf. also 1 Kgs 19:10, 14; Ps 69:9; especially P hinehas in the verses m en tio n ed [Bockm uehl, 199-200]), and it was a “well-known characteristic o f the Pharisees, who in p art traced their line to the M accabees” (M artin [1976], 128; cf. 1 Macc 2:24-29; T. Asher 4:5; 1QH XIV, 14) or maybe back to the Essenes (see M artin, New Testament Foundations, 1:84-89, to be up d ated by Saldarini, ABD 5:289-303). H ence, n o t because Paul was evil, but precisely because he was “g o o d ,” an ard en t Pharisee, zealous for God, inflam ed with zeal for the law and com m itted to keeping the com m unity of God pure, he did what he later came to lam ent, namely, persecute the church (1 Cor 15:9; cf. Acts 22:2,5; 26:9-11; cf. 1 Tim 1:13). T he verb δίωκεiv , “to persecute,” has as its basic idea “to cause som ething to ru n ,” “to pursue or chase.” It pictures an army pursuing its enemy and setting it to flight or a h u n ter tracking down his quarry and putting it on the run. In m uch the same way Paul harried the church, only he did so, on his own confession according to Luke, with a maniacal (έμμαινόμ6νος [Acts 26:11]) zealousness that brought prison and death to innocent m en and wom en of the Way, those who belonged to the church of Jesus Christ (Acts 8:3; 9:1; 22:4-5; 26:9-11). O n Saul’s conversion (Gal 1:13, 23) as a redirecting of a determ ination to pursue divine righteousness with a “zeal” that caused Saul to h u rt the church, see Dupont, “T he Conversion of Paul.” T he word έκκλησία, “ch u rch ,” is used in the o t ( l x x ) for the people of Israel (1 Kgdms [= 1 Sam] 17:47; 3 Kgdms [= 1 Kgs] 8:14, 55; 1 C hr 13:2; Ps 21:23 [ET 22:22]; Mic 2:5; Jo el 2:16), and what is m ore, it is used for the people o f Israel gath ered to conclude the covenant at Sinai (D eut 1:4; 9:10; 23:2-4), the people of Yahweh b o u n d to him by the rules he has given them to keep, b u t m ore

Comment

187

particularly as the qehal YHWH, the people gathered for worship (qahal = “to call”) . Thus, the word έκκλησία, “ch u rch ,” perhaps m ore than any other, reveals the irony with which Paul writes this section. He seems to be saying that while he, an ard en t young Pharisee, a new Phinehas (cf. N um 25:1-18), attem pted to preserve the purity of the church (i.e., the ancient Israel of God, the holy com m unity), he en d ed up persecuting the church (i.e., the new Israel, the true heir and successor o f G od’s chosen people and so a universal society; pace O ’Brien, 376-78). The origin of the church idea in Paul is best traced to his “conversion,” according to the Acts narrative in a threefold repeated story (Acts 9, 22,26). T he heavenly voice (bat qol) addressed him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me ?” (Acts 9:4 n i v ) . This is an identity Paul was to exploit and theologize as the church, thought of as the “body o f C hrist” (1 Cor 8:12; 12:12, 13; see J. A. T. Robinson, Body; Kim, Origin). κατά δικαιοσύνην την έν νόμω yevopevos‫ ־‬ά μ εμ πτος, “With regard to a righteousness based on the law I was a blameless p erso n .” This is the third achievem ent Paul could point to with pride as a result of his diligence. Like the rich young ruler in the gospel story (Luke 18:21), Paul had kept all the com m and m ents from his youth up. He had m et the standards necessary for achieving a righteousness that was rooted in the law. H ere Paul is using δικαιοσύνη, “righteousness,” in the sense of conform ity to external rules th at are considered to be the requirem ents o f God (on the m eaning of this difficult word in Paul see D. Hill, Greek Words, 139-62; and for a treatm ent o f the word in Phil 3:7-11 see Koperski, Knowledge, chap. 4). Since he had worked to achieve com plete conform ity to these rules, leaving n o thing u ndone, no outsider could blam e him , n o r did he blam e him self (yevopevog ά μ εμ πτος, “having been blam eless”; άμ εμ πτος, “blam eless,” is related to the verb μ6μφ6σθαι, “to blam e som eone,” for sins of omission [L ightfoot]). In this sense of om itting nothing that was required of him , Paul, then, could claim w ithout presum ption th at he had becom e faultless (cf. W. G rundm ann, 7IW T4:573; G oguelJB L 53 [1934] 257-67). This statem ent by Paul leaves no place for the view—once popular, now universally rejected—deduced from Rom 7 “th at before his conversion Paul was a Jew who had an uneasy conscience over the stoning of Stephen and a growing dissatisfaction with his own religion” (Keck, 853; see also M itton, ExpTim 65 [1953-54] 78-81, 99-103, 13235; Stauffer, New Testament Theology, 93; R idderbos, Paul, 129 n. 3; against Deissmann, Paul, 93-95). In every way he considered him self to be a m odel Jew, quite satisfied with him self until he m et the living Christ. T he shift in views on Rom 7 can be traced to Kummel, whose book on Rom 7 and P aul’s conversion (Romer 7 und die BekehrungdesPaulus) m ade the popular idea untenable. M ore recent discussions on Rom 7 as a conceivable piece of Pauline autobiography are listed in D unn, Theology of Paul, 346-54, and idem , Romans 1 8, WBC 38A (Dallas: W ord, 1988) 374-412. See too Lohfink, Conversion of St. Paul. All the recen t n t theologies include am ple discussion of P aul’s conversion, usually noting the p opular view found in Stewart, Man in Chnst, only to reject it out of h an d as reflecting a reading of Paul through R eform ation lenses. Saul had no “introspective conscience” (to use S tendahl’s famous phrase [HTR56 (1963) 199215]), a troubled soul whose in n er conflict was resolved psychologically on the Damascus road. Issues of Paul’s self-confessed “blamelessness” still pose a conundrum , given his clear teaching that “there is none righteous, no, no t o n e ” (Rom 3:10). The reviser

188

Philippians 3:4-11

o f this com m entary has tried to state the m atter in clear terms in Reconciliation, from which, since this is an im portant exegetical crux, the following may be quoted (26): But Philippians 3:6 must also be read in context. There Paul is viewing his past life from the position of his new life in Christ. The turning point came in a renunciation of his former “gains” of heredity, birth and religious zeal. But also his acceptance of God’s way of dealing with men and women—devout Jews as well as pagans—made an end to all efforts at securing his own righteousness, whether on the basis of Torah or elsewhere, and cast him without qualification on the free favour of God. “My own righteousness” is now seen to be an impossible claim, not so much because it eluded his grasp as a devout Pharisee but because it ministered to “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:4) which as a Christian he decisively renounced in his becoming a Christian (v 3). This was the great discovery implied in the Damascus road experience. Attainment of nomistic righteousness which he claimed as a Pharisaic pietist is now seen to be invalid, not because he was self-deluded or had lowered the standard but precisely because it represented a mistaken goal for which he was then striving “in the flesh.” The result was that he secured his objective but at the price of “boasting” in the very achievement that can only be granted (viz. divine salvation) as God’s gift and received in the pure gratitude of faith (Phil 3:9; it is righteousness that depends on faith). 7 άλλα ά τινα ήν pot κέρδη, τα ϋ τα ήγημαί διά τον Χ ρίστον ζη μ ία ν, “But what things were th en gains to me I now count as loss because o f C hrist.” W hether or n o t the conjunction άλλα, “b u t,” belongs to the original text (see N oted), th ere is, nevertheless, a m arked transition at this point. Suddenly all those good things Paul enjoyed, all those advantages he possessed from his parents and from his own efforts th at m ade him p ro u d and self-reliant, are considered now n o t as assets b ut as liabilities. Suddenly there is set before the Philippians a startling “re-evaluation [or, transvaluation] o f values” (Umwertung der Werte; Gnilka) on P aul’s part, and any conjunction, however strong, may serve only to weaken the radicalness of this change in his outlook. B arthians used to speak o f P aul’s conversion as “a p erp en d icu lar from above” (Senkrechtvon Oben), which em phasizes the m iraculous n atu re o f P aul’s radical shift, later theologized as a “new creatio n ” (2 Cor 5:17). Paul stresses the im portance of hum an decision and ju d g m e n t in any radical change o f outlook on life such as he has experienced. T he verb ήγβΐσθαί m eans “to think, consider, re g ard ” (BDAG), and the perfect tense th at Paul uses here, ήγημαί, “I c o u n t,” implies that he has com e to a final decision only after considering m atters “with deliberate ju d g m e n t” (Vincent). As Collange (129) notes, “It is still true that divine grace far from annihilating the faculties of m an stim ulates them ra th e r and recreates them in freed o m .” Paul describes this change in outlook on his p art in business term s (so now Bockm uehl, 204), using the fam iliar motifs o f profit (κέρδος) and loss (£ημία; see MM, 273, 341)—motifs also used by the rabbis, who used the idiom s of profit (sakar) and loss (hepsed; Str-B 3:622, citing m. A bot 2:1), and by Jesus (Matt 16:26). T he m etap h o r is the fam iliar one of the balance sheet with its colum ns m arked “assets” an d “liabilities.” Paul adm its that there were certain things in his past th at were in fact gains for him or things th at he did in fact consider as gains. They were n o t m erely potential or supposed gains (cf. g n b ) — the verb ή v, “w ere,” is indicative and p o t, “to m e,” is dative of advantage. Pedigree, covenant connection, zeal, and the like, Paul actually valued. They did contribute to his well-being on the hum an plane o r when he considered his life “in the flesh”—a double en ten d re on σαρξ, “flesh” (v 4). Nevertheless, Paul now bundles up these m any gains (κέρδη, plural)

Comment

189

an d treats them all as a single loss (ζημία, singular). O ne m ight have expected him to say, in light o f what he said before, th at his previous personal advantages, although still good, are being left beh in d because he has found som ething better. But no! In P aul’s thinking, the decision he m ade was n o t the decision to go from good to better, n o r was it the su rren d er o f a valued possession; it was an aban d o n in g to ζημία, “loss.” In the process o f reevaluation he perceived with h o rro r th at the things he had hith erto viewed as benefiting him had in reality been working to destroy him , because they were blinding him to his need for the “real righteousness” (that is, his identity as a m em ber of the elect people) that God required, which he him self could in no way achieve by his own efforts, however earnest they may be (cf. Rom 10:1-4; Gnilka; H. Schlier, TDNT 3:672). This radical transvaluation took place within the apostle διά τον Χριστόν, “because o f [the] Christ. ” But what precisely does Paul m ean by this prepositional phrase? He does n o t m ean that he m ade this reassessm ent “for C hrist” ( kjv ) or “for C hrist’s sake” ( r s v , g n b , n i v ) , as though somehow C hrist would in any way benefit by his decision. R ather, he means that his own outlook on life was radically altered “because o f the fact or the work o f C hrist.” T hat is to say, Paul, encountering the risen Jesus on the Damascus road, understanding there that he was the Christ, the Messiah whom he had longed for and worked for totally unawares, gladly gave up all his form er advantages to gain this one person of suprem e worth. A ccording to Acts, the recognition on the road to Damascus was that “Jesus is L o rd ”— “W ho are you, L ord?” (Acts 9:5)—and this confession becam e P aul’s chief message (Rom 10:9,10; 1 Cor 12:3; Col 2:6). T he im pact o f Christ up o n Paul thus was life altering. And, as M ichael (144) observes, “from that m om ent on the Damascus road he never wavered in his fidelity to the decision then m ad e.” (O n m essiahship in Paul see N. A. Dahl, “M essiahship of Jesus in P aul”; H engel, “‘C hristos’ in Paul.”) A parenthetical cautionary note, as a pastoral observation, may be helpful at this point. P aul’s conversion experience, including the sudden and dram atic renunciation of his heritage and achievem ents, is n o t offered h ere as a m odel to be em ulated, except, of course, th at he does appeal to him self notably in this epistle (Phil 3:17; as H aw thorne, “Im itation o f C hrist,” 172-74, and O ’Brien have show n). Believers n eed n o t feel less Christian than Paul if, unlike Paul, the course and co n d u ct o f th eir life, their occupation, and their aspirations are n o t radically different from what they were before encountering the living Christ. If, however, the observance o f religious ritual, status due to birth, outstanding accom plish m ents owing to innate intelligence or sustained effort, and so on should ever make a person pro u d or self-reliant, unaw are of a n eed of God and of the righteousness th at only Christ can provide, then, upon being m ade aware o f this danger, that person should jettison such privileges and achievem ents, as one would jettison a valuable cargo to save a ship th at would otherwise sink in a storm. Paul had to ab andon his past advantages precisely because they were the very things that kept him from com ing to God. They kept him from surrendering to Christ, who is the only access to God, as Eph 2:18 rem arks in a different context. 8 άλλα μενουνγε καί ήγουμαι πάντα ζημίαν 61ναι, “And what is m ore, I continue to co u n t everything as loss.” Now in a long and involved sentence, extending th ro u g h v 11, Paul enlarges on this them e of the “loss” o f his “gains” because of the fact of Christ. It begins with an extraordinary accum ulation of particles—αλλά μεν ούν ye καί— th at are impossible to translate, b u t th at in Greek, nevertheless, powerfully em phasize the shift from the perfect tense

190

Philippians 3:4—11

ήγημαι, “I have c o u n ted ” all my advantages as loss (indicating en d u rin g action or result [v 7]), to the present tense ήγοϋμαι, “I continue to c o u n t” them as loss, and from the particular ά τι va, “w hatthings” (v7), to the universal πάντα, “everything” (see BDF §448 [6]; Thrall, Greek Particles, 11-16). This change from the perfect tense to the p resen t tense o f the same verb, then, is deliberate. In it Paul is saying th at the settled decision he m ade in the past, as the result o f careful reflection (perfect ten se), is n o t enough. It m ust be reinforced daily by continuous conscious m oral choices (present tense) against d ep ending upo n him self—who he is, the things he possesses, what he has accom plished—for gaining favor with God. F urther, Paul expands on his statem ent in v 7 by saying that those things he listed as “gains” in w 5 -6 are n o t the only things that he now considers as “loss.” Rather, he considers all things (πάντα) as loss, whatever they may be that m ight com pete with Christ for his allegiance or m ight be th o u g h t of as m eritorious and claim ed as acceptable to. God by the “religious” person (M artin [1959]; see also Michael; Dibelius; B onnard; Collange; Fee [1995], 310-11; bu t contrast V incent). διά τό ύπερέχον τή ς γνώσεως Χρίστου Ίησου του κυρίου μου, “because o f the one suprem e value, namely, a personal knowledge of Christ Jesus my L o rd .” P aul’s extraordinary evaluation of things that are norm ally considered “gains”—privilege, family, religious heritage, com fort, position, wealth, power, and so on— as one gigantic loss is n o t m ade w ithout good reason. Paul now states his reason in a single prepositional phrase, bu t one so com pact that it is necessary to analyze its parts fully to get at what Paul is saying. T he preposition διά followed here by the accusative case should be translated “fo r” or “because of.” It simply and clearly introduces the reason for Paul’s decision, nothing m ore, and therefore should not be translated “for the sake o f ’ ( gnb ), “com pared to ” or “com pared w ith” (g o o d speed , m offatt , kn o x , Ph illip s , l b , niv ). to ύπερέχον, the neuter singular participle of the verb ύπερέχειν, “to surpass, excel,” is functioning as an abstract noun that serves m ore graphically than can its cognate n oun υπεροχή, “superiority,” to accentuate the worth of that for which Paul abandoned everything else (see BDF §263 [2]; b ut Koperski, Knowledge, 161, argues that the corresponding adjective is the counterpoint of the participle). It is the object o f the preposition διά, “because of.” τό ύπερέχον, “the surpassing greatness” (BDAG), “the suprem e advantage” ( g o o d speed , j b ), “the one suprem e value,” then, is that for which Paul gave up all those things the world holds on to for dear life. This ultim ate value is immediately qualified by the genitive τή ς γνώσεως, “of the knowledge,” which in turn is qualified by the genitive Χριστοί) Ίησου, “of Christ Jesus,”which in turn is qualified by the genitives του κυρίου μου, “o fth e L o rd o fm e .” All three of these genitives need explanation. (1) The first of these, τή ς γνώσεως, “of the knowledge,” is a genitive of apposition, which m eans that τό ύπερέχον, “the one suprem e value,” and τή ς γνώσεως, “of the knowledge,” are the same thing; i.e., “the one suprem e value” is “knowledge.” (2) The second genitive, Χρίστου Ίησου, “o f C hristjesus,” is m ore difficult to explain because of its potential ambiguity. It could be a subjective genitive, m eaning, then, that for Paul “the one suprem e value” is “to be known by Christ Jesus” (as in 1 Cor 13:12; see Vallotton, Christ, 86-87; this is a kin of the genitive in π ίσ τ ις Χρίστου, “the faith [or, faithfulness] of Christ,” as Hays, Faith, has m aintained, though this is challenged by D unn and others; see D u n n ’s bibliography in his Theology of Paul, 335). But Χρίστου Ίησου could also be,

Comment

191

and most likely is, an objective genitive, m eaning that Christ Jesus, in this instance, is n ot the one who knows but the one who is known: “knowledge of Christ Jesus.” Thus the surpassing worth Paul is thinking of is to know Christ—Christ Jesus is the ultim ate object of his quest. (Although this latter interpretation of the genitive best fits the context, perhaps in choosing such an am biguous construction Paul intends to include both ideas— to know Christ as well as to be known by Christ [cf. Gal 4:9].) (3) T he third set of genitives, του κυρίου μου, “of the Lord of m e,” “of my L ord,” is merely appositive to Χρίστου Ίησοϋ, “of Christ Jesus,” and no t in any sense predicate. In o ther words, it is no t the m ere objective intellectual awareness that Christ Jesus A Lord that Paul has in m ind here. Rather, it is the personal knowledge or intim ate acquaintance of Christ as “my” Lord (the only place in Paul’s uncon tested writings where this intim ate expression occurs) that for him makes all other “values” appear worthless. γνώσις, “knowledge,” had such a wide range of m eanings in Paul’s day that it is difficult to sort out exactly what he m eant when he used it. Am ong the contem porary pagan religions γνώσις, “knowledge,” was a keyword, referring to a kind of mystical knowledge of or com m union with the god— “a revelation of the god in which the vision (granted in the mystery cults) leads to a transform ation of the beholder” (Dibelius, 69; Beare; cf. 2 Cor 3:18; 4:6; see G artner, ATS 14 [1967-68] 209-31). It apparently also was used by gnostic Jewish Christians of some “higher” salvific knowledge accessible only to themselves and to their initiates (cf. 1 Cor 8:1-11; 13:2, 8 ; 14:6; cf. also Gal 4:9; see Schmithals, Paul, 90-92). γνώσις, “knowledge,” has been understood by some to have been used in a peculiar, if n o t unique, way to refer to the experience of the martyrs (Lohmeyer). It is possible, therefore, that γνώσις, “knowledge,” may have been chosen by Paul precisely because it em braced a com bination of ideas, rather than a single one, and would have had significant m eaning to a wide range of people (Gnilka; see also Forestell, CBQ18 [1956] 12336; Gartner, ATS 14 [1967-68] 209-31; Tannehill ,Dying and Rising, 114-23; an d fo r a full discussion Koperski, Knowledge, 22-65). Much m ore probable, however, is the view that Paul’s m eaning for γνώσις, “knowledge,” here was controlled exclusively by his understanding of the o t concept of knowledge (as in the phrase dacat YHWH, “knowledge of Yahweh”)—both G od’s knowledge of his people “in election and grace” (Exod 33:12,17; Amos 3:2) and his people’s knowledge of him “in love and obedience” to his self-revelation (Martin [1959]; cf. Je r 31:34; Hos 6:3; and see also Davies, ChHstian Ongins, 141; Dupont, Gnosis, 34-36; Koperski’s conclusion is that “Paul’s use of this expression in Phil 3:8-11 does seem to come . . . from his Jewish heritage” [Knowledge, 65]). Such knowledge involves m ore than an acquisition of facts. It also involves “loyalty, repentance, love and service” (Beare, 114)—the “yes” o f the soul to the address of God (see Bockmuehl, 205-6, for the Jewish and postbiblical literature, where “knowledge of G od” and obedience in love are dom inant ideas). Knowledge, then, is no t primarily intellectual bu t experiential. Thus, as Loh and Nida (99) explain, in the context of Phil 3: The knowledge of Christ is personal and intimate, as the expression “my Lord” shows, certainly more than an intellectual apprehension of truth about Christ. Rather, it is a personal appropriation of and communion with Christ himself. “The knowledge of Christ” no doubt does involve one’s thoughts, but in its distinctive biblical usage it may be said to involve primarily one’s heart.

192

Philippians 3:4-11

δ ι‫ י‬ον τά πάντα έζημιώθην, “For him I did in fact lose everything. ” The reason Paul gives for considering his form er “gains” as loss has now been stated with clarity. It is because o f the one thing that now has ultimate value, namely, a personal knowledge of Christ Jesus—an experiential encounter with the Savior—that the apostle is led to respond to him in loyalty, love, and obedience as Lord of his life, and to set himself to serve Christ with all his heart. But this glad acceptance of Christ Jesus as Lord had its cost. Paul n o t only considered all things as “loss” because of Christ; he actually experienced the loss of all things. By placing the definite article τά, “the,” before πάντα, “all things,” and both words before the verb, Paul emphasizes that he lost everything. Furtherm ore, the verb he uses, ζημιουν, “to cause loss to,” “to punish,” “to fine” (a play on the ηοσηζημία, “loss, ” in w 7-8), is an aorist passive, which may point to a particular time when this loss occurred, namely, his conversion, and hint at the possibility that he was stripped of all his advantages by the Jewish authorities or even his family (yet his nephew showed him sympathy, in the Acts narrative [Acts 23:1622]). Since, however, ζημιοϋν, “to cause loss to,” is found only in a passive form in the nt with a somewhat shifted m eaning (i.e., not “to be punished, ”b ut “to lose”; BDF §159 [2]), it is m ore likely that Paul is thinking of those things, such as his high status within Judaism and the like, that he himself voluntanly renounced (cf. 2:6-7). In any case, his loss was a real loss, and his claim to consider everything as “loss” is therefore no empty boast n o r a purely academic exercise (see earlier for the suggested parallelism between Phil 2:6-7 and 3:6-8; see too Craddock, 58). και ηγούμαι σκύβαλα, “bu t I consider it all as unspeakable filth.” Paul did n o t lam ent this loss. For him it was a welcom ed relief. In fact it was the freeing of him self from som ething that he unwaveringly continued to consider σκύβαλα, “unspeakable filth.” T he derivation o f this word, σκύβαλον (used only here in the nt ), has never b een cleared up. A lthough traced to the expression to tois κυσΐ βαλλόμ6νον, “th at which is thrown to the dogs” (queried by Bockm uehl, 207-8), it seems to have m eant by usage (1) “d u n g ,” “m uck,” both as excrem ent and as food gone bad; (2) “scraps,” i.e., “what is left after a m eal”; o r (3) “refuse,” “trash ” (Koperski’s translation [Knowledge, 154]). It is also used to describe a pitiful and horrible thing, like a half-eaten corpse, or “filth,” such as lum ps o f m anure. Thus, when Paul uses it h ere as the final object of his studied threefold use ο ίή γεΐσ θ α ι, “to consider, ” it provides the climax o f a crescendo. A ccording to F. L ang’s analysis (T D N T 7:446-47; against Lightfoot, M ichael), The perfect ήγημαι (v. 7) relates to conversion; since this Paul has learned to regard all his former κέρδη as ζημία .. .for Christ’s sake. The present ήγοϋμαι (v. 8a) confirms that this is his judgment now. The second present ήγοϋμαι (v. 8c) strengthens this by substituting σκύβαλα for ζημία. The intensification lies in the element of resolute turning aside from something worthless and abhorrent, with which one will have nothing more to do. The choice of the vulgar term stresses the force and totality of this renunciation. T herefore, P aul’s deliberate choice of the word σκύβαλα, “unspeakable filth,” over ζημ ία, “loss,” shows the u tter revulsion he now feels toward those “advantages” he su rrendered. It is quite im proper to weaken its m eaning in any way by translation o r by in terpretation (cf. M artin [1959]; idem [1976]; see also Vincent, who draws attention to how some of the patristic writers, em barrassed by this passage, attem p ted to modify the m eaning of σκύβαλα).

Comment

193

ϊνα Χ ριστόν κερδήσω, “for the goal o f gaining C hrist.” Finally now, Paul states his motives for counting everything as loss (w 8c-10). They are (1) th at he m ight gain Christ, (2) th at he m ight be found in Christ, and (3) that he m ight know C hrist and the power o f his resurrection. T he first of these is a strange expression th at m ust be un d erstood in light o f the imagery o f a profit-and-loss system and the balancing o f accounts that Paul uses th ro u g h o u t this section. T he verb κερδαί νειν, “to gain,” is a play on the n o u n κέρδη, “gains” (v 7). Paul has given up all o th er forms o f “g ain ” (κέρδη) in o rd er th at he m ight get the true “g ain” (κερδήσω), which is Christ, th at is, C hrist himself, n o t m erely the favor o f Christ. O r in o th er words, were Paul to place the whole world, with its wealth, power, and advantages, its prestige, accolades,, and rewards, in one scale pan o f the balance and Christ in the other, Christ alone would overwhelmingly outweigh everything else in term s o f real worth. H ence, from the standpoint of simple logic Paul cannot afford to gain the whole world if it m eans losing Christ (cf. the words of Jesus in Mark 8:36 par. Matt 16:26 par. Luke 9:25). P aul’s use o f com m ercial term inology will reap p ear in Phil 4:10-20. Although Paul, somewhat caught in the web of his rhetoric, does speak of “gaining” Christ, he does no t intend to convey solely the idea of a personal profiting from Christ. “To gain Christ” m ust also have involved for Paul the concept of bowing before Christ in hum ble repentance (though this is no t a Pauline word; it is found only in two places, Rom 2:4, 2 Cor 7:9-10, and there used of a response to God on the part of professed believers, no t outsiders, of recognizing him as the only Lord [a Pauline title, found 164 times], of claiming him as the only basis for a right standing before God, and at the same time of being accepted by him in ‘justifica tion,” which is a restored relationship; on the m odern discussion, see Martin, Reconciliation, with bibliography). It m ust also have em braced the idea of com m un ion with Christ in an ever-deepening relationship that will continue until it reaches its consum m ation at the Parousia. And yet there is in these words of Paul the unm istakable idea that to know Christ in the intimacy of personal trust and surrender is indeed to benefit personally from him (so M elanchthon, as cited by M artin [1959], 148; for the reference to M elanchthon’s tag, “to know Christ is to know his benefits,” see Martin, “Christology of the Prison Epistles”). The construction Paul uses to express this goal—ϊνα, “in order that,” with the subjunctive—implies m ore than that Paul surrendered all to gain Christ and that he has therefore fully gained Christ. T here is also in this construction the idea of the future, the sense that Paul has both gained Christ and is yet to gain Christ. As stated by Collange (130), “Christ, who has already given him self in many ways, is still to be ‘gained’ (kerdeso’). Experience of his Lordship is therefore essentially a dynamic experience which sets one on the road. T hat road, from self to Christ, is a long o n e.” 9 και εύρεθώ εν αύτω, “and o f being found in h im .” T hat the future elem ent attends P aul’s expression “for the goal o f gaining C hrist” (v 8) is corroborated now by this coordinate expression, εύρίσκειν h ere m eans “to be found when surprised by d e a th ” (cf. 2 Cor 5:3; see MofFatt,2s*^Tm24 [1912-13] 46; Koperski, Knowledge, 164-70). H ere the apostle’s m ind seems to focus on the com ing day of judgm ent, when he m ust stand before God who is the Judge o f his people. But as a result o f his conversion and the enlightening experience stem m ing from his en counter at th at tim e with the living Christ, it is obvious th at Paul fears now to stand before God ένσ α ρκ ι, “in the flesh,” i.e., by himself. H e desires (and fully intends) to be found

194

Philippians 3:4-11

έν Χριστώ, “in C hrist,” incorporate in him (see Comment on Phil 1:1, where the sense o f ev, “in ,” is that of “incorporation into C hrist,” one o f several nuances; see Moule, origin, who brings out the idea o f being in the com pany o f C hrist’s com m unity), and thus to stand before the Judge, n o t presenting him self and his claims to G od’s favor, but because he is in Christ, presenting Christ and the allprevailing m erits o f Christ (although the form ula, we are saved propter meritum Christi, “because o f the m erit of C hrist,” is a later theologizing). He no longer has aspirations to be a self-reliant person who has (έ'χων) only his own goodness (δικαιοσύνην‫ )׳‬to offer to God. H e understands now that his is an inadequate goodness th at can in no way com m end him to God. μή έ'χων έμήν δικαιοσύνην την έκ νόμου αλλά την διά πίστ6ω ς Χριστού, την 6κ Θ60ύ δικαιοσύνην έττι τη ττίστει, “n o t with my own righteousness, earn ed by keeping the law, b u t with G od’s righteousness given through faith in Christ— the righteousness th at is given by God and is obtained through faith.” Thus it is that Paul is led back to a favorite topic of his—δικαιοσύνη, “righteousness”—bu t one he does n o t develop at this point. U nquestionably Paul had thoroughly instructed the Philippians in what it m eans to be righteous before God. But for others to u n d erstan d the m eaning of δικαιοσύνη, “righteousness,” here in Phil 3:9 they m ust atten d carefully to Rom ans and Galatians, which provide the necessary com m entaries on this im portant concept. O ften, bo th in H ebrew and Greek, the words saddiq, δίκαιος, “righteous,” and sedaqd, δικαιοσύνη, “righteousness, ”and the related verb sadeq (in hipcil) ,δικαιοϋν, “to justify, ” were used as legal terms. In a court o f law the judge, who h ad to decide between two parties, was forced “to justify” the one and “to c o n d e m n ” the other. T h at is to say, he h ad to decide in favor o f the one and against the other. Thus “to justify” often m eant “to give som eone their rights,” “to vindicate or ex o n erate,” or “to declare som eone in the right. ”W hat is im p o rtan t to observe is that this decision did n o t necessarily d ep en d on the m oral character o f the person involved. Now when these term s are employed in a religious context, the question naturally arises: “W hat m ust a m an do if God is to declare that he is in the right and so give ju d g m en t in his favor?” (Caird, 138). For the Jew the answer was: “I m ust obey the law of Moses!” Paul’s answer, stem m ing from his new understanding of the ot (cf. Pss 14:1-3; 53:1-3; 143:2; and esp. Hab 2:4, cited in Rom 1:17) in the light of his Damascus-road experience, is that hum an beings are too sinful ever to be able to do enough good to be declared good by God. W hat is m ore, God does not ask for good works; he asks for faith (cf. Gen 15:6). The trouble with a righteousness based on what a person can do is that it is always self-righteousness (cf. Rom 10:1-3), providing a basis for self-boasting. Paul’s argum ent may be paraphrased thus: If I try to earn God’s favorable verdict by my own goodness, I am aiming at a righteousness of my own (έμήν δικαιοσύνην), one that is my own achievement and that will give me a claim on God’s recognition. But as long as I am doing this, I disqualify myself from the true righteousness, which is not based on merit (although not a Pauline expression; cf. Isa 61:10). For faith is not an alternative way of earning God’s favor; faith is the opposite of merit or, as Paul says, boasting, an admission that I cannot earn God’s approval, but can only accept his free offer of forgiveness, grace, and love. And since the offer is made in the life and above all in the death of Christ, true righteousness, the condition of being truly right with God, must come through faith in Christ.

Comment

195

ττίστις, “faith,” in its strictest sense, therefore, is n o t intellectual assent to a series o f propositions about C hrist b u t the act of personal trust in and selfsu rren d er to Christ (for a discussion see Ljungm an, Pistis; Binder, Glaube). It is the m ovem ent o f o n e ’s whole soul in confidence toward Christ. It is the “yes” of the whole personality to the call of Christ. (For this and similar additional ideas see Michael; B ultm ann, Theology, 1:270-84; R ichardson, Introduction, 23-25; Beare; C onzelm ann, Int 22 [1968] 178-82; Caird; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, ICC [Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1975] 1:91-102, passim. But for o th er perspectives on the righteousness of God see also Kasemann, “R ighteousness,” 168-82; idem , Commentary on Romans, trans. G. W. Bromiley [GrandRapids: Eerdmans, 1980] 91-129; Stuhlm acher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes; Kertelge, Rechtfertigung; Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 474-523; Brauch, “Perspectives on ‘G od’s R ighteousness”’; M cGrath, DPL, 517-23, building on earlier treatm ents, especially in R eum ann, Righteousness; and Koperski, Knowledge, 191-238 [note esp. 322 n. 80].) H ence when Paul writes of the righteousness th at is διά πίστ6ω ς Χρίστου, lit. “through faith of C hrist,” one m ust take the genitive Χρίστου, “ofC hrist,”asan objective genitive (cf. Mark 11:22; Acts 3:16; Gal 2:20 for similar constructions). Paul does no t have in m ind here a righteousness th at is based on the faithfulness, loyalty, or fidelity of Christ to the Father (Vallotton, Christ, 88-89; D. W. B. Robinson, RTR 29 [1970] 71-81; Longenecker, “O bedience of C hrist”; and esp. Hays, Faith, and his debate with D unn [see bibliography in D unn, Theology of Paul, 335]). Rather, he has in m ind a righteousness th at has its origin in God (έκθ^οϋ, “from G od”) and that is hum bly app ro p riated by a person through faith in Christ. It is questionable to reject this in terp retatio n simply by claiming that if so interpreted, Paul creates a tautology when he th en adds the phrase την έκ Θ60 ΰ δικαιοσύνην έπ ί τη πίσ τβι, “the righteousness th at is given by God and is obtained through faith,” thus twice calling attention to the hum an response w ithout once stating the objective grounds for G od’sjustifying action (Martin [1976]). Such a rejection hangs by too thin a thread, because the phrase “the righteousness that is given by God and is obtained through faith ” may be simply added for clarification and emphasis, w ithout any concern for being tautological, and because ju st such em phatic redundancy is in keeping with P aul’s style of writing. In Gal 2:16 he seems to do exactly what he does here, though in a m uch m ore awkward fashion. T here he repeats three times over the phrase “faith in Christ Jesus”—διά πίστ6ω ς ’Ιησού Χριστοί) . . . 6ίς Χριστόν Ίησοΰν έπιστ6ύσαμ6ν . . . έκ ττίστΕως Χριστοί)— referring each time to the hum an reaction to G od’s gift w ithout once specifying the objective g ro u nd of G od’s action (see H. D. Betz’s translation in his Galatians, H erm eneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979] 113). But for a different interpretation see Hays, Faith, on Gal 2:16. In this one verse, then, Paul distills his great fundam ental doctrine of justification by faith: (1) All hum an beings are alienated from God, in the sense of being o u t o f relationship. (2) They cannot possibly reestablish the necessary right relationship with God by their own efforts (έμήν δικαιοσύνην την έκ νόμου, “my own righteousness, earned by keeping the law or based on T orah piety, ” is for Paul an im possible fe at). (3) God m ust take the initiative to restore this right relationship; the source o f true righteousness is the redem ptive action of God him self (την έκ Θ60 ϋ δικαιοσύνην, “G od’s righteousness,” is less a forensic, m ore a dynamic,

196

Philippians 3:4-11

creative power; so Kasemann, “R ighteousness”). (4) God has indeed taken this initiative in Christ, in his life, death, and resurrection. (5) G od’s initiative m ust be m et with a h um an response. Right relationship with God is established by o n e ’s faith in Christ (διά πίστεω ς‫ ־‬Χρίστου, “thro u g h faith in C hrist”), that is to say, by o n e ’s continual confession of total d ep en d en ce upo n C hrist for the necessary true righteousness, by o n e ’s personal trust in and su rren d er to Christ. (6) Faith in Christ, then, is an o th er way o f stating what it m eans to be found in C hrist (6ύρ6θώ ev αύτω, “I m ight be found in h im ”) , incorporated in him , and u n ited with him to such a degree th at all that Christ is and has done is received by the person who trusts in C hrist (Silva, 187). Alternatively, the thrust o f P aul’s argum ent may be in terp re ted to be: restoring a right relationship is indeed G od’s doing (2 Cor 5:18); the groundw ork is laid in C hrist’s fidelity (π ίσ τις) to his F ath er’s will to save; and hum an faith is based on “C hrist’s faithfulness” (Bockmuehl, 211-13). This seems em inently logical, though the impasse is faced by H ooker (NTS 35 [1989] 321-42), who links the two kinds o f π ίσ τ ις , “faith ,” with h er notion o f “in terch an g e,” derived from L uther. 1 0 του γνώναι αυτόν, “[Yes, I consider everything as unspeakable filth] for the goal o f knowing Christ. ” Finally, Paul considers all his personal advantages and everything else, for that m atter, as unspeakable filth “for the goal o f knowing C hrist in the power of his resurrection, and in the fellowship o f his sufferings.” This final goal is expressed differently from the previous two (w 8-9), which were in tro d u ced b y iv a, “in o rd er th at,” and the subjunctive: ϊνα Χ ριστόν κ6ρδήσω καί 6 ύρ6θώ ev αύτω, “in o rd e r that I m ight gain Christ and be found in him. ”This goal is expressed by an infinitive with the genitive definite article: τού γνώναι αυτόν, lit. “to know him .” For this reason several com m entators u n d erstan d τού γνώναι, “to know,” as an explanatory infinitive, m ore precisely defining the n atu re and power o f faith (v 9): έπ ί τή π ίσ τβ ι, τού γνώναι αυτόν, “through faith, which is to know h im ” (see Keck, H endriksen, Collange, M artin [1976]). T here is certainly a sense in which faith and knowledge are close in idea, and the m eaning o f the one is stren g th en ed by sharing in the m eaning of the other. A nd it is true that the infinitive may be used to explain or define m ore precisely an o th er word (Moule, Idiom-Book, 129). But it is n o t likely that this is the case here: (1) Nowhere else in the n t is the n o u n π ίσ τ ις , “faith,” followed by an explanatory articular infinitive (although it may be adm itted that Paul is writing here in a cryptic way). (2) O n the o th er hand, the infinitive with the genitive definite article, as here, is often used to express purpose in the n t , especially in Luke and Paul (Luke 24:29; 1 Cor 10:13; cf. BDF §400 [5]). (3) F urtherm ore, to change constructions in the same sentence from iv a, “in o rd er th at,” and the subjunctive to an infinitive in o rd e r to show purpose is no ta n uncom m on change in P aul’swri tings (Rom 6:6; Col 1:9-10). (4) By taking τού γνώναι, “to know,” as an infinitive o f design, parallel in idea to iva Χ ριστόν κβρδήσω καί βύρεθώ ev αύτω, “in o rd er that I m ight gain C hrist and be found in h im ,” one sees im m ediately in this expression a fitting climax to P aul’s passionate willingness to treat everything as “refuse” th at would prevent him from achieving his objective, which is “to gain C hrist,” “to be found in C hrist,” and “to know C hrist.” “To know C hrist,” therefore, is the ultim ate goal toward which the apostle sets the course o f his life (on the gram m ar here see Fee [1995], 327). T he tense o f the infinitive γνώναι, “to know,” is aorist and very likely an ingressive aorist, i.e., an aorist that sums up the action o f the verb at the point at

Comment

197

which it com m ences (but see Beare, opposed by Fee [1995], 326). This suggests a crisis o f knowledge w here for Paul ju st the coming to know C hrist outweighs all o th er values. For him the significance of Christ “in whom are hid all the treasures o f wisdom and know ledge” (Col 2:3) is so vast that even to begin to know him is m ore im p o rtan t than anything else in all the world. T he crisis, however, implies a process. T he com ing to know Christ results in a growing knowledge o f Christ, as Paul makes clear h ere and elsewhere (M oule). T he verb γινώ σ κ ειν/γνώ να ι, “to know,” and its cognates (cf. v 8) often focus attention u p o n the ideas of understanding, experience, and intimacy, even the intimacy o f the sexual relationship in m arriage (cf. M att 1:25), based on the Heb. yadac. H ence, when Paul speaks of his desire to know Christ, he does n o t have in m ind a m ere intellectual knowledge about C hrist (Paul had that when he was persecuting the c h u rc h ). R ather, he is thinking about a personal en co u n ter with Christ that inaugurates a special intimacy with Christ that is life-changing and ongoing (cf. J o h n 17:3; 1 Cor 2:8; 1 Jo h n 2:3, 4; 4:8; 5:20). και την δύναμιν τή ς άναστάσεως αυτοί), “in the power of his resurrection.” T h at this knowledge of Christ is personal and relational is now m ade clear by the phrases th at follow, the first of which is lit. “and the power of his resurrection.” H ere, however, the καί, “a n d ,” is m ore than a simple conjunction. It serves to link the words th at follow together with αυτόν, “h im ,” in such a way as to define and m ore fully explain what is m eant by αυτόν, “h im ” (cf. BDAG: κ α ί, 3). It is n o t that Paul is saying “I want to know him and the power o f his resurrection,” as though “h im ” and “pow er” were equally worthy objects o f his knowing. R ather, he is saying “I want to know him in the power o f his resu rrectio n ” ( g o o d s p e e d , m o f f a t t ) . T hat is to say, Paul is n o t co n ten t m erely to know C hrist as a figure o f history (κατά σάρκα, “according to the flesh”), b u t he desires to know him personally as the resurrected ever-living Lord of his life (κατά πνεύμα, “according to the Spirit”). This is the form ulation o f 2 Cor 5:16. A nd the δύναμις, “pow er,” he wishes to know is n o t som ething separable from him , b u t the power with which the risen Christ is endow ed. He wishes to know C hrist “by experiencing the power he wields in virtue o f his resu rrectio n ” (M ichael). H e wishes to know him alive and creatively at work to save him from himself, to transform him from “b a d ” to “goo d ,” to propel him forward toward a life o f service to others, to inaugurate “newness o f life,” life in the Spirit, in a word, to resurrect him from death in sin to life in God, to quicken and stim ulate his whole m oral and spiritual being (cf. Rom 6:4-11; Lightfoot, Michael, Dibelius, G nilka). και κοινωνίαν παθημάτων αυτού, “and in the fellowship of his sufferings.” This second phrase is to be taken closely with the first phrase, n o t only because it is linked with the connective καί, “a n d ,” b u t especially because the word κοινωνίαν, “fellowship,” shares the same definite article with the word δύναμιν, “pow er”: την δύναμιν . . . και κοινωνίαν, “the power . . . and fellowship” (see Note h‫־‬h). This suggests th at the power of the resurrected C hrist and the fellowship o f his sufferings are to be th o u g h t of n o t as two totally separate experiences b u t as alternate aspects o f the same experience (so T annehill, Dying and Rising, 84-90). Now if the first phrase is in terp re ted to m ean th at Paul wishes to know the power o f the resurrected C hrist at work within him an d the second phrase is as closely related to the first as the sentence structure seems to suggest, then it is n o t plausible to in terp re t the one of an in n er subjective experience and the o th er of

198

Philippians 3:4^-11

an external objective happening. Paul is n o t now thinking o f his own physical sufferings as in a n y way com pleting the full tally o f C hrist’s afflictions (Col 1:24; on this text see R. P. M artin, Colossians: The Church’s Lord and the Christian’s Liberty [Exeter: Paternoster, 1972; reprint, Eugene, OR: W ipf 8c Stock, 2000] ad loc.), n o r does he h ere have in m ind the principle he enunciates elsewhere: “to suffer with Christ is to be glorified with h im ” (Rom 8:17-18; cf. 2 Cor 4:7-11). R ather, this phrase in its context of being found in Christ, clothed with his righteousness, is highly rem iniscent o f Rom 6:4-11 in a baptism al context (but see Koperski, Knowledge, 266-69). Thus, ju st as knowing Christ in the power o f his resurrection is an inward experience that can be expressed in term s of being resurrected with Christ (cf. Rom 6:4), though outwardly and sacram entally expressed in baptism (see Schnackenburg, Baptism), so knowing Christ in the fellowship of his suffer ings is equally an inward experience th at can be described in term s o f having died with Christ (cf. Rom 6:8 and see Gal 2:19-20). This is no t to deny that P aul’s prison experience is also m uch in the background here. This becom es especially clear when one rem em bers (1) that the G reek word κοινωνία, “fellowship,” followed by the genitive case, as here, also carries with it the idea o f “participation or sharing in ” som ething objective (cf. Seesem ann, Begriff ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ; BDAG) and (2) th at a favorite them e of Paul is that of Christ as the last Adam. As such, Christ em bodies the whole of hum ankind or a redeem ed hum anity. He identified him self so com pletely with hum an beings in their state o f sin and helplessness that as a result they m ight be equally identified with him in his resurrected new life of goodness (cf. Rom 5:12-18; 8:3; 1 Cor 15:22,49; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 2:7). In C hrist’s suffering and death the old hum anity came to an end; in his resurrection the new hum anity began (2 Cor 5:14-17). T herefore, for Paul to say th at he wishes to know Christ and the fellowship of his sufferings is n o t that he seeks to know Christ and to experience physical sufferings of m artyrdom (cf. rsv: “th at I may share his sufferings”) , b u t th at he seeks to know Christ who suffered and died for him (cf. 1 Pet 3:18; 4:1), to know that he therefore has suffered and died in Christ, only to be resurrected in him to a new and superlative kind o f life (Jones, Michael, Caird, Loh and Nida; see also Jervell, Imago Dei, 206-8, 261-75; Barrett, From First Adam to Last; Scroggs, Last Adam; Seesemann, BegriffΚ Ο ΙΝ Ω Ν ΙΑ). (But see Jewett, N ovT 12 [1970-71] 198-212; Siber, M it Christus Leben, 111, 115, 118; Collange; M artin [1976] for a different view that interprets these phrases polem ically as P aul’s rebuttal to the w rong-headed teaching o f a group or groups o f religious leaders who oppose him on the g ro u n d that he was an apostle who suffered— a similar charge b ro u g h t in 2 Cor 10-13, whose com m onality with Philippians may postulate an origin of both epistles in P aul’s Ephesian and postEphesian ministry.) συμμορφι£όμ 6νο 9 τω θανάτω αύτοϋ, “continually conform ing myself [orbeing conform ed] to his death. ”T hat the phrase “the fellowship of his sufferings” has been correctly interpreted, in our view, is corroborated now by this participial expression that im mediately follows. To understand this there are several things to note: (1) In a crisscross chiastic structure Paul equates C hrist’s “sufferings” with C hrist’s death (see fig. 4). (2) συμμορφί£6σθαι, “to conform onself,” “to make oneself like,” is a hapax legomenon, a word occurring only here in the nt. Nevertheless, in spite of its uniqueness, it immediately brings to m ind the vocabulary of Rom 6:1-12: “For if we have becom e united [σύμφυτοι, lit. ‘growing or planted together’] with him in the

Comment

199

likeness [όμοιώματι ] of his death, we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection” (Rom 6:5, H aw thorne’s translation); “If we died with [συν] Christ, we believe that we will also live with [συ£ήσομ6ν] him ” (Rom 6:8, H aw thorne’s translation). (3) Therefore, by coining this word and using it here, Paul is n o t dramatically claiming that he is expecting to suffer physically as Christ suffered or to die as he died ( w e y m o u t h , Ph il l ip s , j b ; see also Meyer, Plum m er, L ohm eyer). Rather, captivated by the idea that he and all believers are caught up into Christ and are indissolubly linked together with him to share with him in all the events of his life, including his death and resurrection, Paul creates a new word capable no t only of stating that he has died with Christ (cf. Rom 6:10, in baptism?) as a facto f the past, but also of stating his conscious glad choice to identify him self with that death and to conform his life to the implications of that death now in the present. He expresses this great fundam ental concept bywords com pounded with συν, “with,” such as συσταυροϋν, “to crucify together with” (Rom 6:6); συνθάπτ6ιν, “to bury together with” (Rom 6:4); συ£ωοποι6ΐν, “to make alive together with” (Eph 2:5), and so on (see W. G rundm ann, TDNT 7:786-87, for a com plete listing of these com pounds; see also Moule, Ongin, 124).

Figure 4.

Chiastic diagram o f Phil 3:10

συμμορφι^όμβνος, “continually conform ing myself [orbeing co n fo rm ed ],” is a participle, m iddle voice and present tense. As such it says that Paul, already dead to sin by virtue of C hrist’s death, nevertheless strives to make the effects of that death an ever-present reality within him self by his own constant choice to consider him self in fact dead to sin and alive to God (cf. Rom 6:11), to conform his practice in the world to his position in Christ, to renounce his own selfish desires and say yes to Christ, who calls him to take up his cross daily and follow him as a servant o f God for the good of hum ankind (cf. Phil 2:6-8 where μορφήν δούλου, “form of a slave,” is recalled by συμμορφι_£όμ6νος, “continually conform ing myself [or being conform ed] ”; for the baptism al context of both Philippian texts, see Jervell, Imago Dei, discussed in M artin, Hymn of Christ, 81-82). This in terp retation does n o t totally rule out the tho u g h t o f physical sufferings or death playing o ut their transform ing role in the C hristian’s life. In fact, the mystical un io n with Christ in his sufferings and death, as outlined above, is but stren g th en ed and d eep en ed by any physical pain that may be experienced because o f faith in Christ. T he hazards that Paul faced in his apostolic work, the

200

Philippians 3:4-11

batterings he was subjected to as a C hristian, had the potential for being “the concrete external m eans” by which he could be conform ed to C hrist’s death (Beare, 124). Thus, the expression “conform ing oneself to his d e a th ” can be enlarged to include “costly discipleship,” the kind o f suffering expressed so poignantly by the apostle in his letter to the C orinthians (2 Cor 4:10-11, H aw thorne’s translation): Always carrying about in the body the dying of Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body. For we who live are constantly being delivered over to death for Jesus’ sake, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh. (See 2 Cor 1:8-10; 6:8-10; 11:21-33. It has been no ted earlier th at P aul’s suffering in Ephesus is reflected in the C orinthian correspondence.) This setting would answer the criticism o f Fee ([1995], 332 n. 61,336 n. 72), that Paul is n o t implicitly responding to his o pponents in this section. 11 6Ϊ πως καταντήσω 6ίς την έξανάστασιν την 6κ ν6κρών, “in the hope of attaining the resurrection from am ong the dead.” If by reading v 10 one should think that Paul has shifted from a futuristic eschatology (cf. 1 Thess 4:13-17) to a “realized” eschatology, where the C hristian’s resurrection has already taken place (cf. 1 Cor 15:12; Col 3:1-3; and the error of Hym enaeus and Philetus in 2 Tim 2:718) in C hrist’s resurrection (cf. Gal 2:20), clearly this is n o t the case. T he aposde does assert that the Christian died and rose with Christ, and is now living in the power of C hrist’s resurrected life (Dibelius, Gnilka, C ollange). But this conviction does n o t lead him to surrender the hope o f a future resurrection, when all conflicts will be resolved; all ills healed; all hum an frailties, both m oral and physical, elim inated; and all wrongs forever set right (cf. 3:21). Paul’s “eschatological proviso” (Vorbehalt), i.e., the tension between what is already experienced by believers and what lies ahead, is one o f the most axiomatic conclusions in recent Pauline studies. Paul expresses this hope o f a future resurrection in an unusual way. H e begins with the words 61 πως καταντήσω, lit. “if som ehow I m ight attain .” These words seem to convey an elem ent of doubt or uncertainty, however slight (see Bockmuehl, 217, who com m ents, “T here is a degree o f contingency often u n d errated by com m entators”) . But if there is any do u b t in Paul’s m ind, it is n o t about the reality o f the resurrection to com e (cf. 2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 3:20-21), or about the trustw orthiness o f God (Rom 8:38-39), or about the way in which he will attain the resurrection, i.e., by m artyrdom (cf. O tto, CBQ57.2 [1995] 324-40, who thinks the d o u b t is real th at Paul will fail to be resurrected as a m artyr), or by some o th er way (M artin [1976]), o r about him self (Michael, V incent, Collange) as to w hether he m ight be rejected for his own defects (1 C or 9:27; b u t see Phil 3:9; Rom 5:17-18, 21). R ather, it would appear that Paul uses such an unexpected hypothetical construction simply because of hum ility on his part, a hum ility th at recognizes that salvation is the gift o f God from start to finish and that as a consequence he dare n o t presum e on this divine mercy (C aird). A translation such as goodspeed’s “in the ho p e o f attain in g” adequately and accurately expresses P aul’s feeling of awe and w onder as he wrote the phrase (cf. Acts 27:12; Rom 1:10; 11:14 for similar expressions o f expectation; BDF §375). Such an attitude of hum ility is n o t in any way w eakened by the active voice of the verb καταντήσω, “I m ight attain ” (akin to 3:12-14), as tho u g h Paul were thinking th at by him self and his own efforts he

Explanation

201

could attain the resurrection. His expression as it stands im plies the following m odification: “If by the grace and goodness o f God I m ight be privileged to participate in the resu rrectio n ” (see G undry Volf, Paul and Perseverance, 254-60). T he expression Paul uses here for the resurrection, έξα νά σ τα σ ις, does no t ap p ear in the l x x , n o r is it found elsewhere in the n t . Paul coined it, perhaps, com pounding the preposition έκ, “ou t of,” with the usual word for resurrection (ά ν ά σ τα σ ις), so th at by using this strengthened form along with the rep eated έκ, “o u t o f ’—έκ νεκρών, “o u t of the d ea d ”—he m ight stress in a striking way th at it is precisely the rising from am ong the dead he has in m ind here, n o t the mystical rising with Christ th at is the present experience o f all believers. T hat future resurrection, which will be in incorruption, glory, and power (1 Cor 15:42-44), now has the focus o f his attention, and only this resurrection is in view. See the full n ote o f the unusual term “resurrection from the d ea d ” in Bockm uehl (218-20); he em phasizes its polem ical background. Explanation In this section, Paul makes it clear that Jewish T orah piety presented advantages, such as birth, religion, and position in society, and th at Jewish boundary m arkers, however arduously achieved, ultim ately are things w ithout value. H e says this n o t because o f pique owing to a personal lack of distinction or because of failure in his occupational pursuits or religious endeavors. By hum an standards he was the best o f the best, the m ost religious of the religious, with every right to boast in him self and to believe in his own goodness. R ather, he says this in light of what occurred to him on the Damascus road and the life-altering h appening th at took place there. Suddenly he en co u n tered the very Christ whose followers he had been harassing. As a result, his life was never to be the same again. Im m ediately he experienced a radical transvaluation of values. At once he realized that those “g o o d ” things he had cherished and striven for were n o t “gains” at all. They were losses th at had b an krupted him . They were “evil” things b en t on destroying him, because they m ade him self-reliant, self-satisfied, co n ten t to offer to God his own goodness. They acted as an opiate, dulling his awareness of his n eed for the real righteousness that God requires and that only God can supply. T he blinding light of the C hrist-encounter (Acts 9:3-5) paradoxically opened P aul’s eyes to see everything clearly and in p ro p e r perspective. As a result he came to realize th at to know C hrist Jesus as his L ord was the one thing in life of ultim ate w orth— everything else that would com pete for his allegiance was n o t only “loss” b u t “filth” by com parison, things to be ab h o rred and abandoned. And the actual loss o f all those things he once lived for in no way altered his thinking. He co n tin u ed with happy resolve to value only Christ. H e considered him self a person who profited to the extrem e by having gained Christ, by having becom e incorporate in him. Now there was no longer any do u b t in his m ind about w hether his own goodness within the limits of T orah religion, based on keeping the law, was good enough for God; it was not. Instead, Paul came to see that by faith, that is, by his “yes” to the address of Christ, he stood now before God in Christ and in his goodness. H e came to und erstan d that the ultim ate goodness that God dem anded has been provided by God himself, b u t only in Christ. Thus, he came to understand that to have gained everything and lost C hrist would have been to profit no t

202

Philippians 3 : 12-16

at all, whereas to have lost everything and yet gained C hrist was to have becom e the richest o f the rich, n o t obviously in m aterial possessions, b u t in spiritual en rich m en t (2 Cor 8:9). H ence Paul desired to com e to know Christ m ore fully, n o t as a theological topic to be discussed, m uch as he used to discuss different points of th e Jewish law, b u t as a person to be enjoyed, echoing what L uther would later say in contrasting “using G od” and “enjoying G od.” H e desired to experience in practice what he knew to be true in theory, i.e., th at when C hrist died, he died; when Christ was resurrected, he, too, was resurrected. H e desired to sense within him self the power o f the resurrected, living Christ. H e desired to realize in personal experience the fact th at C hrist’s suffering for sin had indeed p u t to death his own sin. To this end Paul, although in d eed dead to sin by virtue of C hrist’s death for him , nevertheless, by his own continuous, conscious choice, was p rep ared to take this fact seriously, to take sides with Christ against himself, to bring his practice in the world in line with his position in Christ, to ren o u n ce his own selfish desires and say yes to Christ, who was calling him to conform him self to his death by daily taking up his cross in self-sacrificing service to others. Thus it was in a deep sense of hum ility and trust, expectation and hope, that Paul looked forward to the future and to his own bodily resurrection from am ong the dead. This th o u g h t points on to Phil 3:20-21. T he issue o f “religion” is bro u g h t into prom inence in this section. H ere, while we should n o t seek to read Paul through R eform ation spectacles and see the opposition to “works” as p art of the debate betw een m edieval Catholicism and the P rotestant reform ers, it still rem ains true that o n e ’s trust in external props (for Paul, T orah religious observances, such as the distinctives of circum cision, sabbath keeping, and kosher observance, and for Luther, his fierce polem ic against papal Rome) may constitute a th reat to living faith. Karl Barth voiced this reliance on externalities (in his day, o f the Confessing C hurch in the T hird Reich) as an evil to be resisted. H ence we may u nd erstan d his stark axiom: “religion is a concern o f the godless” (Religion 1st eine Angelegenheit . . . des gottlosen Menschen; Church Dogmatics 1.2, 299-300 [trans. G. T. Thom son and H. Knight, ad ap ted ]). T he “godless” in this context were n o t evil people b u t religious folk, and especially th eir leaders in the G erm an C hristian m ovem ent that supported H itler. This section in Paul speaks, then, with a timeless relevance to any situation in which C hrist is being replaced by “religion,” w hether T orah or civil or cultural-patriotic loyalty to which hum an beings cling for support and by which they seek to gain acceptance with God who “justifies the ungodly” (Rom 4:5).

C. Warning against Perfection Now

(3:12–16)

Bibliography B eardslee, W. A. H um an Achievement and D ivine Vocation in the Message o f P a u l SBT 31. London: SCM Press, 1961. Bultmann, R. Theology. Cullmann, O. Chris t and Time: The Primitive Christian Conception o f Time and History. Trans. F. V. Filson. Rev. ed. Philadelphia: Westminster

Notes

Press, 1964. Daube, D. “Participle and Imperative in I Peter.” In E. G. Selwyn, The F irst E pistle o f St. Peter. 2d ed. London: Macmillan, 1946. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981. 467-88. D upont, J. “The Conversion of Paul, and Its Influence on His Understanding of Salvation by Faith.” In A postolic H istory a n d the Gospel. FS F. F. Bruce, ed. W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970. 176-94.---------. Gnosis: L a connaissance religieuse d a n s les ép î tres de sa in t P a u l. Bruges: Desclée de Brouwer, 1949. Dyer, J. A. “The Unappreciated Light.” J B L 79 (1960) 170-71. Fernandez, E. L. “En torno a Fil 3, 12.” E stB ib 34 (1975) 121-23. Fitzmyer, J. A. “The Consecutive Meaning οf έφ’ ώ in Romans 5.12.” In To A d v a n c e the Gospel: N ew T estam en t Studies. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. 349-68. First published in N T S 39 (1993) 321-39. Forestell, J. T. “Christian Perfection and Gnosis in Phil. 3, 7-16.” C B Q 1 8 (1956) 123-36. Fridrichsen, A. “ΕΝ ΔΕ: Zu Phil. 3, 13.” C o n N T (1944) 31-32. Glotz, G. “Hellenodikai.” D A G R . 3.1.60-64. Gunther, J. J. St. P a u l ’s O ppon en ts a n d T heir B ackground. NovTSup 35. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Klijn, A. F. J. “Paul’s Opponents.” N o v T 7 (1964-65) 27884. Koester, H . “The Purpose of the Polemic of a Pauline Fragment (Philippians III).” N T S 8 (1961-62) 317-32. Lütgert, W. D ie Vollkom m enen im P h ilipperbrief u n d die E n th u sia sten in Thessalonich. BFCT 13.6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1909. Marshall, P. E n m ity in Corinth: Social C o n ven tion s in P a u l ’s R elation s w ith the C orin th ian s. WUNT 2.23. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1987. Peterlin, D. P a u l ’s L etter to the P h ilip p ia n s. Pfitzner, V. C. P a u l a n d the A gon M o tif. Polhill, J. B. “Twin Obstacles in the Christian Path: Philippians 3.” R e v E x p 7 7 (1980) 359-72. Rigaux, B. “Revelation des mystères et perfection à Qumran et dans le Nouveau Testament.” N T S 4 (1957-58) 237-62. Schmithals, W. G n osticism in Corinth: A n In vestig a tio n o f the Letters to the C orin th ian s. Trans. J. E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.---------. P a u l a n d the Gnostics. Stauffer, E. N ew T estam ent Theology. Sumney, J. Id en tifyin g P a u l ’s O pponents: The Q uestion o f M eth od in 2 Corin th ia n s. JSNTSup 40. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990. Turner, G. A. “Paul’s Central Concern: Exegesis of Phil. 3, 10-15.” AS 29 (1975) 9-14. Turner, Μ. B.

“Spiritual Gifts Then and Now.” V E 15 (1985) 7-64. Reprinted and revised in The H oly S pirit a n d S p iritu a l Gifts , rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996) chaps. 12-20. Williams, N . P. Ideas o f the F all a n d o f O rig in a l Sin: A H isto rica l a n d C ritical S tudy. London: Longmans, Green, 1927.

Translation 12I do not say that I have at this time graspeda [the meaning of] Christ, or that I have already become perfect [in my knowledge of him]. But I keep pressing on to see whether b I may apprehend ChristJesus,c inasmuch as [or, since] I was indeed apprehended by him. 13Brothers [and sisters], I do notd reckon that I havefully apprehended him yet. But I focus on one thing only: whileforgetting what is behind me, and stretching out to what lies before me, 14I keep running toward the goal-marker, straight for the prize to which God calls me up,e the prize that is contained in ChristJesus.f 15So this is the attitude all of us who are “perfect”m ustg have. But since you have a somewhat different attitude, God will surely reveal to you the truth even about this. 16In any case, let us live up to whatever truth we have already attained.h Notes a$p46D and a few other witnesses add ή ήδη δβδικαίωμαι, “or have already been justified,” perhaps influenced by 1 Cor 4:4 or compensating for the lack of any objects for the verbs in this verse. If this phrase is an omission, it can be explained as an error due to homoioteleuton (see Silva, 203-4). Its inclusion would provide a good example of paronomasia with διώκω, “I keep pressing on” (see Fernandez, EstBib 34 [ 1975] 121-23). For a defense of the inclusion of this phrase (as in NA27), see Bockmuehl, 220.

204

Philippians 3 : 12-16

bMany mss add καί, “and,” “indeed,” at this point. ‫ *א‬D* F G and a few other witnesses omit it. CB F G 33 and a few other witnesses omit Ιησού, “Jesus.” As is often the case, this name, “Christ Jesus,” generates variant readings. ^ 46‫ ׳‬61‫ א‬A Ψ and the Majority Text read Χρίστου Ίησου, “Christ Jesus.” d‫ א‬A D * P 33 81 and apparently gy661‫ ־‬read ούπω, “not yet,” for ου, “not,” which is supported by φ 46 B F G and the Majority Text, οΰπω, “not yet,” is the easier of the two readings and should be rejected as secondary. e I739mg and Tertullian have άνεγκλησίας, “irreproachability,” instead of άνω κλήσεως, “upward call,” perhaps an early emendation of the text to make sense out of an otherwise difficult expression (cf. Phil 1:10; 2:15; 3:6 to see that the idea of “irreproachableness” is a concern of Paul). f Some few mss add κυρίω, “Lord,” to the phrase ev Χριστώ Ίησου, “in Christ Jesus”—ev κυρίω Ίησου Χριστώ, “in the Lord Jesus Christ.” 8‫ א‬L and a few other witnesses read φρονούμ6ν, “the attitude we have” (indicative), instead of φρονώμβν, “the attitude we must have” (hortatory subjunctive). This kind of variant appears elsewhere (cf. Rom 5:1), perhaps as a result o f confusion in sound or sight. The two meanings may well be combined, as in moffatt’s rendering of Rom 5:1, “Let us enjoy the peace we have.” hSome witnesses read τώ αύτώ στοιχβΐv κανόνι, αυτό φρονβΐν, “to walk by the same rule, to think it,” or το αυτό φρον6ΐν, τώ αύτώ κανόνι στοιχβΐν, “to think the same thing, to walk by the same rule,” or other various combinations of these same words. The shorter reading, adopted for this translation, is supported by the oldest mss: sp16‫ ׳‬46 ‫ *א‬A B 33 and others.

Form/Structure/Setting P au l’s G reek at this point is difficult. H ence it is n o t possible to see precisely how it relates to what has gone before. True, the new section does begin with a conjunction, ό τι, b u t the am biguous natu re o f this conjunction (it can m ean “th a t” o r “because”) does n o t perm it one to speak with any assurance. This am biguity o f m eaning and the fact that the several verbs in v 12 are w ithout objects com p o u n d the problem o f relationship. O ne can only hope, therefore, to m ake an intelligent guess as to how w 12-16 fit with w 4-11. O ne such surm ise may be the com m on catchw ordδιώκ6ιν, re n d ere d “persecu te” (inv6) and “keep pressing o n ” (in v 12). T he d o m in an t them e in the previous section (3:4-11) was the superlative significance o f Christ. A lthough Paul also recites his own worthy attributes, he does so simply to accentuate the values of Christ; for he considers these attributes o f his to be worse th an n othing w hen com pared with Christ. They can be easily set aside, ab an d o n ed even, if this is necessary to gain Christ. Paul is obsessed with Christ. N othing else m atters b u t Christ. H e can afford to lose all, b u t n o t Christ. For him to gain the world bu t n o t C hrist is to have lost everything, whereas to gain Christ an d lose everything is to possess all. H ence the apostle’s desire is to gain Christ, to be found in Christ. In a word, the total focus of his life is to know Christ intimately. Paul closes this section by giving expression to his hope of attaining the resurrection from the dead. But this m ention o f the resurrection is m ade m ore like an aside th an anything else. Certainly it is n o t the b u rd e n of w 4-11. Christ is the chief them e. Any hope for resurrection and standing before God in a goodness acceptable to God is based wholly up o n Christ. H ence w 12-16 may be viewed as relating to the previous section in this way: they provide a caution about past experiences and a plan o f action for the future. Paul has ju st said th at his suprem e desire is to know C hrist (and this is a worthy goal for any C hristian). But lest some should assume that he (or anyone else for that m atter) h ad already attained com plete knowledge o f Christ, he im m ediately

Comment

205

proceeds to disabuse them o f such an assum ption. Christ is too great to be grasped in a single lifetime. A nd yet this fact does n o t discourage Paul or dam pen his ardor. R ather, it drives him on to know m ore. T he m ore he knows about Christ, the m ore he wishes to know. H ence he views his future as a race course stretching ou t before a ru n n e r who is pressing on to reach the goal and win the prize. Thus, the incom prehensible majesty o f Christ is no d e te rre n t to P aul’s quest, b u t a spur, urging him to press on to a still greater knowledge of Christ until it is finally com plete when he is called up to receive the prize. At the same time that Paul continues to bare his soul and disclose the motive that drives him, he may also intend his words to be a warning against any claim that “perfection” is possible in the present. Those same Jewish teachers, whom he attacked so vehemently in w 2-3, were known to state repeatedly that a person who has been circumcised and is true to the law can reach perfection (Rigaux, N TS 4 [1957-58] 237-62). H ence if they were teaching this in Philippi, Paul, who now knows that “perfection” cannot be attained in this way, surely would wish to rem ind his friends that “perfection” comes only through Jesus Christ and at the resurrection at the last day (cf. Phil 3:21). T here is no need, then, to suppose that in addition to such Jewish or Jewish-Christian propagandists the Philippian Christians were beset by still ano th er group of opponents—gnostics, who also believed and taught that perfection could be attained on earth now without waiting for, or w ithout any need for, the resurrection (Friedrich, 120; Koester, N T S 8 [1961-62] 324). This is n o t to say there was no gnostic influence present in Philippi or that Paul did no t know and use gnostic key words and phrases in his teaching. But there seems little need here to ferret o u t a new o p p onent for Paul to attack in addition to the Jewish faction in o rd er to justify the statem ents he makes. Rather, the elegance of Paul’s rhetoric, the depth of feeling he emotes, the unique intim ate revelation of his own consum ing desire to know Christ and to follow on to know him better—all breathe m ore the spirit o f parenetic, or better, epideictic, rath er than polem ical rhetoric. Paul seems m ore like a pastor who gladly risks being ridiculed or m isunderstood in o rd er to care properly for his flock than a warrior fending off an enemy. H e seems m ore concerned to consolidate converts to Christ than to win an argum ent with his opponents. (Yet he did face an array of deviationists who attacked his congregations [see G unther, St. Paul's Opponents, for a survey; also see Sumney, Identifying Paul's Opponents].) His style of writing appears designed powerfully to affect his readers, to move them to change, to create within them the same appreciation for and pursuit o f Christ that he him self experienced, rath er than to p u t down any enem ies one can imagine. Christ is so real to him and so ultimately significant that he wants the Philippians (and the whole world, for that m atter) to know what he knows and feels. Comment 12 ούχ ότι ήδη ελαβον, “I do n o t say th at I have at this tim e grasped [the m eaning of] C hrist.” Paul continues his passionate writing, beginning his new sentence abruptly with ούχ ό τ ι, “n o t th a t”— a distinctively nt form ula, m eaning “I do n o t say th a t” or “I do n o t claim th a t” (cf. J o h n 6:46; 7:42; 2 Cor 1:24; 3:5; 2 Thess 3:9). But what is it that Paul h ere so em phatically disclaims? To answer this question is n o t an easy m atter. First, it is difficult because the verb o f the

206

Philippians 3 : 12-16

subordinate clause introduced by δ τι, “th at,” is ελαβον, a verb with a wide range o f m eanings: “to take hold of,” “to receive or accept,” “to get or o b tain ,” “to make o n e ’s own,” “to ap p reh en d or co m p reh en d [mentally or spiritually].” Second, it is difficult because this verb has no direct object to say what it was that Paul obtained o r ap p reh en d ed . As a consequence, many answers to the question have been suggested. (F urther options in addition to what follows are m en tio n ed by Bockm uehl, 221, with special reference to Q um ran.) (1) Some say th at Paul disclaims having already attained to the resurrection o f the dead (cf. v 11; Lü tgert, Vollkommenen imPhilipperbrief). (2) O thers say that he denies having fully achieved righteousness (Klijn, Ν ονΤ 7 [1964-65] 281; Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, 14253, su pported by the variant reading o f $p46 and D, which add ή ήδη δεδικαίωμαι, “or have already been justified”; see Note a), m oral and spiritual perfection (Vincent, J. J. Mü lle r), or the prize at the en d o f the race (Moule, B onnard, Synge, B eare). (3) Still others say th at Paul deliberately left the object o f the verb unexpressed to co unter the arrogance of the gnostics, who claim ed to know everything, to have attained everything, to have reached the goal, to have becom e perfect (H aupt; Ewald; Gnilka; Collange; Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, 97; Koester, N T S 8 [1961-62] 317-32). N one of these interpretations o f Paul’s concise statem ent, however, doescjustice to its vocabulary or to its context. H ence one m ore suggestion may be perm itted: Paul m eans to say that he does n ot lay claim to having fully grasped the m eaning of Christ at this point in his experience. Christ—the full significance of this person— is the missing object of the verb ελαβον, “I have grasped.” In justification of this interpretation we may note the following factors: (1) The verb λαμβάνωiv can indeed m ean, am ong other things, “to com prehend mentally or spiritually” (BDAG). (2) The strengthened form καταλαμβάνειν, which appears twice in im mediately succeeding clauses (καταλάβω, “I may ap p reh en d ’’/κατελήμφθην, “I was appreh e n d e d ”), also carries the idea of “to grasp” in the sense of “to co m p reh en d ” (cf. Jo h n 1:5; Acts 4:13; 10:34; Eph 3:18; Plato, Phaedr. 250d; Polybius 8.4.6; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. rom. 5.46.3; Josephus, Life 11 §56; see also the helpful remarks in R. Bultm ann, The Gospel of John, trans. G. R. Beasley-Murray [Philadelphia: W estminster Press, 1971] 47-48; Dyer, JBL 79 [1960] 170-71). (3) The aorist tense ελαβον, “I have grasped,” that is used here is a constative aorist, collecting Paul’s past experiences up to the time of the present and viewing them as a single whole. This is confirm ed by the tem poral adjunct ήδη, “at this tim e,” that accom panies it (BDF §332 [1]). (4) The past experiences that are especially envisaged are those described in Phil 3:8-11, but especially the experiences involving Christ—gaining Christ, being found in Christ, and com ing to know Christ. Paul’s encounter with the resurrected and living Christ created within him no t only a consum ing desire to know Christ intimately and fully, but also an awareness that this was som ething that could n o t be achieved in a m om ent. To know the incom prehensible greatness of Christ dem ands a lifetime of arduous inquiry. ή ήδη τετελείω μ α ι, “or that I have already becom e perfect [in my knowledge o f h im ].” It is in ju st such a context of th o u g h t that the next verb, τετελείω μ α ι, “I have becom e perfect,” m ust also be interpreted. With it Paul carries fu rth e r and underscores his disclaim er by saying that he is n o t “perfect” in his knowledge and u n d erstan d in g o f Christ. (Cf. ήδη τέλ ειο ς, “already perfect,” which seems to have been a catchphrase of the gnostics, who considered themselves the only ones to

Comment

207

have been fully instructed and so to have reached the p ro p e r level of illum ination, knowledge, or understanding, especially at C orinth. See Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, 99; idem , Gnosticism in Corinth, 30; cf. also J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 3d ed. [London: M acmillan, 1879] on Col 1:28.) T he apostle is keenly aware that his knowledge of C hrist is partial and that he m ust wait for a future day, the eschatological day (?), when the partial will give way to the perfect (to τέλειον, “the perfect,” in 1 Cor 13:9-10, although the allusion h ere may be christological: w hen the retu rn in g Christ brings G od’s purposes to fulfillm ent [1 Cor 15:20-28]). T he sights of the apostle are evidently trained on those who espoused some form of “realized eschatology” (which may provide an o th er link uniting P aul’s opponents at C orinth and Philippi, if his inten tio n includes the polem ical along with the h o rtato ry ). διώκω δε el καί καταλάβω, “b u t I keep pressing on to see w hether I may ap p reh en d C hrist Jesus.” T he realization that there is too m uch to know about C hrist for o n e ’s knowledge of him ever to be com plete this side of the future resurrection incites Paul to keep pressing on to see how m uch understanding he can achieve. T he adversative conjunction δε, “b u t,” em phasizes this determ ination: the immensity of the task m ight indeed paralyze some, hut n o t Paul, διώκειv, “to keep pressing o n ,” belongs to the world of the h u n te r ra th e r than that of the athlete. It does n o t properly m ean “to ru n ”; ra th e r it m eans “to pu rsu e,” “to chase,” “to h u n t dow n.” Nevertheless, because Paul uses διώκειv, “to keep pressing o n ,” in v 14 of an athlete ru n n in g a race, it is quite likely that he already had this m etap h o r in m ind in v 12 (Beare, C aird ). In any case this verb gives expression to the greatness o f the effort required, w hether it is to make a catch, to win a race, or, in this instance, to know Christ. διώκω, “I keep pressing o n ,” is followed by εί . . . καταλάβω, “w hether I may ap p re h e n d ,” an exam ple of the subjunctive em ployed in a d ep e n d en t construction to express a deliberative question (BDF §368). εί, therefore, is to be translated “w h eth er.” καταλαμβάνειv, which is the truly difficult word, may m ean “to seize, win, attain ,” as a ru n n e r in a race m ight ru n to win the prize (1 Cor 9:24). But it can also have the very different m eaning, even in its active form, of “to grasp an idea with o n e ’s m in d ,” hence “to u n d ersta n d ” (BDAG; D upont, Gnosis, 50121). It is this latter m eaning that makes the m ost sense here. P aul’s one desire is to know Christ. But he is keenly aware that he has n o t yet grasped (ούχ . . . έλαβον, “n o t [that] I have grasped”) the full im port o f the significance of Christ. As a consequence, he sets out, very m uch like a ru n n er, to see w hether he m ight at last be able to co m p rehend (καταλάβω, “I may a p p re h e n d ”) Christ fully. έ φ ’φ καί κατελήμφθην ύπό Χρίστου Ίησου, “inasm uch as [or, since] I was indeed ap p reh en d ed by him.” The reason Paul gives for this lifetime quest is stated in this clause. (For έφ’ώ as an idiom m eaning “because” see BDF §235 [2]. For its use in the theologically im portant phrase in Rom 5:12 see J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans, AB 33 [New York: Doubleday, 1993] 413-17; idem , NTS 39 [1993] 321-39, w here he argues for a consecutive reading m ore than a causal one. Bockm uehl, 221, agrees. For a full discussion of this text, whose significance for “A m brosiaster” and Augustine was m om entous, see Williams, Ideas of the Fall. See Fee, 346 n. 31, 430 n. 28.) O nce again P aul’s rhetorical skill becom es obvious as he plays with two forms of the same verb: καταλάβω, “I may a p p re h e n d ’’/κατελήμφθην, “I was ap p reh en d ed .” First, Paul states his goal: it is to grasp C hrist Jesus for good and all,

208

Philippians 3:12-16

b u t to grasp (καταλάβω, “I may a p p re h e n d ”) him with his m ind and h ea rt and to co m p reh en d him with the full com prehension o f faith (cf. R. B ultm ann, The Gospel of John, trans. G. R. Beasley-Murray [Philadelphia: W estm inster Press, 1971] 48). But second, in giving a motive for this driving force within him , Paul states th at it was because he him self had been grasped (κατβλήμφθην, “I was a p p re h e n d e d ”) by Christ. Now the m eaning o f this verb shifts slightly. As Paul uses it here, he may in ten d it to retain some overtones o f grasping with the m ind, hence of being known by Christ, i.e., o f being chosen by C hrist for a specific task (Gal 1:15-16; 4:9; cf. Amos 3:2). But Paul seems now to be using it prim arily to refer to th at Christen co u n ter he experienced on the Damascus road, at which tim e Christ laid hands on him , so to speak, forcefully arresting him and setting him off in a new lifelong direction (1 C or 15:8-10; Michael; D upont, “Conversion of P aul”) . Perhaps, then, the English verb “to a p p re h e n d ” is the one best suited to express the idea involved in P aul’s use o f καταλαμβάνειν. For “to a p p re h e n d ” can m ean both “to lay hold o f with the u n d erstan d in g ” as well as “to arrest o r seize.” 13 αδελφοί, 6γώ έμαυτόν ού λογίζομαι κατ6ιληφ 6ναι‫ ־‬βν δέ, “B rothers [and sisters], I do n o t reckon that I have fully ap p reh en d e d him yet. But I focus on one thing only.” O nce again, with repetitive em phasis, Paul makes it clear to his fellow C hristian family m em bers (άδβλφοί, “brothers [and sisters]”) at Philippi th at even after a fu rth e r careful weighing o f the evidence (λογί£6σθαι, a verb m eaning “to calculate precisely”) he m ust reaffirm his form er conclusion that he has n o t com pletely grasped the full significance of C hrist (ού . .. κατ6ιληφ6ναι, “n o t . . . fully a p p re h e n d e d ”). And if this is true for Paul, it is equally true for all others, some o f whom may have claim ed th at they had reached perfection u n d e r the influence o f teachers Paul opposes and whose advocacy of perfection led to disunity in the church (see Peterlin, Paul's Letter to the Philippians) . W hat th en is to be done? T h ere is only one thing (ev; b u t see Fridrichsen, ConNT9 [1944] 31-32) th at can be done. Having com e to know C hrist partially, his im plied readers m ust press on to know Christ perfectly. τά μέν όπίσω 6πιλαν‫׳‬θανόμ€νος τ ο ΐς δέ Εμπροσθεν έ π 6 κτ 6 ινόμ 6 ν 09 , “while forgetting w hat is b eh in d me, and stretching ou t to what lies before m e.” Paul expresses this idea in a highly rhetorical, em otion-filled, passionate way. Even the form an d structure o f his sentence radiate the d epth o f his feelings. It begins with two concise participial phrases that are perfectly balanced: τά μέν όπίσω έπιλανθανόμ^νος, το ΐς δέ 6μΤΓΡοσθ^ν 6π€κτ 6 ινόμ 6ν 09 on the one hand, forgetting the things behind, on the other hand, stretching out to the things in front

T he μέν, “on the one h a n d ,” in the first phrase is answered by the δ6, “on the o th er h a n d ,” in the second; the article and the adverb τά . . . όπίσω, “the things b eh in d ,” in the one, by the article and the adverb T 0 1 g έμπροσθεν, “to the things in fro n t,” in the other; and έπιλανθανόμενος, “forgetting,” by έπΕΚΤ^ινόμβνος, “stretching o u t.” O ne can easily im agine th at Paul took special pains in selecting the double prepositional com pound 6 π -€ κ -τ€ 1νόμ€νος, “stretching o u t,” a word found now here else in the G reek Bible (6κτ6ίν6ιν, “to stretch o u t,” however, is

Comment

209

often found in the Gospels, e.g., M att 8:3; 12:13, 49). With it he carefully m atches the corresponding participle έπιλανθανόμενος, “forgetting,” and uses it to express precisely what he intends the future course o f his life to be. W hat is it th en th at Paul wishes to express so powerfully by such carefully chosen phrases? (1) H e wishes to express the im portance o f com pletely forgetting (έπιλανθανόμβνος, “forgetting”—note the present tense) the past: to forget those wrongs done, e.g., the persecution o f the church (Phil 3:6), and so on, whose m em ory could paralyze one with guilt and despair; to forget, too, those attainm ents achieved, the recollection o f which m ight cause one to p u t life into neutral and to say “I have arrived”; and to forget in such a way that the past, good or bad, will have no negative bearing on o n e ’s present spiritual growth or conduct. (2) He wishes also to express the im portance o f continuous concentration on the things th at are in front, i.e., on the goal o f the full and com plete knowledge of Christ Jesus. His sum m ons is unceasingly to reach ou t toward som ething o th er than oneself (C ollange). T he participle έ π 6 κτ 6 ινόμ 6ν 0 9 , “stretching o u t,” is a graphic word, chosen from the arena (Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, 139-56), and pictures Christians as ru n n ers with their bodies b e n t over, their hands outstretched, th eir heads fixed forward, never giving a backward glance, and their eyes fastened on the goal, as in the famous statue of “T he Discus T hrow er” by Myron (Moule, Vincent, M ichael). It powerfully describes the n eed for concentration and effort in the Christian life if one is to advance in the knowledge of Christ. It pictures the ceaseless personal exertion, the intensity o f the desire o f Christian participants in the contest if they are to achieve the hoped-for goal, namely, the full and com plete u nderstanding of the object o f faith. 14 κατά σκοπόν διώκω, “I keep ru n n in g toward the goal-m arker.” T he participles in v 13 are circum stantial participles o f m anner. With them Paul tells how he has d eterm ined to ru n the race, by n o t looking back over his shoulder b u t straining forward, stretching every nerve and muscle. Now he describes the actual race itself by the verb διώκω, “I keep ru n n in g .” T he fundam ental idea underlying διώκ6ιν (cf. v 12), “to p u rsu e,” and the present tense in which this verb now appears underscore once again the incom pleteness o f P aul’s present situation (Beardslee, Human Achievement, 68). They rem ind the read er of the constant alternation between the “already” and the “n o t yet.” διώκω, “I keep ru n n in g ,” stresses the “n o t yet” o f this dialectical tension o f the life o f faith (cf. Bultm ann, Theology, 1:322). Since Bultm ann, this has been a constant them e o f n t theology, namely, the tension between what believers have now and what will be theirs at the Parousia. C ullm ann ( Christ and Time, 3) used the now fam iliar imagery, drawn from W orld W ar II, o f D-Day, when the Allied troops landed on the N orm andy beaches in 1944, and VE-Day, when they en tered Berlin at the close o f the war a year later. The church lives between these poles o f an initial event and the final outcom e, and in the interim th ere are battles to be fought and both gains and reversals to be registered. T he imagery, now dated, is taken from W estern E uropean history, bu t it has appeal to Am erican or Russian students. For the form er, we should also appeal to the initial engagem ent in Saratoga and the final su rren d er at Yorktown. O r since global com m unications m ake the appeal to history a worldwide phenom enon, in Russian history the turning p o in t came at Stalingrad in January 1943 and the resolution of the conflict was reached in May 1945, when, to close the G reat

210

Philippians 3 : 12-16

Patriotic War, the Soviet forces took Berlin after the unconditional su rren d er of the G erm an military leaders on May 7. T he tw entieth century of conflict and su rren d er helps us understand both the Philippian text and m ore broadly 1 Cor 15:20-28. It focuses on the necessity of constantly striving for the goal. It represents the necessity o f constantly pursuing the end of the course with resolute determ ination, διώκω, “I keep ru n n in g ,” then, characterizes one very im portant aspect o f P aul’s (and the C hristian’s) life, that of progressively discovering what it m eans to know Christ and so o f pressing forward to reach the “n o t yet.” Yet P aul’s ru n n in g is n o t aimless; it is directed toward the goal (κατά σκοπόν). To be precise, however, the word σκοπός, found only here in the n t , is n o t the goal, b u t the “goal-m arker.” It is that post at the end o f the race upon which the ru n n e r fixes his attention (cf. σκοπώιν, “to keep o n e ’s eyes o n ”). U nfortunately, Paul in his intensity and desire to make full use of the stadium imagery fails to say what this “goal-m arker” corresponds to in his or the C hristian’s life. But since it originally was in ten d ed to give direction to the ru n n e r and incentive to his flagging energies, one m ight guess, then, that Paul m eant by σκοπός, “goal-m arker,” anything or anyone that kept the believer from straying from the course of the Christian life or from slackening in the believer’s m oral strivings. 6ίς τό βραβ6ΐον τή ς άνω κλήσ6ως του Θ60ϋ έν Χριστώ Ίησοϋ, “straight for the prize to which God calls me up, the prize that is contained in Christ Jesus.” While keeping the goal-marker in view and taking full advantage of its benefits, Paul races for τό βραβώιον, “the prize.” This word is qualified by the genitive phrase τή ς άνω κλήσβως του Θ60ϋ, lit. “of the upward call of G od.” But what is intended by this striking expression? Does it refer to G od’s invitation to enter the kingdom (1 Thess 2:12), which is perpetually offered and is άνω, “upw ard,” in its action and result ( r s v ; Plum m er; H endriksen)? Does it refer to an invitation “to a life which is to be lived above, i.e. in G od’s own eternal presence” (Caird, 143), “our heavenward calling” (Lightfoot, 153; cf. Gnilka; n e b ; cf. Philo, Planting 6 §§23-27; H eb 3:1)? Does it refer to the high vocation to which God called Paul and calls all Christians (Beare, 130)? Apparently all these explanations view the genitive τή ς άνω κλήσβως του Θ60ϋ, “of the upward call of G od,” as appositional to τό βραβώιον, “the prize” (see Bockmuehl, 222), m eaning that the “prize” is identical with G od’s “call.” In keeping with the vivid imagery drawn from the G reek games that pervades this section, there is still an o th er explanation of the “upward call of G od” that seems the m ost reasonable explanation of all. It sees in the expression τή ς άνω κλήσβως του Θ60 ϋ, “o f the upward call of G od,” an allusion to the fact that the Olym pian games, originally foot-races, were organized and presided over by the αγω νοθέτης, “ju d g e ,” and highly respected officers called Έ λλανοδίκαι, “chief judges.”According to Glotz (DAGR, 3.1.60-64; cited by Collange, 134), “after each event they had a h erald announce the nam e of the victor, his fa th e r’s nam e and his country, and the athlete or charioteer would com e and receive a palm branch at th eir hands.” This is the call to which Paul is now alluding (but Bockm uehl, 223, doubts th is). Such an explanation as this has the virtue of not identifying the “upw ard call” with the “prize” and allows the force of the context to determ ine what Paul had in m ind when he spoke of that prize. For him it was to be found in Christ (έν Χριστώ Ίησοϋ, “in Christ Jesus”) ; i.e., C hrist was his prize. To know Christ fully and com pletely was the prize for which he had been striving ever since his en co u n ter with Christ on the Damascus road. H ence the entire verbless

Comment

211

expression (v 14b) can be paraphrased as follows: “T he prize that God, the Judge [αγω νοθέτης], will give me when he calls m e up and announces my nam e, the prize that is contained in Christ Jesus”; or “th at I may respond to the call, ‘Come up and receive the prize.’” A nd it may be that such a prize is the same as P aul’s faithful response to the initial call that came on the Damascus road, when Christ laid hold o f him. 15 οσοι ούν τέλειοι, τούτο φρονώμεν, “so this is the attitude all of us who are ‘p erfect’ m ust have.” With a touch o f irony coupled with gentleness Paul exhorts his friends (ούν, “so”) to rem em ber that to be ap p reh en d e d by Christ does n o t p u t the h um an will o ut of action b u t ra th e r raises it to its highest power, that as the power o f C hrist’s will grows, the effort of the C hristian’s will does n o t decrease bu t grows accordingly (Stauffer, New Testament Theology, 184). This is the m eaning of the im perative idea with which the apostle now directly addresses the Philippians. Paul’s gentleness is expressed by the hortatory subjunctive φρονώμεν, “the a ttitu d e ... we m ust have.” He does not say φρονείτε, “the attitu d e ... you m ust have”; rather m ore delicately he says φρονώμεν, “the a ttitu d e ... we m ust have.” He includes him self along with those to whom he is writing: he and they together stand equally u n d er the same ethical dem and of no t holding an attitude (φρονεΐν) that assumes such a level of spiritual attainm ent that further striving becomes unnecessary (see Comment on Phil 1:7 for the m eaning of φρονεΐν). It is this gentle tone of exhortation that argues against viewing this section (w 12-16) as a polem ic written to oppose Jewish Christian gnostics (Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, 99-104), nomistic Jews who asserted that only they had perfectly kept the law and were thus perfect (Klijn, Ν ο νΤ 7 [1964-65] 282), Judaizers who boasted in circumcision as an indication of their being “com plete” Christians (Gnilka; Koester, N TS 8 [1961-62] 322-23), or martyrs whose death for the faith m ade them “perfect” (Lohmeyer; cf. Ign. Rom. 1.2; 2.1). (See further Introduction, Paul’s Opponents and the False Teachers at Philippi.) It seems m ore reasonable to suppose that what Paul wrote here he wrote because some of his friends at Philippi m isunderstood his teaching about justification by faith alone and as a consequence believed that they had “arrived” and had ceased from that m oral striving so characteristic o f and essential to the Christian life. He wished to set the record straight and prom pt them to exert themselves once again. P aul’s irony is expressed by his use o f τέλειο ι, “perfect.” Only a few sentences earlier he had stated unconditionally that as for him self he had no t yet reached “p erfectio n ” (ούχ ... ήδη τετελείω μ α ι, “n o t [that] I have already becom e perfect” [v 12]). But now he includes him self am ong the τέλειοι, “p erfect.” How can this be? (1) Some suggest that it is because in v 12 Paul was speaking of absolute perfection, the ultim ate level o f u n derstanding he could only deny having already attained, whereas in v 15 he is speaking of relative perfection, i.e., “m aturity” as over against a childish im m aturity in spiritual m atters, a level of understanding he could justly claim for both him self and o th er Christians (cf. 1 Cor 2:6; 15:20; H eb 5:14; note also M att 5:48; Jas 1:4; 3:2 and see Vincent, H endriksen; r s v , n e b , l b , g n b , JB , n i v ) . (2) O thers, slightly m odifying this in terpretation, see the “p erfection” of v 12 as ethical perfection and that of v 15 as perfection in principle (cf. P aul’s use o f the word ά γιο ς, “holy”). J. J. Mü ller (126) states: Just as a little child is a perfect human being, but is still far from perfect in his development as man, so the true child of God is also perfect in all parts, although not yet perfect in all

212

Philippians 3 : 12-16

stages of his development in faith. In verse 12 Paul confessed that he was not yet perfect in all stages, but here he confesses his perfection in all parts, as a child of God.

It is best, however, to see in Paul’s use of tcXcioi , “perfect,” a touch of reproachful, though loving, almost whimsical, irony (Lightfoot, Jones, Moule) for the following reasons: (1) T here is no indication whatsoever that the apostle is using the terms tcXc io w , “to becom e perfect”/T6Xe10g, “perfect,” in two different senses within such a short span o f words, and thus there is no reason to translate one “perfect” and the o th er “m ature.” (2) It seems certain that there were those at Philippi who, for whatever reasons, believed that they had reached the very kind of “perfection” that Paul denied was attainable this side of the resurrection. H ence the m eaning “perfect” in both places is necessary fully to understand what he is saying. (3) Irony is a favorite technique of the apostle, by which he prods his readers on to still greater m oral action (Rom 15:1; 1 Cor 8:1; Gal 6:1; and it is a rhetorical device that pervades 2 Cor 10-13; see Marshall, Enmity in Corinth). He m eans to say, therefore, that as many of us “as suppose we have reached perfection” (cf. j b ) m ust nevertheless take the following view o f things: we m ust forget the past and continuously push forward toward the goal. He is saying that “Christian perfection really consists only in this constant striving for perfection” (Weiss, ad loc.), that “it is the m ark o f the perfect man, not to reckon him self perfect” (Chrysostom, cited in Beare, 131), that “the nature of a Christian does not lie in what he has becom e b u t in what he is becom ing” (Luther, cited in Beare, 131). This view of P aul’s language as ironical, however, has been challenged, and some recent interpreters (O ’Brien, Fee [1995], Bockmuehl) prefer to see Paul’s language as inclusive, not polemical, since he includes him self am ong the tcXclol, “perfect.” και el τ ι έτέρως φρονβΐτε, “but since you have a somewhat different attitude.” Paul continues once again in words and phrases that are difficult to understand. To try to grasp what he means, it is necessary to look carefully at each p art of this clause: (1) T he καί is m ost likely an adversative conjunction, em phasizing a fact that is surprising, b u t nevertheless true (BDAG). It should be translated “b u t,” rath er than “a n d ”: “All of us who are perfect m ust have a certain attitude, but. . . . ” (2) The conjunction el, “if,” followed by the indicative (φρον6ιτ6, “you have [an] . . . attitu d e”) can introduce a condition of reality, in which case the “i f ’ clause is assumed to be true (BDF §372). el, therefore, is m ore accurately translated “since” (cf. Matt 4:6; 6:30; Luke 11:19-20; 1 Cor 9:11: Phil 2:1): “but since som ething is so.” (3) T he “som ething which is so” is that the Philippians actually did have a. somewhat different attitude about perfection from the attitude Paul dem anded of those who claimed to be “perfect” (τι is used adverbially, m eaning “som ewhat” [BDF §137 (2)], and is coupled with έτέρως, a word used only here in the nt, m eaning “differently” or “wrongly” [BAGD; Lightfoot]). (4) φρον6ΐτ6, “you have [an] . . . attitude,” which answers to φρονώμ^ν, “the attitude we . . . m ust have,” in v 15a is a key word in this letter to the Philippians (Phil 1:7; 2:2, 5; 3:19; 4 :2 , 10)—a word that primarily describes attitudes (“adopting a stance,” as Bockmuehl, 226, helpfully translates), rath er than specific thoughts about points of doctrine. In adding up all these details, one arrives at the conclusion that Paul is saying: “All of us who claim to be perfect m ust have the attitude that Christian perfection is in reality a constant striving for perfection. But since you have a somewhat different attitude about this matter ...” It is, therefore, yet another illustration of the apostle’s dialectic of “becom e what

Comment

213

you already are,” expounded by B ultm ann ( Theology, 1:332-33). καί τούτο ό θεός ύμΐν άποκαλύψει, “G od will surely reveal to you the tru th even about this.” T he sentence, which in the beginning sounded discouraging, finishes with this note o f confidence. By this clause the apostle says, in effect, to the Philippians: ( 1 ) I know what the correct attitude toward “perfectio n ” is that m ust be held by all who would be “perfect.” (2) I know, too, that you hold a different attitude from m ine. (3) I know I cannot convince you to change your attitude by logical argum ents or apostolic com m ands. (4) But I know that God can; for he is at work within you. By his gracious activity of unveiling he will reveal (άποκαλύψει) even this (και τούτο; καί has o th er m eanings than the simple copulative, as here and in Phil 2:5; see Comment on Phil 2:5) to you as he did to me, namely, what the tru th about perfection really is. T he verb αποκάλυπτεiv, “to reveal,” has a rath er special sense here (cf. A. O epke, T D N T 4:582-87), m eaning that “the revelation o f divine tru th is n o t conveyed solely through the apostolate, n o r indeed can it be m ade effective by virtue of external authority o f any kind; it requires also the [divine] enlightening o f ‘the eyes of the h e a rt’ (Eph 1:18)” (Beare, 131). 16 πλήν ε ις δ έφθάσαμεν, τω αύτω σ το ιχεΐν , “In any case, let us live up to whatever tru th we have already attained.” T he final sentence in this section is the m ost difficult o f all, and its difficulty has been the cause of num erous alterations o f the Greek text (see Note h ) . This sentence begins with the particle πλήν, a word that is used here to break off the discussion in o rd er to em phasize what is truly im p o rtan t (BAGD; BDF §449 [2]) and is translated “in any case.” The m ain verb o f the sentence is really an infinitive, σ τ ο ιχ ε ΐν , “to live up to ,” used with the force o f an em phatic im perative (for this use of the infinitive see BDF §389, based on the pioneering study of Daube, “Participle and Im perative”). It is derived from a verb that originally m eant “to be drawn up in a line,” b u t which came to be used m etaphorically in the sense of “to be in line w ith,” “to follow in som eone else’s steps,” “to hold to ,” or “to agree w ith” (BAGD; cf. Gal 6:16). In choosing this verb Paul once again stresses the im portance of harm ony and m utual cooperation in spite o f whatever divergence o f opinion may exist. T he rem aining words, ε ις δ έφθάσαμεν, τω αύτω, lit. “toward that which we have attained, by the sam e,” although certainly awkward, are nevertheless fairly understandable, ε ις , “tow ard,” with the accusative indicates the direction of the C hristian’s m oral m ovem ent. T he relative p ro n o u n 0 , “th at w hich,” has no clear and certain antecedent, b u t based on the context one may correctly infer that it points back to whatever knowledge God will reveal and whatever level of knowledge has already been attained (έφθάσαμεν, “we have attain ed ”) . τω αύτω, “by the sam e,” is a p ro n o u n that refers to the preceding clause, ε ις δ έφθάσαμεν, “toward th at which we have attain ed ,” and the dative case is the dative of the norm or standard (cf. Acts 15:1; Gal 5:16, 25; 6:16; V incent). T ogether these words constitute P aul’s appeal to the Philippians to fall into step with him and together with him begin to live up to whatever level o f knowledge they have already acquired by revelation (for this “gift of the Spirit” see Rom 12:3-8; 1 Cor 12:1-10; 14:30; see Μ. B. T u rner, VE 15 [1985] 7-64). G ranted there m ay be differences of opinion, different levels of understanding, different degrees of apprehension of truth, and need for fu rth er revelations, yet these differences m ust n o t be allowed to create dissension or generate criticism of one another. They m ust not cause C hristians to fall back from high spiritual attainm ent. W hat Christians are and

214

Philippians 3 : 12-16

claim to be (i.e., m en and wom en o f the Spirit, as in Gal 5:25) m ust govern how they live (M artin [1976]). The conduct o f C hristians m ust be consistent with the level o f tru th they have already reached (cf. n e b ) . And th at conduct should conform to the p attern o f life they are to follow as those “in C hrist Jesus” (Phil 2:5; for a full discussion see Fee [1995], 357-62). Explanation After having expressed to the Philippians his all-consuming desire to know Christ, Paul proceeds now to disclaim that he has reached that goal. Intense as his desire m ay be, he has no t yet grasped the full significance of Christ, n o r has he come to a perfect knowledge o f him. He emphatically refuses to place him self am ong any who m ight claim such perfection. But this falling short o f a com plete knowledge of Christ in no way dam pens his ardor. Rather, it causes him to set out on a course, m uch like a ru n n e r in a race, to see w hether he m ight indeed fully com prehend the m eaning o f this majestic person. H e is spurred on in his endeavor no t only because he is fully known by Christ but also because he was forcefully taken hold of by Christ, saved from ruining his life, and set off in a new direction of useful service to God and people. Christian hymnody has m ade this a stirring call to endeavor and action. As an exam ple we may cite the once-popular hymn “Fight the Good Fight with All Thy M ight” (J. S. B. Monsell [1863]) with the stanza: Run the straight race through G od’s good grace. Lift up thine eyes to seek His face. Life with its path before thee lies. Christ is the path and Christ the prize.

Thus, although Paul again disclaims having achieved perfect knowledge of Christ, even after a careful evaluation of his successful life as Christ’s apostle, he also reaffirms the one course of action open before him: to forget the past with all its failures and successes—all those things that could paralyze him with guilt or im pede him with pride—and to stretch out to the future. Like an athlete with every nerve and muscle taut, with body thrust forward, with eyes firmly fixed on the goal, so Paul pictures his own ceaseless exertion, his own intensity of desire to reach the end of life and gain the prize. Every part of his existence is thrust wholly into the contest to win.Just as the victor in the Olympian games was called up to the judges’ stand to receive the crown at the hands of the judge (agōnothetēs), so Paul hopes to be called up to receive from God the award he coveted: full knowledge of Christ Jesus. Such perfection, he had come to realize, could only be achieved beyond this life at the end of the race. As a consequence he urges all who claim already to be perfect to realize that for the tim e being true Christian perfection “consists only in . . . striving for p erfectio n ” (Weiss, ad loc.). H e fears that “the p erfect” will cease their m oral striving, falsely believing that they have achieved their goal, whereas Paul knows that the goal is at the end of the course, at the end of life. Consequently, he knows that the m ark o f the perfect person is n o t to reckon oneself perfect b u t to realize th at th ere still is a long way to go and m uch good still to do. But since there were those at Philippi who had a different attitude about perfection from that which Paul cham pioned and they could n o t be convinced by logical argum ent or won

215

Translation

over by apostolic dem ands, Paul lovingly com m ends them to God, who alone can reveal the tru th to them by enlightening their m inds. T he apostle is certain that God will do this for them . In the m eantim e he asks only that together and in harm ony they m arch forward into the future, living up to the level of understanding they have already reached. We may summarize the thrust of the preceding paragraphs in a topical way. The title may well be “Eyes on the Prize.” Part of the problem Paul addresses in this chapter has to do with claims m ade by certain opponents that in this life perfection is attainable. Perfection is, of course, a loosely used term and one that changes its m eaning according to the context. The call “Be perfect” (Matt 5:48) is heard in both the o t and the n t , and is said to be a possibility in hum an experience. Yet m ost of us would run away from such a claim for ourselves, as the saying goes, “Nobody’s perfect.” In Scripture, as distinct from everyday speech, perfect means “m ature, wellrounded, com plete” (Heb. tāmîm; Gk. teleios), no t sinless or even blameless (contrast Phil 3:6). This explains why Paul can confess that perfection is a goal to be striven for, yet at v 15 the same word (teleios) is used o f “those of us who are perfect” (referring to all Christians). We are on the road to full salvation that awaits the resurrection (v 11), as T ertullian rem arked (Christians “long for the resurrection” [spectare resurrectionem]). Yet we are to seek and strive for the best God has for his people.

D. Paul’s Life: A Model to Imitate

(3:17)

Bibliography B etz, H . D. Nachfolge u n d N achahm ung Jesu Christi im Neuen Testament. BHT 37. Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1967. D e B oer, W. P. The Im itation o f Paul: A n Exegetical Study. Kampen: Kok, 1962. H aw thorne, G. F. “The Imitation of Christ: Discipleship in Philippians.” In Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament. Ed. R. N. Longenecker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. 163-79. L o fth o u se, W. F. “Singular and Plural in St. Paul’s Letters.”E xp Tim 58 (1947) 17982. M cM ichael, W. F. “Be Ye Followers Together of Me: συμμιμηται μου yiveo Q e —Phil. III. 17.” E xp Tim 5 (1893-94) 287. O ’Brien, P. T. “The Gospel and Godly Models in Philippians.” In Worship, Theology a nd M inistry in the Early Church. FS R. P. Martin, ed. M. J. Wilkins and T. Paige. JSNTSup 87. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992. 273-84. Schulz, A. Nachfolgen u n d Nachahmen: Studien ü ber das Verhältnis der neutestamentlichen J ü ngerschaft zur urchristlichen Vorbildethik. SANT 6. Munich: Kösel, 1962. Stanley, D. M. “Imitation in Paul’s

Letters: Its Significance for His Relationship to Jesus and to His Own Christian Foundations.” In From Jesus to Paul. FS F. W. Beare, ed. P. Richardson and J. C. Hurd. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier UP, 1984. 127-41. W ulf, F. “Seid meine Nachahmer, Brüder! (Phil 3,17).” GuL 34 (1961) 241-47.

Translation 17Continue to join with one another in imitating me, my brothers [and sisters]. Keep your eyes constantly on those who live according to the pattern I [or, we] gave you.

216

Phiuppians 5:17

Form/Structure/Setting In accordance with the form o f instruction established within the letter, namely, warnings followed by encouragem ent thro u g h exam ple, Paul again encourages his Philippian friends (αδελφοί, “brothers [and sisters]”) by giving them a m odel (or models) to follow as they set about organizing their lives within a pagan world where values differ radically from Judeo-C hristian values. Against am bition, conceit, pride, and a self-serving attitude, Paul holds before the eyes of the Philippians the humility, self-emptying, and self-giving conduct o f Christ, whose whole life was dedicated to obeying God and serving others (Phil 2:6-8). Against the cry o f “perfection now ” (3:12-16) Paul shows, by the striking and authoritative exam ple o f his own personal experience, that this is a false call, harm ful to progress, and an im pedim ent to the life of constant m oral struggle that m ust characterize the C hristian’s entire existence. O n the o th er hand, it may be noted, as an alternative interpretation, that it is striking that Paul should rem ark “jo in with one an o th er in im itating me,” no t Christ. To draw in the “example of the incarnate L ord” in the interpretation of 3:17 is a theological decision not required in the text, and it may be open to several objections, which have been rehearsed in the previous pages (see the Reviser’s Application in the Explanation of 2:5-11). T here it was argued that C hrist’s display of humility in 2:6-8 is unique since he is the preexistent O ne who becam e incarnate by an act all Christians regard as sui generis and is h onored by elevation to a station of lordship, also believed to be unique since he is proclaim ed as Lord of the universe and cosmic powers. In 3:17 Paul’s appeal is to him self as one with his im plied readers and a fellow worker of the divine family, still struggling in via, “along the way,” in hope of reaching perfection in patria, “at hom e.” Thus Paul denies a “realized eschatology,” suggested in 2 Tim 2:17-18 as earlier at C orinth (1 Cor 4:8; 15:12). O n the role o f Paul as exam ple, using 1 Cor 11:1 and Phil 3:17, 4:9, see the brief, b u t interesting, survey in J. Moffatt, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, MNTC (London: H o d d er & Stoughton, 1938), 146-49. He writes of Paul (146): He had been the first Christian they knew. He was the founder of their church. He had stood, and he claims that he still stands, for them as an em bodim ent of the faith. Let them recollect his behaviour and the principles he had exhibited in his conduct.

This one verse, then, stands as a warning by exam ple against two wrong em phases originating from P aul’s Jewish opponents (cf. Phil 3:2). It is a w arning against the belief th at one can be perfect now (3:12-16) and against the belief that external rituals can be a necessary m eans of grace (3:18-19). Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, n o t having yet attained perfection, is thereby driven on to still greater m oral endeavors. H e calls the Philippians to follow his exam ple, quit claim ing perfection, an d get busy living the Christian life. Paul, a Jew p ar excellence (3:56), having seen the all-sufficiency of Christ, is thereby forced to su rren d er confidence in the effectiveness of the observance of food laws or rites o f circumcision (3:19) to establish a right relationship betw een him self and God. The Philippians should follow his exam ple and abandon thinking only of things that belong to this world. They should forsake putting confidence solely in hum an accom plishm ents (έν σαρκί π επ οιθότες, “putting confidence in ourselves” [3:3]).

Comment

217

This verse stands as a transition po in t between these two errors of perfection and o f trust in Judaism ’s boundary m arkers. It forms the conclusion to the one and the introduction to the other. Comment 17 συμμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, αδελφοί, “continue to jo in with one an o th er in im itating me, my b rothers [and sisters].” For the th ird tim e now in chap. 3 Paul addresses the Philippians as “brothers [and sisters] ” (cf. w 1,13), rem inding them that they belong to the same spiritual family with him , in which equality is the hallm ark. This rem in d er is im portant to prevent any irritation at or m isunderstanding o f what the apostle is now about to say, namely, “Im itate m e!” In this statem ent Paul does n o t in ten d to say that he is b etter than anyone else. In calling for im itation, it is n o t for people to em ulate his privileges, achievem ents, or advantages; ra th e r he calls for them to copy his self-denying and self-giving acts (1 Cor 11:1), willingness to suffer for the sake of others (1 Thess 1:6; 2:14; cf. 2 Thess 3:7-9), losing all for Christ, im itation o f C hrist (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thess 1:6; cf. E p h 5:l; Phil 2:6-11), seeking for a goodness n o t in him self b u t in God, and admission that perfection is n o t yet his, b u t is eagerly pursued by him (cf. 1 Cor 4:16-17). (1 Cor 11:1, however, may yield a different sense if the translation “Be im itators o f me, as I belong to Christ [κάγώ Χ ριστοί)]” is accepted, pointing back to 1 Cor 1:12.) In calling for imitation Paul uses an am biguous expression that is open to m ore than one interpretation: συμμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, lit. either “becom e fellow imitators o f m e” or “becom e fellow imitators with m e.” The noun συμμιμητής, “fellow im itator,” is found only here in all o f Greek literature, hence the ambiguity. (1) Some have pursued its m eaning by studying each of the nouns in the n t that are similarly com pounded with the preposition συν (συ μ‫)־‬, “with.” They conclude from their study that Paul m eans “Become imitators along with me of som ething or som eone,” i.e., Christ (cf. 1 Cor 11:1; and see McM ichael, Exp Tim 5 [1893-94] 287). (2) O thers suggest that the prepositional prefix συν (συμ-), “with,” in συμμιμητής has no m eaningful value whatsoever, συμμιμηταί, therefore, is equivalent to μ ιμηταί, “im itators,” on the analogy of έπομαι and συνέπομαι, both of which m ean “to follow along with.” Paul, then, is saying nothing m ore than he has said elsewhere, simply, “Become imitators of m e” (cf. 1 Cor 4:16; and see W. Michaelis, TD N T 4:667 n. 13), adding that his appeal is to “my ways in C hrist” (Phil 4:17). (3) More likely, however, the noun συμμιμητής was coined by Paul from the verb συμμιμεΐσθαι, “to jo in in im itating” (see LSJ), to stress his desire that there be a com m unity effort in following his example: “Im itate me, one and all of you together!” (Betz, Nachfolge, 145-53; see also De Boer, Imitation, 169-88; Schulz, Nachfolgen, passim). Such an interpretation (a) best accounts for the origin and m eaning of the com pound word συμμιμητής as “fellow im itator,” (b) does justice to the genitive μου, “of m e,” by taking it as the object of the action im plied in the noun it modifies: συμμιμηταί, “fellow imitators of m e” (c) takes into consideration that there is nothing in the context to indicate that Paul wishes the Philippians to imitate him as he imitates Christ, and (d) reinforces Paul’s emphasis on the im portance of the Christians’ corporate life, doing things together and in harmony. καί σκοπείτε τούς ούτω περιπατούντας καθώς εχετε τύπον ημάς, “keep your eyes constantly on those who live according to the pattern I [or, we] gave you.” Paul,

218

Philippians 3:17

however, recognizes that it may be difficult for some to imitate one who is absent from them . H ence, he continues by urging the Philippians to fix their eyes on those n earer at hand, on those, perhaps, within their own community, like Epaphroditus (Phil 2:25-30), whose lives conform to his teaching. Yet Paul rem ains within the trio o f persons to whom he is appealing (Timothy, Epaphroditus, and himself; see O ’Brien, “Gospel and Godly M odels,” esp. 278-82, for a full discussion). T he verb Paul uses here, σκοπεΐν, “to keep o n e ’s eyes o n ,” picks up on the them e in tro d u ced by σκοπός‫־‬, the “goal-m arker” upon which ru n n ers fix their eyes, in v 14. It conveys the idea o f close observation, fixed attention. Sometim es it m eans “to m ark ” and stay away from (Rom 16:17). H ere, however, it m eans “to m ark ” and follow (Lightfoot). P aul’s concern is that his friends will notice and follow people who consistently walk (τούς π ερ ιπ α τού ντα ς, “those who live,” a p resen t participle), i.e., who continuously behave in such a way (ούτω, “in this way”) th at th eir daily conduct em bodies the essence of the Christian faith as he, Paul, has experienced it and m odeled it (τύπον, “p a tte rn ”) . T he apostle asks them to “look at m en they know and see the p ro o f o f his teaching in their lives” (M artin [1976], 143), and that advice would surely include himself. T he Greek καθώς έ χ ετε τύπον ήμάς, however, raises a question. Literally it says, “as you have us [ήμάς] for a pattern [τύπον].” Does the ήμάς, “us,” here m ean Paul and others or simply Paul by himself? Should it be translated “us” (as m ost translations) or “m e” (cf. m o f f a t t , l b ) ? Several factors point to “m e” as the correct translation: (1) T he word τύπος, originally m eaning an “im pression left by a blow” (cf. J o h n 20:25), comes through usage to m ean an “archetype,” “p attern ,” or “m odel” (BDAG). In Paul’s letters it refers to “the determ inative ‘exam ple’ of the obedience of faith . . . the m odel which makes an impress because it is m oulded by G od” (L. Goppelt, TDATT8:248-49). (2) τύπον, “p attern ,” is singular and ήμάς, “us,” is plural. If ήμάς, “us,” were a real plural, one m ight have expected τύπους, “p atterns” (plural), to m atch it: “us as patterns.” (O n the other hand, one example can serve as a m odel to several people.) (3) The order and choice o f words in this sentence imply that Paul differentiates between him self as m odel and others, and considers him self to be the suprem e m odel (τύπος, “p a tte rn ”) on a plane above oth er worthy models. His words are συμμιμηταί μου, “be fellow imitators of m e,” on the one hand, b ut σκοπείτε τούς ούτω περιπατούντας, “mark and follow those who walk in this way,” on the other. (4) The Philippians are to follow “those who walk in this way” only because their teaching and lifestyle accord with the pattern laid down by som eone o th er than themselves. The Philippians have a standard by which they can ju d g e any so-called leader: καθώς έ χ ε τε τύπον ήμάς, “as you have us [i.e., me] for a p attern .” (5) If the “us” in this phrase is pressed, one is immediately at a loss to know who it is that Paul elevates along with him self to this high place of “determ inative exam ple.” In the im m ediate context he gives no hint about who this m ight be. (Yet he does appeal to Tim othy and E paphroditus in the previous chapter.) (6) T he literary plural, i.e., the use of “w e /u s” instead of “I /m e ,” was a widespread tendency am ong Greek authors (BDF §280). (7) Paul him self sometimes uses “w e/u s”when he really means “1 /m e” (Rom 1:5; 2 Cor 11:6 [φανερώσαντες, “[we] having m ade this evident”]; 1 Thess 2:18; 3:1-5, especially w 3 and 5; see Moule, Idiom-Book, 118-19). As a consequence it is no t always possible to determ ine w hen he is referring to his own life and personal experiences and when he is identifying him self with some or all of the group he m entions (but see Lofthouse, ExpTim5S [1947] 179-82). (8) It has been suggested that the context indicates that

Explanation

219

Paul intends by his remarks here in v 17 to assert his apostolic authority in order to counter conflicting ideas and practices at Philippi (cf. w 16, 1 8 -1 9 ). “Be fellow imitators of m e” means, then, no t only “Walk as I do, b u t ... also ... (and prim arily): Recognize my authority, be o bedient” (W. Michaelis, TDNT 4:668; against De Boer, Imitation, 184- 87). W hen all these elem ents are p u t together, it appears that Paul is here using the plural pronoun ήμάς, “us,” bu t has in m ind the singular 6μ6, “m e.” He uses the literary “us” to m ean “me.”Alternatively, the plural “us” may refer to Paul and his associates (see Bockmuehl, 22). Explanation Paul’s instruction “C ontinue to jo in with one another in imitating m e” appears on the surface to be an expression o f intolerable conceit. But it is not (and perhaps less so if Paul’s use of the personal pronoun is broadened to include his fellow workers). The apostle is fully aware of his potential to fail (1 Cor 9:27), lack of “perfection,” and struggle to attain (Phil 3 :1 2 -4 ). Nevertheless, confident that his own m anner of life—characterized by self-renunciation, humility, and service to others—and his own presuppositions—namely, that God is, that Christ is the only way to approach God, and that the Holy Spirit provides the power to live acceptably before God—are so thoroughly right and true, he is unafraid to present himself, in whom these characteristics and beliefs are em bodied, as a m odel for others to follow. Like an experienced craftsman who shows an apprentice how to do a difficult jo b (Grayston) or a scout who knows the way and leads a caravan through perilous terrain, he is in no way asham ed to say “Follow m e!” n o r is he arrogant in doing so. But if the Philippians find it difficult to im itate Paul because he is many miles rem oved from them , he urges them to seek ou t others whose conduct is wholly in accord with the pattern he him self has established. All o f this shows the im portance o f m odels for the early church. Those first Christians, com ing as they did from a pagan society with values often totally antithetical to Christian values, n eed ed n o t only to hear what was right b u t also to see it done. It was inadequate for them to have Christian tru th presented in a code of precepts and maxims. They n eed ed to observe it em bodied in the lives of C hrist’s m inisters. H ence Paul was keenly conscious o f his own responsibility to give the Philippians tangible p ro o f o f the tru th of the gospel as tru th m ade concrete, quantifiable, and m easurable in a hum an life, his life and the lives o f those who followed his example. We are rem in d ed that C hristian influence, seen in the lives of o th er people, is o f inestim able value in every age. And this is especially so when we have the authoritative persons of the apostolic figures, both m en and wom en, to be our guides. T he background here is the rabbinic idea o f hălākâ, lit. walking, as setting a p attern for behavior. So the apostles, and Paul preem inently, serves as a living hălākâ to guide the lives of his people. T he Philippians had no w ritten scriptures and so were d ep e n d en t on hum an lives to be their “m odel,” and it is as such that Paul claims to have lived am ong them since his first visit (in Acts 16:12-40) when he bore the sham e of a beating and an im prisonm ent. T he evidence for this event in Acts, as reflected in his letters, is seen in 1 Thess 2:2, and this is linked with the them e o f m odeling in 1 Thess 2:14. It is a pleasing sidelight on Paul the hum an being th at he can (with some risk of immodesty) p oint thus to him self and his missionary team (Tim othy and E paphroditus in clu d ed ).

220

Philippians 3 : 18-19

E. Warning against Imitating Other Teachers (3:18-19) Bibliography Betz, H . D. Nachfolge und NachahmungJesu Christi im Neuen Testament. BHT 37. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1967. Feine, P. Die Abfassung des Philipperbriefes in Ephesus: Mit einerAnlage über Rom. 16, 3-20 als Epheserbrief. BFCT 20. Gü tersloh: Bertelsmann, 1916. Gnilka, J. “Die antipaulinische Mission in Philippi.” BZ 9 (1965) 258-76. Gunther, J. J. St. Paul’s Opponents and Their Background. NovTSup 35. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Harnack, A. The Mission andExpansion

of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. Trans. J. Moffatt. 2d ed. 2 vols. New York: Putnam ’s Sons, 1908. Holladay, C. R. “Paul’s Opponents in Phil. 3.” ResQ 3 (1969) 77-90. Jewett, R. “The Agitators and the Galatian Congregation.” NTS 17 (1970-71) 198-212. Klijn, A. F. J. “Paul’s O pponents.” NovT7 (1964-65) 278-84. K oester, H . “The Purpose of the Polemic of a Pauline Fragment (Philippians III).” NTS8 (1961-62) 317-32. M oore, G. F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1927-30. R ichardson, P. Israel in the Apostolic Church. SNTSMS 10. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1969. Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Schmithals, W. Paul and the Gnostics. Schürer, E. A History of theJewish People in the Time ofJesus Christ. Rev. G. Vermes, F. Millar, M. Black, and M. Goodman. 3 vols. Edinburgh: T 8c T Clark, 1973-87. Translation 18For many are living a as enemies of the cross of Christ. I told you about them many times before, and I tellyou about them again, weeping as I do so.19Their end is destruction. Their observance of food laws and their glorying in circumcision has become their god. They are people whose minds are set on earthly things. N otes a $p46 inserts β λ ύ π Ε Τ Ε , Took out for,” before τ ο ύ ς Ε χ θ ρ ο ύ ς, “the enemies,” perhaps in an unnecessary attempt to explain the accusative τ ο ύ ς Ε χ θ ρ ο ύ ς, “the enemies,” or perhaps to make β λ ύ π Ε Τ Ε τ ο ύ ς Ε χ θ ρ ο ύ ς, Took out for the enemies,” analogous ΐ ο β λ ύ π Ε Τ Ε τ ο ύ ς κ ύ ν α ς , Took out for [or, observe] the dogs,” in Phil 3:2. The theme of “looking” runs through the chapter, with models to imitate and avoid.

Form/Structure/Setting This section relates to the preceding section as cause to effect. Why does Paul press the Philippians to jo in together in im itating him (Phil 3:17)? Why is he co n cern ed th at they m ark and follow those who “walk” (i.e., live, according to the Heb. idiom ) according to the pattern he has set o ut (3:17)? Because (γάρ, “fo r”) th ere are many would-be leaders, teachers, and m odels who “walk” contrary to this pattern. They are people who teach wrong doctrine, m odel wrong behavior, and who, if followed, would carry to destruction all who pay heed to them . O nce again, as in 3:2, the apostle breaks ou t into the harshest kind of language to describe these persons, these “enem ies of the cross of C hrist”: “T heir end is

Comment

221

destruction. T h eir observance o f food laws and their glorying in circum cision has becom e th eir god. They are people whose m inds are set on earthly things.” O nce again his passionate feelings against them are registered in his rhetoric. Its features are short, verbless sentences; constructions th at are broken off w ithout p ro p er com pletion; clipped phrases whose m eaning defies precise explanation; and strong words whose force lies n o t in lexical definitions b u t in the sound and suddenness with which they address the reader. O nce again he writes furiously about people whom he does n o t nam e. And this suggests that they are the same o p ponents in b oth instances (3:2-3 par. 3 :1 8 - 9 ) , as n o ted below. Because Paul does no t nam e these “enem ies,” no one today can be certain of their identity. This fact, however, does n o t stop speculation about who they were, n o r should it. T he understanding of the “enem ies” determ ines to a large extent the m eaning o f the words he uses to describe them . T herefore, any attem pt to identify them can only be m et with appreciation. (1) Some interpreters see these as Jewish Christians (Judaizers), who opposed the gospel o f free grace as Paul p reached it, refused to believe that the death of C hrist on the cross was sufficiently adequate in itself to secure the favor o f God, and required, therefore, the keeping of the law as a necessary supplem ent for salvation (J. J. M uller). (2) O thers u n d erstan d them to be pagans, who opposed the Christian gospel because it disturbed th eir life o f sham eful lust (Weiss). (3) O thers believe that they were antinom ian Christians, people who had distorted P aul’s doctrine of grace and in terp reted Christian liberty as license to gratify the lusts o f the flesh (Jones; Michael; Scott; Beare; Betz, Nachfolge, 151), or Christians with gnostic tendencies, people who believed they had reached such a degree of spiritual perfection that what they did on the physical plane was inconsequential (cf. Koester, N T S 8 [1962] 328). (4) O thers think that Paul had in m ind those who were willing to deny Christ in the time o f persecution and th reat o f m artyrdom (L ohm eyer). (5) O thers view these as Christians who refused to recognize the decisive eschatological nature of the event o f the cross and resurrection of Christ, which inaugurated a radically new o rd er o f things and which stam ped this new way o f life as a life of self-sacrifice and service (Collange, M artin [1976]). (6) O thers are certain that Paul had in m ind h ere the same group of people he addressed at the beginning of chap. 3 and to whom he alludes again in w 12-16. They may have been Jews who were ard en t propagandists seeking to win converts to their religion in every p art of the world (H oulden) o r Jewish Christians who were insisting on physical signs of initiation, priding themselves on their privileges o f pedigree (3:5-6) and proclaim ing a message o f righteousness and perfection that was attainable now simply by subm itting to circum cision and complying with certain food laws. This last view, with these two possible variations, is the one form erly adopted here, and it is in light o f such a view that w 18-19 will be in terp re ted in the Comment that follows (see Form/Structure/Setting on Phil 3:1- 3 and Introduction, P aul’s Opponents and the False Teachers at Philippi). Paul can be seen to give a serious rem inder of the need to avoid those teachers who resisted his message and led others astray. Comment 18 πολλοί γάρ π^ριπατοϋσιν, “for many are living.” If one should inquire why Paul so urgently asked his Philippian friends to im itate him and closely to follow

222

Philippians 3 : 18-19

o th er worthy leaders like himself, the answer is quickly given. T he conjunction γάρ, “fo r,” with which this new section begins, states the reason: It was because, in contrast to the few who conducted themselves (τού?ούτω π6ριπατοϋντα?, “those who live in this way” [v 17]) in accordance with the p attern o f teaching and living set forth by the apostle, there were many (πολλοί) who conducted themselves (περιπατούσιν, “are living”) in a very different way that was n o t only wrongheaded, b u t evil (κακώς, “in an evil way”: although this word is n o t in the text, it may correctly be inferred from the context; see V incent). This statem ent is n o t necessarily a com m ent on their m oral perform ance, however. These people may have been, an d probably were, very religious, honest, sincere Christians. But if th eir “goodness” and the religious acts that they faithfully perform ed in any way ten d ed to keep them from casting themselves wholly upo n G od and asking for the righteousness th at he supplies only through Jesus Christ, if their beliefs and practices set them in opposition to the gospel o f salvation by C hrist alone and its outw orking in a life o f obedience and earnest m oral endeavor, if their doing the law th reaten ed the exclusiveness o f the forgiveness o f sins by faith in Christ, then, for Paul, th eir conduct was indeed “evil” because it bro u g h t ultim ate harm both to themselves an d to others (see Comment on v 2; Richardson, Israel, 114; see also Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 426-28, 550). And even if these Jewish m issionaries h ad n o t yet reached Philippi with their teaching, Paul nevertheless considered it necessary to warn against them simply because he knew of their num bers (πολλοί, “m any”) and the zeal with which they propagated their religion (cf. H arnack, Mission, 1:1-10; M oore, Judaism, 1:93-121; Schü rer, History, 3.1:15076 [§31, V]; an d see M artin [1976], 143-44, for a review of options). ους πολλάκις eXeyov ύμΐν, νυν be και κλαίων λέγω, “I told you about them m any times before, and I tell you about them again, weeping as I do so.” So num erous were these missionaries, and so persuasive their message that Paul had often (πολλακις, “m any tim es”) w arned the Philippians about them , believing th at rep etition was an excellent preventative. He used to warn them (note the im perfect eXeyov, “I used to tell”) in speech when he was present with them in Philippi an d in letters (cf. Pol. Phil. 3.2) w hen he was absent. He warns them again now {νυν) . A nd he does so with tears. This is rare for Paul, who does n o t often show his em otions, especially in dealing with his adversaries. T he participle κλαίων, “weeping,” is a circum stantial participle of m anner, form ed from the verb κλα i 6 1v , “to w eep.” This verb implies n o t only tears “bu t lam entation, audible g rie f’ (Moule; BDAG; cf. M att 2:18). It was chosen by Paul to express the d ep th o f his em otion at this point, as he reflects on these people. Paul does n o t say th at he weeps for anyone (cf. M att 2:18; Rev 18:9 T R ). This may in d eed have been the case, that is, that he wept for those who rejected the cross o f Christ; for Paul witnesses elsewhere to the deep grief he has for the Jews who do n o t believe the gospel, the ceaseless pain he has in his h ea rt for them , expressing the wish that he him self m ight be accursed, could this effect the salvation o f his b rothers and sisters (Rom 9:1-5). It is easy, therefore, to im agine his pain here spilling over once again into lam entation for these about whom he writes (cf. Acts 20:31; 2 Cor 2:4 to see the tenderness that characterized P aul’s dealing with people; b u t these references are to C hristian people, n o t his declared o p p o nents). But the verb κλαίων, “w eeping,” in fact is used here w ithout any object, indicating perhaps that P aul’s tears were tears n o t of com passion for his

Comment

223

o p p o nents bu t tears o f frustration at their obduracy. His experience with them in the place o f his confinem ent showed to him m ore clearly than ever how im pendous they were to the gospel and how vigorously they opposed—to the point of persecution— anyone who dared to proclaim it (Acts 23:1-3, 12-15; 24:1-9; 28:25-29; at Ephesus Paul had m et with deadly opposition to the p oint o f his life being at risk [1 Cor 15:32; 2 Cor 1:8-10, 4:11-12]). τούς εχθρούς τού σταυρού τού Χριστού, “as enem ies of the cross of C hrist.” Thus in frustration and anguish Paul labels them n o t merely “enem ies o f the cross of C hrist” b u t “the enem ies [τούς εχθρούς] of the cross of C hrist.” And why does he so label them? Because the message of the cross—which is n othing o th er than the gospel, indeed an exhaustive statem ent of the co n ten t of the gospel, namely, th at C hrist m ust be crucified, that the Messiah had to die in o rd er for sinners to be forgiven by G od—was the very thing th at scandalized the Jews and was treated as folly by the Greeks (1 Cor 1:23). T he gospel was an “offense” to them and “foolishness” because in the cross God did precisely the opposite of what they expected him to do (cf. C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, HNTC [New York: H arp er & Row, 1968] 51, 55; H. C onzelm ann, 1 Corinthians, H erm eneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975] 41, 47). They, therefore, could n o t accept the message o f the cross, n o r could they tolerate its dissem ination. N or could professed believers tolerate the idea o f a suffering apostle, as we know from 2 Cor 10-13 (where the attack on his m inistry came while he was at Ephesus). Paul him self h ad experienced their hostility. H e knew firsthand their opposition to the gospel and their determ ination to stam p ou t th at message that struck at the very h ea rt o f th eir religion (cf. Acts 17:5, 13; 18:6; 19:9) or that brought his own m inistry o f “strength in weakness” into disrepute (2 Cor 12:1-10). In those earliest days o f the history of the church the Jews or Jewish messianic preachers could thus rightly be term ed “the enem ies of the cross o f C hrist” (and 2 Cor 11:13-15 is equally em p h atic). 19 ών τό τέλος απώλεια, “their end is destruction.” If “the cross of Christ,” i.e., “C hrist’s death on the cross,” is the one essential thing for salvation and the Jews, or anyone else for that m atter (especially C hristian leaders who treat a suffering apostle as a contradiction in term s), reject this as absurd and scandalous, then they, by the natu re of things, have tu rn ed away from salvation to its opposite because they have espoused an alien gospel (2 Cor 11:4). Paul says of them , no t with any sense of delight bu t ra th e r o f pain, that ών τό τέλος, “their e n d ” (as in 2 Cor 11:15), as the natural result, the inevitable consequence of their sustained decision, is απώλεια, “destruction” (cf. 1 Cor 1:18). απώλεια originally was used in the sense o f “loss.” Later it came to m ean “waste” (Mark 14:4), or “destruction,” “an n ih ilatio n ,” “ru in .” It was especially used o f eternal destruction as punishm ent for the wicked (Matt 7:13; 2 Pet 3:7; Rev 17:8,11). Paul seems to be using it h ere in this last sense since he couples it with τό τέλος, “the e n d ,” “the goal.” Even so, the precise m eaning of απώλεια is difficult to pin down. H ence, as often is the case, it is best explained in term s of its opposite: σωτηρία, “salvation” (Phil 1:28); π ερ ιπ ο ίη σ ις ψ υχής, “the preserving of o n e ’s soul” (H eb 10:39); £ωή αιώνιος, “eternal life” (John 3:16). For Paul, then, to reject the crucified Christ and live a life n o t shaped by the diaconal character o f Jesus and its cruciform p attern as the sole m eans o f salvation is in effect to reject salvation. It is to lose o n e ’s soul and thus to forfeit life. Elsewhere he says of such people τ o . . . τέλος εκείνων θάνατος,

224

Philippians 3 : 18-19

“th eir en d is d e a th ” (Rom 6:21; he is speaking here of antinom ian Christians, no t Jews) , a condition in which the destiny of life outside o f Christ is tu rn ed to its opposite, i.e., co rru ption (Gal 6:8) or destruction (Rom 9:22) in the active sense o f the word (A. O epke, TDNT 1:396-97), “the absolute antithesis of the life in ten d ed by God and saved by C hrist” (Ridderbos, Paul, 112-13). Bockm uehl (232) wisely com m ents, citing the argum ent in Galatians: “T he logical progression in this ch ap ter (3), from the rejection o f legalistic righteousness to a com m endation o f trust in C hrist and then a w arning against licentiousness, is in fact a fam iliar one in Pauline theology (pace Silva 209).” ών ό 060? ή κοιλία καί ή δόξα έν τη αισχύνη αυτών, “their observance o f food laws and th eir glorying in circum cision has becom e their g o d .” Paul continues his description o f these “enem ies” with words that are am biguous in natu re and with a sentence structure capable o f m istranslation. T he key words in this clause are κοιλία, “belly,” and αισχύνη, “sham e.” O n the surface they seem to say that these people are licentious individuals who “conceive o f no higher good than the satisfaction o f th eir bodily appetites” (Scott, 99), who take delight in sexual sins (see Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics, 110-11; cf. also Weiss, Jones, Michael, B eare). But if the exegesis of this passage is correct thus far, th en κοιλία, “belly,” an d αισχύνη, “sham e,” m ust m ean som ething in addition to gross self-indulgence. In Rom 16:18 κοιλία is used “for that sphere o f things which is opposed by Christ an d which is passing away” (H oulden, 103; cf.J. Behm, TD N T 3:788), things th at in P aul’s m ind could and did include devotion to the law. Early Christian com m entators, such as T heodore o f Mopsuestia, “A m brosiaster,” and Pelagius took κοιλία as a reference to Jewish laws about food (see J. Behm , TDNT 3:788 n. 14). T he n t does n o t elsewhere describe a licentious person in term s o f one who “serves his belly. ”It does m ake clear, however, that the Jews were people very m uch co ncerned ab o u t laws relating to food and drink, what they could and could no t eat, and how they were to eat (Col 2:16, 20-21, 23; cf. H eb 9:10). T he n t indicates, too, th at th e Jews on occasion had elevated traditions having to do with “the belly” to such an exalted place that they took precedence over the laws o f God (cf. Mark 7:1-16). In this sense, then, it could be said that their god, i.e., that which they devoted themselves to, was their belly. T heir scrupulous observance of food laws becam e th eir belly-god (see Feine, Abfassung, 26-28; Ewald and W ohlenberg; Barth; J. Behm, TDNT 3:788; J. J. Mü ller, who und erstan d κοιλία, “belly,” indeed as a reference to food laws, b u t see the persons involved as Judaizers ra th e r than Jews). Alternatively, as an o th er possibility of interpretation, κοιλία can m ean “sexual organs” and so refer to im m oral practices, a view th at has now gained g ro u n d and sees the reference to be eith er to “gluttony” (less probable) or “licentiousness.” Indeed, Schenk (288) relates κοιλία to the freq u en t Pauline m oral term σαρξ, “flesh”/ “self.” If Paul is alluding to punctilious, law-keeping Jews ra th e r than to libertines, th en αισχύνη, “sham e,” is m ore likely to be a reference to “nakedness,” o n e ’s private parts, m eaning those parts of the body that are unpresentable (cf. 1 Cor 12:23), than it is to sham eful lusts, αισχύνη, “sham e,” therefore, becom es P aul’s way o f p o u rin g b itter scorn on the rite of circum cision (cf. Phil 3:2) w hen in his ju d g m e n t circum cision becom es that in which a person boasts (cf. Gal 6:13) and u p o n which one d epends for salvation (Barth, 113: “‘T heir god the belly and their glory in th eir shame!’—a fu rth er allusion to circum cision, which for concreteness

Explanation

225

leaves n o th in g to be desired”). In o th er places Paul gives a h ig h er value to circum cision (Rom 2:25-29; 1 C or 7:19; Gal 6:15), though it is inadequate and lethal if it is trusted for salvation (Gal 5:1-12). O ne fu rther observation about the structure of the sentence is needed. The conjunction και, “an d ,” links ή κοιλία, “the belly,” and ή δόξα, “the glory,” together as a single subject, with 0 0cog, “the god,” as the predicate. T he entire clause, literally translated, should be as follows: “whose god is the belly and the glory in their sham e” (see, however, the disagreem ent of Silva, 212). W hen interpreted, this concise expression m eans n ot “god is their stomach, and their glory is in their sham e” (cf. r s v , n e b , g n b , j b , n i v ) but “they have m ade their stomach and their glory in their shame their god.” This is to say that these people have perm itted food laws and the rite of circumcision to becom e god to them . (O r it may be that they have m ade their sexual fixations and their unbridled appetites their object of worship. Paul does not m ention circumcision per se in this text, nor indeed in the whole of 2 Corinthians.) They have becom e so preoccupied with scrupulous observance of ritual detail, so obsessed with the suprem e im portance (δόξα, “glory”) of circumcision, seeing that it was carried o u t and carried out correctly, that they have had no thought for anything or anyone higher. God has becom e obscured by religion. The true God has been replaced by a false god, w hether a covenant m arker or an antinom ian slogan (“Anything goes!”), to whom devotion is duly paid. οι τα έ π ίγ ε ια φρονουντβς, “they are people whose m inds are set on earthly things.” It is no w onder then th at Paul sums up his attack on these “enem ies of the cross o f C hrist” with his m ost stinging criticism, presented in a nom inative participial phrase that, w ithout any gram m atical connection, expresses his strongest feelings o f am azem ent (L ightfoot). Again it m ust be p ointed ou t that “this is n o t a com m ent on their m oral perform ance; it simply states that for Paul ‘they are co ncerned with values which pass away, having n eith er divine origin or eternal quality’” (H oulden, 103-4, citing Koester, N TS 8 [1961-62] 328; see also Klijn, N o vT 7 [1964-65] 278-80; the resonance with 2 C or 4:16-18 is to be noted, which may suggest a com m on place o f origin). W hat stands as a ju d g m en t against the Jews becom es a w arning to everyone. T here exists always the tragic possibility of exchanging the glorious im m ortal God for some lesser deity. Strangely, this potentiality has the greatest chance of becom ing reality in the realm o f the religious, where doctrine and ritual so easily becom e th at to which people wholly devote themselves and to which they com m it themselves com pletely (cf. Rom 1:21-23, an expose of G entile m orality w ritten from C orinth, where Paul moved after a spell in E phesus). Recent discussion of these verses is summarized in O ’Brien, 450-58. He finds the key thought to be that of “boasting” (common in 2 C orinthians), and this suggests that the issue between Paul and his opponents was eschatological m ore than simply moral. They boasted that their powerful presence in the church was based on their “realized eschatology” (the claim that they were “perfect”), and so they were not subject to moral restraints. The attraction of this view is that it links directly to Phil 3:20-21. Explanation In this section Paul explains why he asks the Philippians to im itate him and to follow closely those leaders who adhere to his teaching and practice. It is because

226

Philippians 3:18-19

th ere are m any o th er leaders who go off in a very different and w rong-headed direction, and who would gladly take the Philippians along with them . T he apostle has often spoken to his friends about these teachers, though his “lost” letters have disappeared. He does so once again with tears of frustration as he realizes finally th at these teachers will n o t change and their hostility toward him and his gospel will never abate. They are enem ies. N ot P aul’s enem ies only, b u t m ore accurately enem ies o f the cross of Christ, i.e., the fact th at the Messiah died on a cross and his death set a p attern of self-denying service, as seen in the Christ-hymn o f Phil 2:6-11. They are non-C hristian or Christian Jews who have set themselves against P aul’s gospel th at says that salvation is exclusively through the crucified and resurrected Christ. They are enem y “N um ber O n e ” o f the cross, the enemy, to whom the message o f the cross is a aKCtv8aX0v, “stum bling block,” a cause o f u tter revulsion, a reason for anger and opposition. They will have nothing to do with it, an d they will try to do everything they can against it. Thus, because these Jews reject o u t o f h an d the only one who can save them , preserve th eir souls, and give them life, th ere is nothing left bu t for them to experience the opposite— loss, destruction, and death, the u tter ruin o f their lives. They seem to resem ble the people d en o u n ced in P aul’s strongest language in 2 Cor 11:13-15 ( n i v ) as “false apostles . . . and [Satan’s] servants” whose τέλος, “e n d ,” is eternal ruin. D estruction will m ost surely be their en d if they persist in their rejection o f the crucified Christ, even though they are scrupulously precise in keeping the law. T he care with which they observed every last p recep t concerning food and drink and th eir glorying in the ancient covenantal rite of circum cision (according to one u n d erstan d in g of the text) did n o t solve their problem , b u t ra th e r exacerbated it. Why? Because those who faithfully perform ed such religious practices m ade them th eir god. They overlooked the true God by paying too m uch attention to ritual. T h eir m inds becam e set on earthly things, and they lost any ability to look up (cf. Col 3:2, although here antinom ian ideas are in view [3:5] and future ju d g m e n t is th reaten ed [3:6], which is an alternative understanding o f Phil 3:1819; the Colossian letter may be dated to an Ephesian captivity). W hat makes this section so poignant is th at Paul takes the m ost exalted religious an d ethical austerity of those he would warn against and describes it in term s that if found in any o th er context would have to be understood as a description of the basest o f bodily sins. But this is intentional. T hat is precisely how Jewish piety, as Barth (114) observes, really does look, seen from the standpoint of the preaching of the cross.. . . O f course Paul is speaking of depravity, but the fact that he brands as depraved those who, bypassing the cross of Christ and bypassing faith and its righteousness, call for holiness and cleanness—that he drags their glory in the mire (he may well and truly do it, after having done exactly the same with his own glory in w 7-9 ) — that is the bitter point of w [18-19].

T he em otional ten o r of these sober words is alm ost unique in P aul’s pastoralia. If, on an alternative understanding of the text, the people in m ind are professed believers an d teachers m asquerading as Christian leaders, then the gravam en of the charge is one o f being antinom ian, i.e., offering a relaxed m orality on the m istaken assum ption that religion and righteousness have nothing in com m on.

Bibliography

227

This error, confusing “freedom from sin” with “freedom to sin” and condoning the latter, dogged P aul’s steps in several of his churches, as we know from Rom 3:8; 6:1-14 as well as Gal 5:13-15. T here is a sad line of m istaken teachers and leaders in the history o f the church who have seen no incom patibility between indulgence and the practice o f devotion and who have divorced religion from righteousness. The line extends from the early centuries to the prophets of Zwickau and Bunyan’s Ranters to Rasputin in the Russia o f the Romanovs. Paul does n o t m ince words in condem nation, as in 2 Cor 11:13-15, and rem ains in every period of subsequent church history the im placable foe of a teaching on “cheap grace” (Bonhoeffer) th at may be presum ed to offer an easy forgiveness for sins and refuses a strenuous call o f “die to live,” echoing Jesus’ words in Mark 8:34-38.

F.

Paul’s Hope in the Future and Unseen

(3:20-21)

Bibliography Barclay, J. M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 b. c.e . -1 1 7 c.e .). Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996. B eck er, J. “Erwäg u ngen z u P hil 3 , 20-21.” T Z 27 (1971) 16-29. B ockm uehl, M. ‘“The Form of God’ (Phil. 2.6): Variations on a Theme of Jewish Mysticism.” J T S n.s. 48 (1997) 1-23. B ornh äuser, K. Jesus Imperator M undi. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1938. Bö ttger, P. C. “Die eschatologische Existenz der Christen: Erwägungen zu Philipper 3, 20.” ZNW60 (1969) 244-63. C ox, S. “The Heavenly Citizenship.” Expositor, 2 d ser., 3 (1882) 303-13. D alton, W .J. “The Integrity of Philippians.” Bib60 (1979) 97-102. E ngers,M . “Πολιτ6υμα.” Mnemosyne 5 4(1926) 154-61. Flanagan, N . “A Note on Philippians 3:20-21.” C BQ 18 (1956) 8-9. Fuchs, L. DieJ u d e n Ägyptens i n ptolemäischer u n d römischer Zeit. Vienna: Rath, 1924. Garland, D. E. “The Composition and Unity of Philippians: Some Neglected Literary Factors.” N o v T 27 (1985) 141-73. Gundry, R. H . Sōma in Biblical Theology: With Emphasis on Pauline Anthropology. SNTSMS 29. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1976. Gü ttgem anns, E. Der leidende Apostel u n d sein Herr: Studien zurpaulinischen Christologie. FRLANT 90. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. Klijn, A. F. J. Introduction. Kreitzer, L. J. “Body.” DPL. 71-76. L em erle, P. Philippes et la M acédoine onentale à l'époque chrétienne et byzantine. Paris: de Boccard, 1945. L evie, J. “Le chrétien citoyen du ciel (Phil 3, 20).” In Studiorum Paulinorum Congressus In te r n a tio n a l Catholicus 196 1 .2 vols. AnBib 17, 18. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press, 1963. 2:81-88. L incoln, A. T. Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role o f the Heavenly Dimension in P a u l’s Thought with Special Reference to H is Eschatology. SNTSMS 43. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1981. M eeks, W. A. “The Man from Heaven in Paul’s Letter to the Philippians.” In The Future o f Early Christianity. FS H. Koester, ed. B. A. Pearson. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991. 329-36. N ord en , E. Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zu r Formgeschichte religiöser Rede. 4th ed. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1956. O akes, P. Philippians. P ilhofer, P. Philippi. Reum ann, J. “Philippians 3:20-21—A Hymnic Fragm ent?” N T S 30 (1984) 593-609. R idderbos, Η . N . Paul. Schneider, N . Die rhetorische Eigenart der paulinischen Antithese. HUT 11. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1970. Sherwin-White, A. N . Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963. Siber, P. M il Christus leben: Eine Studie zu r paulinischen Auferstehungshoffnung. ATANT 61. Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1971. Stanley, D. M. Christ’s Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology. AnBib 13. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press, 1960. Stauffer, E. New Testament Theology.

228

Philippians 3:20-21

Stegner, W. R. “Diaspora.” D P L . 211-13. Strecker, G. “Redaktion und Tradit on in Christus-Hymnus.” Z N W 5 5 (1964) 75-78. Taylor, V. T h e N am es o f Jesus. London: Macmillan, 1953. V olz, P. D i e E schatologie der j ü disch en G em einde im n eu testam en tlich en Z eitalter: N a ch den Q u ellen d er rabbinisch en , apokalyptisch en u n d apokryphen L ite ra tu r. 2d ed. Tübingen: MohrSiebeck, 1934. Zwaan, J. d e. “Philippenzen 3.20 en de κοινή.” T h S t 31 (1913) 289-300.

Translation 20For our citizenship is in heaven, and from heaven we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. 21He will transform our lowly bodies so that they might becomea like his glorious body. A nd he will achieve this goal by the outworking of his ability to subject everything to himself.b Notes aD2 ‫ א‬and the Majority Text add eis‫ ־‬t o γενόσθαι αυτό, “so that it might become,” before σύμμορφον, “having the same form.” ‫ א‬A B D and several other witnesses omit these words. The addition apparently is secondary, in that it serves to smooth out and make clear an otherwise awkward but understandable construction. 15‫ א‬L Ψ and other m ss read 6αυτω, “to himself,” for αύτω, “to him.” This change simply makes precise the ambiguity contained in αύτω, “to him.”

Form/ Structure/ Setting This section seems n o t to fit easily with the context in which it is placed. Its apocalyptic them e of the church as a colony of heaven, eagerly expecting a savior to com e from above to set everything right, to deliver it from its present m ortal weakness, an d to transfigure it from lowliness to glory is unexpected, to say the least. N othing th at has im m ediately p receded these verses has p rep ared the read er for this kind of joyous outburst. T here has been no recounting of suffering, no tale o f woe, no despairing o f life as things that would naturally give rise to such an affirm ation o f hopeful confidence o f deliverance in the future (cf. 2 Cor 1:810; 4:7-14). Yet the contrast between the “earthly” (Phil 3:19) and the “heavenly” (3:20) seems clear and shapes P aul’s thinking in a notable way. In addition, conjunctions are particles designed to connect sentences or groups of sentences logically to each other. But the conjunction th at connects this section with the section before it (w 18-19) hardly seems capable of doing so. It is the conjunction y a p , “fo r,” whose norm al function is to introduce the reason or cause for that which has ju st been m entioned. Paul has ju st finished saying that the enem ies of the cross of Christ are people whose m inds are fixed on earthly things. Now he continues: “For ou r citizenship is in heaven.” This presents such a difficulty th at the earliest quotations o f this passage by G reek authors substitute 8e, “b u t,” for y a p , “fo r” (L ightfoot), and m odern versions translate as “b u t” (so n r s v ) . F urtherm ore, a careful exam ination of the language and style of writing found in this section and a study o f its unusual words and rhythm ic patterns suggest that it is an o th er christological hymn, perhaps com posed early in the c h u rc h ’s

Form /Structure/Setting

229

existence, th at was found and used by Paul because it precisely expressed his own ideas. If he used it in its entirety, quoting it exactly, then the conjunction yap, “fo r,” with which it begins is inconsequential and should be ignored as no t originally being in ten d ed to do w hat translators m ust now try to make it do (see Becker, 7Z 27 [1971] 16-29; Lohmeyer; Flanagan, CBQ 18 [1956] 8-9; Strecker, ZNW 55 [1964] 75-78; Gü ttgem anns, Der leidende Apostel, 240-47). Like the Christhym n (2:6-11) this hymn, too, has a cosmic sweep, seeing Jesus C hrist as the sovereign L ord with everything subject to him and everything u n d e r his control (see table 3). But now for the first time in P aul’s extant writing—and indeed the only time, if Eph 5:23 is deutero-Pauline— the title σωτήρ, “savior,” is added to Jesu s’ nam e (Becker, T Z 27 [1971] 16-29). Even the vocabulary of this new hymn, its words and phrases, and its essential ideas parallel those o f the earlier hymn (cf. Flanagan, CBQ 18 [1956] 8-9; Gü ttgem anns, Der leidende Apostel, 214; M artin [1976]; Dalton, Bib 60 [1979] 97-102, who argues that Paul wrote 3:20-21 with “the thoughts and phrases of the Christ-hymn still fresh” in his m ind [100], noting the link between επιγείω ν, “earthly beings” [Phil 2:10], and ε π ίγ ε ια , “earthly things” [3:19], a n d aTavpot), “cross” [2:8], and σταυροί), “cross” [3:18]; Reum ann, N TS 30 [1984] 593-609; Oakes, Philippians, 30, adds to the list of parallels: παν δνομα, “every n am e” [2:9], πάσα γλώσσα, “every to n g u e” [2:11], a n d Ta πάντα, “everything” [3:21]). Thus, when translating, one is fully justified in setting this section forth in poetic form to call attention to its hym nlike characteristics. Table 3.

Parallels on the Christ-hymn o f Phil 2:6-11 and the hymn o f Phil 3:20-21

σύμμορφοη, “having the same form ” (3:21)

μορφη/μορφήν, “form ” (2:6, 7)

υπάρχει, “is” (3:20)

υπάρχων, “being” (2:6)

μετασχηματίσει, “transform the likeness” (3:21)

σχήματι, “likeness” (2:7)

ταπεινώσεων, “hum ble state” (3:21)

έταπείνωσεν, “hum bled” (2:8)

δύνασθαι . . . ύποτάξαι . . . τά πάντα, “able to subject everything” (3:21)

παν γόνυ κάμψη, “every knee m ight bow” (2:10)

κύριον Ίησοϋν Χριστόν, “the Lord Jesus C hrist” (3:20)

κύριον Ίησοϋν Χριστόν, “Jesus Christ is L ord” (2:11)

δόξη 9 , “glory” (3:21)

δόξαν, “glory” (2:11)

A lthough, as has been p ointed out, this section does n o t fit easily into its context and it may originally have been p art of a very different context with a very different train o f thought, it is here, nevertheless, and one is com pelled to ask why Paul puts it here. Paul does so because it provides the final answer to his verbal contest with the opponents. See table 4.

Table 4.

Paul’s com parison o f his opponents and true Christian believers

Opponents

Pauline Christians

Their πολίτευμα, “colony,” “citizenship,” is here in this world.

Their πολίτευμα is in heaven (cf. 1:27).

T heir m inds are earthbound since the earth is the limit of their m ental horizon.

Their minds are fixed on heaven, from where they eagerly expect the savior to come.

They expect perfection now by keeping the law.

They yearn for the future, at which time perfection will be achieved.

They stand as enemies of the crucified Christ.

They own Christ as crucified Lord and see him as sovereign over the universe.

They will find their end to be destruction, however ecstatic and glorious their present may be.

They may be straining now, morally struggling to attain, but their goal will be so full of richness that nothing can com pare with it. Their weak mortal bodies will be transform ed and m ade like Christ’s resplendent body.

This section, thus, is a capstone to P aul’s teaching: in Christ the Christian has been b ro u g h t into a new, ethically controlled relationship to God. This new relationship commits the believer to a life-style in which suffering and hardship are his present lot in anticipation of the day when he will be set free. The Pauline disciple is like a runner in a race, or an athlete at the games. He struggles and exerts himself now, by God’s assistance, in the hope that he one day will reach the winning post and gain the prize. He is thus faced with a paradox: already “saved” and with the race begun, he awaits and strains forward to attain his resurrection, which will be the completion of his salvation under God . . . (1:6; 2:16; 3:11-14). (Martin [1976], 150-51)

To this statem ent may be added the endorsem ent of G arland (NovT 27 [1985] 160-62), who argues th at the links betw een earlier parts of the letter (1:27-28) and the section opening with 3:18 support his contention that the letter is a rhetorical and literary unity. Above all, the them e o f the nexus betw een “abasem e n t” (ταπβίνω σις) and “exaltation” (δόξα, “glory”) in both C hrist’s life and the believers’ was po in ted out by Dibelius (72), though there is no tho u g h t of Christians becom ing κύριος, “lo rd ,” over the universe.

Comment

231

Comment 20 ήμών γάρ τό πολίτευμα εν ουρανοί? υπά ρχει, “for our citizenship is in heaven.” T he p ro n o u n ημών, “o u r,” stands first in this new section. It has the em phatic position (as in v 3) in o rd er again to draw sharp contrast between “th e m ” and “us,” between Jews or Jewish Christians and Pauline Christians. T heir citizenship is on earth (v 19); ours is in heaven. T he word πολίτευμα, “citizenship,” found only here in the n t , is m ore accurately translated “com m onw ealth” or “state” (see Stauffer, New Testament Theology, 296-97). O ften πολίτευμα was used to designate a colony of foreigners or relocated veterans (BDAG) whose purpose was to secure the conquered country for the conquering country by spreading abroad that country’s way of doing things, its customs, its culture, and its laws. W hen Paul wrote his letters, Rome was the conqueror, and its em pire spread over the M editerranean world. M acedonia was u n d e r its dom ination. But the M acedonian city of Philippi had been designated a R om an colony and had been aw arded the ius italicum, “Italian law,” the highest legal privilege obtainable by any provincial municipality (Lemerle, Philippes, 7-10; Bockm uehl, 3-4, drawing on Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:121-22). Its citizens, therefore, were also citizens o f Rome with all of the rights and privileges aw arded to any Rom an born in the im perial city (see fu rth er in Introduction, Recipients and Their City). In writing this word, πολίτευμα, “citizenship,” to the Philippian church, Paul was thus using a word that would appeal to them and to which they could easily relate. With it, as Caird (147-48) observes, Paul pictures the world as an empire over which Christ rules de jure, though not yet de facto. Each local church is a colony of heaven, its members enjoying full citizenship of the heavenly city (cf. Gal 4:26; Eph 2:19), but charged with the responsibility of bringing the world to acknowledge the sovereignty of Christ. Neither the Roman colonist nor the Christian depended for the meaning, character and purpose of his life on the ethos of his alien environment, nor did he allow that environment to determ ine the quality of his behavior.

(See also de Zwaan, ThSt 31 [1913] 298-300; Engers, Mnemosyne 54 [1926] 15461; Dibelius; b u t see Volz, Eschatologie, 114-16; H. Strathm ann, TDNT 6:535; Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 184-85). Note D ibelius’s paraphrase of v 20a: “O u r hom e is in heaven, and here on earth we are a colony o f heavenly citizens” (cited in BDAG, s.v.). Paul also may have chosen the word πολίτευμα, “citizenship,” conscious still o f his contest with the Jews or Jewish-Christian opponents. H e knew that the Jews were a favored people, treated in a special m an n er by the Romans. He knew that they were allowed to live a m ore or less in d ep en d e n t existence as small colonies su rro u n d ed by ethnically different populations. H e knew that the Jews m ade up th eir own π ολιτεύμ ατα, “colonies,” w herever they settled and that they were p erm itted to live according to their own laws and follow their own religious practices (Fuchs,Juden Ägyptens, 89; Klijn, Introduction, 110; Stegner, DPL, 211-13; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora). But Paul believed that these Jews, irrespective o f what they m ight have speculated about themselves, belonged only to colonies th at were linked to Palestinian Jerusalem —earthbound, tim e-bound colonies w ithout any en during quality. By contrast, he says that Christians are a

232

Philippians 3:20-21

colony o f heaven, living here on earth, to be sure, b u t belonging to a heavenly city that is enduring. T herefore, they enjoy all the rights and privileges o f that city, including the privilege of eternal life. εξ ού καί σωτήρα άπεκδεχόμεθα κύριον Ίησοϋν Χ ριστόν, “and from heaven we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus C hrist.” T hen, with language that is characteristic o f apocalyptic literature, Paul proceeds to say that Christians are eagerly anticipating a savior to com e from heaven. (The relative p ro n o u n ού, “w hich,” formally agrees with πολίτευμα, “citizenship,” b u t by sense it agrees with ούρανοΐς, “heaven.” For this kind o f constructio ad sensum, “construction according to the sense,” see BDF §§134, 296; cf. also Michaelis; Gnilka; O ’Brien, 461.) The verb th at expresses the ch u rch ’s eager anticipation, άπεκδεχόμεθα, “eagerly wait fo r,” is used six times by Paul of the eight times it appears in the n t (Rom 8:19, 23, 25; 1 C or 1:7; Gal 5:5; Phil 3:20). It is his special word, the one th at for him best describes the C hristian’s persistent yearning for, happy expectation of, and earnest desire for the second com ing of Christ, when this travailing creation will be freed from its “thraldom to decay” (Rom 8:21 m o f f a t t ) and restored to its pristine wholeness once again (cf. Rom 8:19-25). Thus the c h u rc h ’s expectation focuses on a person who is σωτήρα, “Savior.” T he absence o f the definite article before σωτήρα does n o t m ean “a savior,” as though any savior would do. R ather, its absence is to be understood in a qualitative sense, w here a single individual represents an entire class (BDF §252 [2]). So it may be re n d ere d “he will com e as Savior.” T h at single individual is “Jesus C hrist,” who is confessed by the church as “L o rd ” (cf. 2:11). It is he who will bring about the final stage o f G od’s saving work th at was also begun by him , namely, the “decisive laying aside o f the com ing wrath (Rom 5:9; 1 Cor 3:15; 5:5; 1 Thess 5:19) or, as here, the ultim ate acquisition of Glory” (Collange, 140; see also W. Foerster, TDNT 7:993, 1015-18). σωτήρ, “savior,” is a term that also reaches back into, and gains substance from, the o t . T h ere it is used of God him self who is described as V indicator of his people, the one who will ultim ately deliver them from all their adversaries (cf. Isa 35:4). Surprisingly, the word σωτήρ, “savior,” is found only h ere in the letters of Paul; it does, however, have a special place in Ephesians (5:23), the Pastorals, and 2 Peter. Why Paul uses it so sparingly as a title for Jesus and why he uses it here are questions difficult to answer. Perhaps its rarity can be explained by noting th at (1) σωτήρ, “savior,” was a word frequently used by the masses to refer to their pagan gods or to designate the em p ero r (Taylor, Names of Jesus, 109; see M artin [1976]). Paul may th en have been reluctant to use such a com m on term of som eone so unique as Christ (cf. Collange; b u t he uses κύριος, “Lord,” which was a title of both em perors and cult deities). O r (2) for Paul the word σωτηρία, “salvation,” is n o t generally used o f th at state in which believers now find themselves in this life. R ather, salvation is th at state into which they will be b ro u g h t at the re tu rn o f Christ. Christians have been justified, bu t n o t yet saved. They are “being saved” (1 C or 1:18), b u t salvation is a process that will n o t be com pleted until the Parousia. H ence, Paul prefers “justification” or “reconciliation” to describe what has already been do n e in the Christian by G od’s action in Christ, while he reserves “salvation” for what yet rem ains to be done (Beare; cf. Rom 5:9-10). Yet this future salvation is an assured fact (1 Thess 1:10; 5:9-10; cf. Eph 2:1-10, esp. v 8). O r (3) while Paul does use the term ‘Jesus” m any times, it would be tautologous for him to say “Jesus Savior” since he would be repeating the nam e twice: Jesus ( o t ‘Jo sh u a ”; Heb.

Comment

233

yĕhôšûac or yēšûac) m eans “God saves,” and th at is, of course, exactly what is conveyed by the n o u n σωτήρ, “Savior.” O n the o th er hand, the presence of the word σωτήρ, “Savior,” here may be explained variously: It may be explained by noting that (1) it is fittingly placed within the context of the en d times; and that placem ent would confirm the idea th at it is used in a descriptive way— “as Savior.” O r (2) this section may be an early C hristian hymn n o t com posed by Paul, and hence σωτήρ, “Savior,” is really n o t his choice o f title. O r (3) the imagery of this section inevitably sets up a contrast with the Rom an em peror. Paul, therefore, opposes the head of im perial Rome with the true Emperor-Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ (M artin [1959]; cf. B ornhäuser, Jesus ImperatorMundi; Oakes, Philippians, 138-47). We may note that in an inscription in Ephesus dated a . d . 48 there is a designation of Julius Caesar as a visible “god and political savior o f h um an life” (MM, 621). And later, N ero will be hailed as “savior and benefactor o f the w orld” (MM, 621; the last two references are noted by T hielm an [2002], 3:362). 21 δς μ ετα σ χη μ α τίσ ει τό σώμα τή ς ταπεινώ σεω ς ήμών σύμμορφον τώ σώματι τή ς δόξης αύτοϋ, “he will transform o u r lowly bodies so that they m ight becom e like his glorious body.” In any case, the Savior will perform his saving work on τό σώμα τή ς ταπεινώ σεω ς ήμών, “our lowly bodies,” m ore literally, “the body o f o u r hum iliation.” This expression, of all expressions, describes the fallenness, the weakness, the corruptibility, the m ortality of everyone, including all Christians. τό σώμα, “the body,” for Paul is n o t some sort o f o uter husk covering the h um an spirit, a covering th at he hopes will some day be discarded, n o r some prison-house o f the soul (as in Wis 9:15 and in the O rphic tag σώμα σήμα, “the body is a to m b ”) th at m ight better be done w ithout. R ather, for Paul a p erso n ’s body is that person (see Gundry, Sōma, who em phasizes the physicality of σώμα, “body”). And th at person, every person, this side of the Parousia, is m arked by frailty, suffering, sorrow, vanity, death, and corruption. T he body can only be described by τα π είνω σ ις, “hum iliation.” But w hen Christ returns, described here as when the Savior comes from heaven, the thing he will do for Christians that gets singled o ut for special attention is that he will transform (μ ετα σ χ η μ α τίσ ε ι) their bodies o f hum iliation and m ake them like his own body of glory. This tho u g h t may be ind eb ted to Jewish mysticism, as Bockm uehl (JTS n.s. 48 [1997] 1-23) suggests. T he blessed state is never described by Paul as a separation o f the soul from the body. Salvation for him is not the survival of the soul alone, but the preservation and restoration o f people in their wholeness— spirit, soul, and body (1 Thess 5:23). See Kreitzer, DPL, 71-76, for discussion of relevant passages. Paul believed th at when C hrist was resurrected, his physical body was transform ed into a spiritual body. But he did n o t m ean by this th at Christ no longer had any p art in the corporeal. R ather, he was freed from the weakness and lim itations and hum iliation o f the flesh, so that his new m ode of existence could be identified with th at o f the Spirit (2 Cor 3:17; 1 Cor 15:45). Paul also believed that ju st such a radical transform ation would be effected in the bodies of Christians by the Lord Jesus C hrist at his return. Paul does not describe the exact nature of these transform ed bodies here, except to say that they will be like (σύμμορφον, “having the same form ”) C hrist’s body of glory; i.e., they too will be spiritual bodies—n o t bodies consisting of spirit merely bu t bodies with a new determ ining or m otivating force. They will be bodies bro u g h t forth and

234

Philippians 3:20-21

d eterm in ed by divine, heavenly power. As a consequence, it will be possible to say o f these bodies— these transform ed people, ra th e r— that they are im perishable an d im m ortal, m odels of glory and power (cf. 1 Cor 15:42, 43, 48, 53; see Ridderbos, Paul, 538-39, 544-45). κατά την cvepyciav του δύνασθαι αυτόν και ύποτάξαι αύτω τα πά ντα , “and he will achieve this goal by the outw orking of his ability to subject everything to him self.” T hus this section closes with a liturgical confession ascribing all power to Jesus Christ as L ord (cf. N orden, Agnostos Theos, 240-42; M artin [1976]). He who will raise the dead and transform their bodies o f hum iliation into incorruptible glorious bodies will do so by m eans o f divine evepyeia, “outw orking.” evepycia, m ost frequently translated “pow er,” is m ore dynam ic than such a translation m ight lead one to believe. In classical Greek it was used of physiological “fu n c tio n ” (Galen, 6.21) or of the “activity” o f drugs (Galen, 6.467). D iodorus Siculus (20.95) used it of the “driving force” o f an engine (LSJ). H ence, cvcpycia is n o t m erely “pow er” b u t “power in action,” “power in o p eratio n ,” “power w orking” (cf. k j v ). It is n o t simply supernatural “pow er” that Paul has in m ind here, b u t supernatural “action.” T he resurrection and transform ation of the body are b u t the “outw orking” of C hrist’s ability (του δύνασθαι αυτόν, “him to be ab le”) even to subject (ύποτάξαι, “to subject”) the entire universe (τά πά ντα , “everyth in g ”) to himself. T he genitive infinitive τού δύνασθαι, “o f . . . to be able,” with its accusative o f reference (αυτόν, “h im ”) is descriptive o f this divine cvepyeiav, “outw orking,” while the infinitive ύποτάξαι, “to subject,” is com plem entary to δύνασθαι, “to be able”: “the outw orking of his ability to subject.” T he resurrection o f the body, then, is to be viewed n o t as an isolated event “b u t as the last act in the dram a o f cosmic re d em p tio n ” (Caird, 149; cf. Rom 8:19-25; Eph 1:7-10, 19, 22). Explanation Paul concludes his polem ic against the opponents with what m ight have been one of the earliest hymns of the church (Phil 3:20-21). It begins with the trium phant b u t challenging claim that Christians com pose a colony o f heaven on earth. As such, they enjoy full citizenship rights in the City o f God, but they are also responsible for spreading abroad in this “co n quered” world the customs, culture, m anner of life, and laws of their heavenly hom e. As a colony of heaven, Christians m ay be contrasted with Jewish com m unities in the Roman world. O ften the Jewish com m unities were allowed by the Rom an governm ent to form little enclaves, colonies of Jerusalem , so to speak, to keep their own traditions and obey their own laws. But for Paul these colonies were strictly earthbound and tim e-bound because they were entirely fixed on earthly matters, such as survival in a hostile world. But Christians live in eager expectation of the future. They have a persistent yearning, a joyful anticipation of a com ing day when the crucified Christ will return as Savior and Lord. W hen that day comes, when the Savior arrives, his special saving act will be utterly to transform their bodies. From bodies of hum iliation—i.e., from bodies m arked by limitation, frustration, feebleness, mortality, and corruption—Christ will transfigure them into bodies like his own glorious resurrected body, that is, bodies infused with a new determ ining force of the Spirit that is heavenly and divine, bodies that are im perishable and immortal, m odels of glory and power. But this Christ is not merely the Savior o f Christians. H e is also Imperator mundi, “Ruler of the world.” The

Explanation

235

energy by which he transfigures m ortal bodies is the energy by which he subdues the universe and subjects all things to his authority. T he resurrection of the dead and the transform ation o f broken persons are bu t one part, the most significant part, to be sure, of the great dram a of cosmic redem ption. The climax, reached in Phil 3:20-21, also in a sense looks back to 3:14. Paul pursues the goal of winning the prize, which is no t yet attained. T hat will come with the Parousia, which in turn ushers in the resurrection of the dead and the achievem ent of G od’s saving purposes for both cosmos and church. The link word is “look.” W hat began the chapter as a sum m ons and caution to “look o u t” (3:2) moves to the call “look at us” (3:17-21) and closes with both a warning (3:18-19) of teachers to be avoided (“look away” from such persons) and an eschatological aspiration (“look u p ” to the fulfillment of the C hristian’s hope in 3:20-21). In contrast to the “earthly things” (3:19), the concluding picture is one of eternal realities, where true citizen-life (1:27, a term suitable to Paul’s readers in a Roman colony) is to be found and from where Christ will come to bring resurrection power to m ortal existence (cf. 1 Cor 15:42-57). Only then will the prize be won (Phil 3:14) at the resurrection (3:11). (Interestingly the call in 1 Cor 15:58 to be “steadfast, immoveable, always abounding in the work of the L ord” is m atched by the way Paul proceeds in Phil 4:1. This is one further indication of the close affinity between both letters and may suggest a com m on origin in Paul’s Ephesian period.)

I V. Exhortations to Harmony and Joy

(4:1- 9)

Bibliography A rnold, M. Literature and Dogma: A n Essay towards a Better Apprehension o f the Bible. 3d ed. New York: Macmillan, 1873. B eet, J. A. “Did Euodia and Syntyche Q uarrel?” E xpT im 5 (189394) 179-80. Bigaré , C. “La paix de Dieu dans le Christ J ésus: Prier et mettre in pratique: Ph. 4, 6-9.” AsSeign 58 (1974) 11-15. Black, D . A. “The Discourse Structure of Philippians: A Study in Textlinguistics.” N o v T 37 (1995) 16-49. C ham bers, T. W. “ο κύριος εγγύς: Philip. iv.5.”J B L 6 (1886) 108-10. Cullm ann, O . “The Tradition: The Exegetical, Historical and Theological Problem .” In The Early Church. Ed. A. J. B. Higgins. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966. 55-99. D avies, W. D. P aul and Rabbinic Judaism. D eissm ann, A. Light from the A ncient East. D inkier, E. Eirene: Der urchristliche Friedensgedanke. SHAW, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 1. Heidelberg: Winter, 1973. D ungan, D. L. The Sayings o f Jesus in the Churches o f Paul: The Use o f the Synoptic Tradition in the Regulation o f Early Church Life. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971. Easton, B. S. The Pastoral Epistles. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1947. Ellis, E. E. “Paul and his Co-Workers.” N T S (1970-71) 437-52. E ngberg‫־‬ P ed ersen , T. “Stoicism in Philippians.” In P aul in H is Hellenistic Context. Ed. T. EngbergPedersen. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. 256-90. Ezell, D. “The Sufficiency of Christ: Philippians 4.” Rev Exp 77 (1980) 373-87. Fitzgerald, J. T. Friendship, Flattery and Frankness o f Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World. NovTSup 82. Leiden: Brill, 1996. G eoffrion , T. C. The Rhetorical Purpose and M ilitary Character o f Philippians: A Call to Stand Firm. Lewiston, NY: Mellen Biblical Press, 1993. Gilm an, F. M. Women Who Knew Paul. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992. G o o d sp eed , E. J. Problems o f New Testament Translation. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1945. H ájek , M. “Comments on Philippians 4:3—Who Was ‘Gnésios Sygygos’?” CV 7 (1964) 261-62. Harris, J. R. “St. Paul and Aeschylus (Phil, iv.4).” E x p T im 35 (1923-24) 151-53. H aw thorne, G. F. “The Imitation of Christ: Discipleship in Philippians.” In Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament. Ed. R. N. Longenecker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. 163-79. H em er, C. J. The Book o f Acts in the Setting o f Hellenistic History. Ed. C. H. Gempf. WUNT 2.49. Tü bingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1989. Reprint, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990. H olzm eister, U. “‘Gaudete in Domino sem per’ (Phil. 4, 4 -9 ).” VD 4 (1924) 358-62. H unter, A. M. P aul and H is Predecessors. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961. Kamlah, E. Die Form der katalogischen Paränese im Neuen Testament. WUNT 7. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1964. Kim, S. “Jesus, Sayings of.” DPL. 47492. Krentz, E. M. “Military Language and Metaphors in Philippians. ” In Origins and Method: Towards a New Understanding o f Judaism and Christianity. FS J. C. Hurd, ed. B. H. McLean. JSNTSup 86. Sheffield. JSOT Press, 1993. 105-27. Kruse, C. G. “Virtues and Vices.” DPL. 962-63. Leivestad, R. “‘The Meekness and Gentleness of Christ’: II Cor. x .l.” N T S 12 (1966) 156-64. M alherbe, A. J., ed. The Cynic Epistles: A Study Edition. SBLSBS 12. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977. M alinowski, F.X . ‘T h e Brave Women o f Philippi.” 15 (1985) T B 60-64. M anson, T. W. “St. Paul in Ephesus: The Date of the Epistle to the Philippians.” BJRL 23 (1939) 182-200. Reprinted in Studies in the Gospels a nd Epistles, ed. M. Black (Manchester: Manchester UP, 1962) 149-67. M arshall, I. H . The Challenge o f New Testament Ethics. London: Macmillan, 1946. Martin, R. P. H ym n o f Chris t. -------- . “Virtue.” N ID N T T . 3:928-32. M offatt,J. “The History of Joy: A Brief Exposition o f Phil. iv.4-7 (R .V .).”E xpTim 9 (1897-98) 334-36. N ew ton, M. The Concept o f Purity at Qumran and in the Letters o f Paul. SNTSMS 53. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985. N ord en , E. Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Formgeschichte religiöser Rede. 4th ed. Stuttgart: Teubner, 1956. O akes, P. Philippians. O ’Brien, P. T. “Benediction, Blessing, Doxology, Thanksgiving.” DPL. 68-71. Ogara, F. “‘Dominus propre est’ (Phil. 4, 4- 7).” VD 17 (1937) 353- 59. Peterlin, D. P a u l’s Letter to the

Notes

237

Philippians. Pfitzner, V. C. P aul and the Agon Motif. P ortefaix, L. Sisters Rejoice: P a u l’s Letter to the Philippians and Luke-Acts as Received by the First Century Philippian Women. ConBNT 20. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell, 1988. Porter, S. E. “Peace, Reconciliation.” DPL. 695-99. R enan, E. Saint Paul. Trans. I. Lockwood. New York: Carleton, 1869. Rhijn, C. H . van. “Euodia en Syntyche.” ThSt 21 (1903) 300- 309. Sevenster, J. N . P aul and Seneca. NovTSup 4. Leiden: Brill, 1961. Stacey, D. The Pauline View o f M a n in Relation to Its Judaic and Hellenistic Background. London: Macmillan, 1956.Stewart, J . S. “Philippians iv.6-7 (Moffatt) .”E xpTim 49 (1937-38) 269-71. T hom as, W. D. “The Place of Women in the Church at Philippi.” E x p T im 83 (1971-72) 117-20. V ö gtle, A. Die Tugend- u n d Lasterkataloge im Neuen Testament: Exegetisch, religions- u n d formgeschichtlich Untersucht. NTAbh 16. Mün ster: Aschendorff, 1936. W atts,J. C. “The Alleged Quarrel o f Euodia and Syntyche.”E xpTim 5 (1893-94) 28687. W eeda, W. H . “Filippenzen 4 vs 6 en 7: Over Bezorgdheid.” ThSt 34 (1916) 326-35. W eidinger, K. Die Haustafeln: E in Stü ck urchristlicher Paränese. UNT 14. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1928. W enham, D. Paul: Follower o f Jesus orF ounder o f Christianity? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. W ibbing, S . Die Tugend- u n d Lasterkataloge im Neuen Testament u n d ihre Traditionsgeschichte unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Qumran-Texte. BZNW 25. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1959. W ieseler, K. G. Chronologie des apostolischen Zeitalters bis zum Tode der ApostelPaulus u n d Petrus: E in Versuch ü ber die Chronologie u n d Abfassungszeit der Apostelgeschichte u n d der paulinischen Briefe. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1848. W iles, G. P. P a u l’s Intercessory Prayers: The Significance o f the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters o f St Paul. SNTSMS 24.

Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1974.

Translation 1Well then, my Christianfriends, you whom I love and longfor, myjoy and my crown— this, my Christian friends, a is how you must stand firm in the Lord:2[First,] I begEuodia and I beg Syntyche to agree with each other in the Lord. 3Yes, and I ask you, my loyal yokefellow[s],b to help them, because they are women whofought at my side in [the spread of] the gospel along with Clement and the rest of my co-workers.c All their names are in the book of life.4Second, rejoice in the Lord at all times. Once again I will say it, rejoice! 5Next, letyour magnanimity be known to everybody. The Lord is near!6Do not worry about anything, but in every situation make your requests known to God by prayer and petition with thanksgiving.7As a result God’s d peace, which excels all human planning, will stand guard over your thoughtse and feelings in Christf Jesus.8And last of all, my Christian friends, since there is moral excellence and since there are things worthy of praise,gfocus your minds on these things— on whatever is truthful, whatever is majestic and awe-inspiring, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever callsforth love, whatever is winsome.9And keep putting into practice the lessons that you learnedfrom me and the traditions that I passed on to you, and the things that you heard about me, and the things that you saw in me. I f you do, the God of peace will be with you.

Notes aB 33 add μου, “my,” after this second αγαπητοί, “Christian friends,” at the end of the verse. Its presence is not needed to preserve the possessive idea. D* and a few other witnesses omit this second αγαπητοί, “Christian friends,” and the μου, “my,” perhaps as useless redundancy. bSome commentators take σύ£υγ6, “yokefellow[s],” as Σύ£υγ6, “Syzygos,” a proper name. See Comment below. CK* and apparently $p46, because of scribal inadvertence, have a slightly longer text: και των συν6ργών μου και των λοιπών, “and my co-workers and the rest,” for και των λοιπών συν6ργών μου, “and the rest of my co-workers.”

238

Philippians 4:1-9

dA and some early versions have ή ειρήνη του Χρίστου, “the peace of Christ,” for ή ειρήνη του θεού, “the peace of God.” There is no substantial reason to consider seriously this reading. e For νοήματα, “thoughts,” F G read σώματα, “bodies,” and apparently $p16 reads νοήματα και σώματα, “thoughts and bodies.” Again there is no good reason for adopting these changes, in spite of the fact that Lohmeyer considers them favorable to his thesis about martyrdom. But see Silva, 228. f$p46 has κυρίω, “L ord,” for Χριστώ, “Christ.” Titles for Jesus, as usual, are extremely susceptible to variation. g Whereas most m s s read εϊ τ ις έπαινος, lit. “if there is any praise,” D* F G, apparently uncomfortable with leaving έπαινος, “praise,” without an object, add επιστήμης, “of understanding,” after it: “if there is any praise of understanding.”

Form/Structure/Setting U pon the assumption that Philippians is a single letter and not a com pilation of letters that Paul wrote to the church at Philippi (see Introduction, Integrity ofPhilippians) , one can easily view 4:1 as a transitional verse. The apostle now shifts from theological or polemical matters to concluding remarks, i.e., exhortations, expressions of gratitude, and words of farewell. Thus he brings his letter to a close, but in a rather protracted way. In this first section (4:1-9) familiar motifs are echoed: αγαπητοί, “beloved” (4:1 [2x]; cf. 2:12), έπιπόθητοι, “lo n g ed for” (4:1; cf. 1:8; 2:26), χαρά, ‘joy” (4:1; cf. 1:4, 25; 2:2, 29), στήκ6τ6, “stand firm ” (4:1; cf. 1:27), τό αυτό φρον6ΐν, “to agree” (4:2; cf. 1:7; 2:2,5; 3:15,19), ev τω 6ύαγγ6λίω συναθλειν, “struggling together in the gospel” (4:3; cf. 1:27), and τό ^ύαγγέλιον, “the gospel” (4:3; cf. 1:5, 7, 12, 16, 22; 2:22). They serve to bind the whole of the letter together and at the same time show how unstructured it is and how difficult a task it is to outline any logical flow of the apostle’s thought from first to last, except that we should observe how certain themes recur and the letter conforms to some pattern set by a “letter of friendship.” Once again there is here a sharp rem inder of the very personal nature of this letter, not only in the affectionate language Paul uses in addressing his friends, but also in his frequent use of the first-person pronoun that appears again and again: “my brothers,” “my crown,” “I beg,” “I ask,” “I will say,” “with m e.” Paul customarily brings his letters to a close with a section dealing with practical and personal m atters and greetings. So here in Philippians. However, the contrast between the theoretical and the practical, the didactic and the personal application, so p rom inent in o th er Pauline letters, is not nearly so pronounced here because (1) it is such a personal letter in all its parts and (2) practical m atters have been dealt with throughout. Nevertheless, this final chapter is m ore pronounced in its practical application and in its attention to personal notices than those that have preceded it. In this it shows itself to be in harm ony with the Pauline style and pattern o f writing. Thus, as is to be expected, the imperative m ood is predom inant. And as is usual, too, the exhortations given here are given to the entire Christian community. If individual Christians are singled out for special instruction, it is always with the understanding that they are part of the church and that behind them — to support, encourage, guide, and be responsible for them —is the congregation, which with them is equally the recipient of the apostolic commands. T h ere have been indications th ro u g h o u t the letter th at all was n o t well at Philippi. H ints have been given of selfishness, self-interest, conceit, and pride existing with harm ful effects within the Christian com m unity. Now one o f these problem s surfaces: intense disagreem ent, along with the nam es o f those who are

Comment

239

party to the quarrel (see Peterlin, Paul's Letter to the Philippians, for a discussion of the natu re and ex tent of this disagreem ent). Two w om en could n o t agree, and the church may have been in danger of taking sides and dividing. Equally troubling to Paul, the spiritual leaders within the congregation were n o t taking the problem seriously eno u g h to becom e involved in solving it. He was forced to ask them specifically to do what they should already have been doing. In the rapid-fire com m ands that Paul now flings out in all directions, one gets the im pression th at there were many o th er spiritual irritants present at Philippi, such as depression, harshness of spirit, anxiety, failure to take prayer seriously, troubled m inds, m inds filled with all the wrong kinds of things, and, above all, confusion over m oral values and th eir com peting claims (see M artin, Hymn of Christ, xxxv). Paul is confident that there are solutions to the problem s at Philippi, and thus he encourages them to change n o t only their actions, but, m ore fundam entally, th eir attitude. Comment 1 ώ σ τ 6 , “well th e n .” This verse is a transitional verse. T he ώ σ τ 6 , “well th e n ,” is a conjunction designed to ask the readers to look back and to take action in light o f what has ju st been said: in light of the fact that Christians are a colony of heaven, th at they eagerly expect the Lord Jesus Christ to com e as Savior, that their hope is in him for a com plete transform ation of their bodies from frailty to glory, they m ust “th ere fo re” stand firm. But in what way are they to stand firm? ο ύ τ ω ς , “thus,” “in this way,” is P aul’s answer. And with this word the apostle points them in the opposite direction (cf. BDAG)—n o t backward now, b u t forward and onward to undertake im m ediately those things he is about to introduce with a set of imperatives. H ence this verse is no m ore linked with what precedes (H aupt, Barth, B onnard, Friedrich, Collange, M artin [1976]) than it is with what follows. For w 2-9 state precisely how Christians are to stand firm (cf. Lohm eyer). α δ ε λ φ ο ί μ ο υ α γ α π η τ ο ί κ α ι έ π ι π ό θ η τ ο ι , χ α ρ ά κ α ι σ τ έ φ α ν ό ς μ ο υ , “my C hristian friends, you whom I love and long for, my joy and my crow n.” But before the apostle begins his com m ands, he first com m ends. H e does so with an extraordinary, long series o f appellatives designed to express powerfully to the Philippians his feeling of closeness to them and his great affection for them : (1) α δ ε λ φ ο ί , lit. “b ro th ers” (cf. also Phil 1:12; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:8, 21—a feature in Hellenistic letters o f frien d sh ip ), rem inds them that they and he belong to the same divine family and hold equal status in relation to God as F ather (see Comment on 1:12). (2) α γ α π η τ ο ί , lit. “beloved,” is a verbal adjective with passive force (BDF §112), and appearing in this context twice over, it focuses attention on the Philippians as the object o f P aul’s love. It is his hum ble way of saying “I love you,” bu t it is not less powerful for being so hum bly expressed. (3) έ π ι π ό θ η τ ο ι , lit. “longed for,” like α γ α π η τ ο ί , “beloved,” is also a verbal adjective with passive force, bu t unlike α γ α π η τ ο ί , “beloved,” this word occurs now here else in the n t . Its rarity perhaps adds intensity to the em otion of “hom esick tenderness,” especially to the pain of separation th at Paul feels and expresses here (cf. 1:8 where Paul uses the cognate verb έ π ι π ο θ β ΐ ν , “to long fo r,” and see the Comment there; cf. also 2:26). (4) χ α ρ ά , “jo y ,” is a word th at belongs to the special vocabulary of Philippians (1:4, 25; 2:2; cf. also 1:18; 2:17, 18, 28; 3:7; 4:4, 10) and gives expression to a fundam ental

240

Philippians 4:1-9

Christian em otion. But what is w orth noting h ere is that the Philippians are P aul’s joy, which is a striking way of saying that they are his source or cause o f joy. People, n o t things— these friends, his children in the faith, even with all th eir failings— are what stim ulate within him this great gladness. (5) στέφ ανος, “crow n,” as Paul uses it here, is n o t to be thought o f as the diadem (διάδημά) worn by a king (cf. Rev 19:12; and see Deissm ann, Light from the Ancient East, 315) or the m artyr’s crown (L ohm eyer), b u t as eith er the garland placed on the h ead of a guest at a b an q u et (Aristophanes, Ach. 636; Plato, Symp. 212; see V incent) or a victor’s wreath presen ted by the judges to the w inner in the Olym pian gam es (Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon M otif 104-6), or both at the same time. With this single word, then, Paul may be reinforcing the idea th at the Philippians are a cause for his festal-like joy, on the one hand, and inform ing them th at they are also a source of great h o n o r for him , on the other. T here is no n eed to push this idea o f “crow ning” exclusively into the eschatological period, as though the co ntinued fidelity o f the Philippian church would only then result in a reward, a crown, being given Paul for the success o f his pastoral work (Collange; M artin [1976]; W. G rundm ann, TDNT 7:615-36; Bockm uehl, 237, who notes the eschatological setting in 1 Thess 2:19, an o th er M acedonian congregation, and that the connective ώστε, “well, th e n ,” links with 3:20-21 and places the greeting in the fram e o f the fu tu re ). T he Philippians already are a cause of P aul’s boasting and honor. They are his crown. Yet, like the C orinthians, who are both called “saints” (1 Cor 1:2) and in serious d an g er o f falling short o f this calling, P aul’s people are in constant n eed o f both praise and blam e. ούτως στήκετε εν κυρίω, α γα π η τοί, “this, my Christian friends, is how you m ust stand firm in the Lord.” Now, after so powerfully expressing his affection for them , Paul asks the Philippians to stand firm. By this word, σ τήκ ετε, “stand firm ,” he describes them as soldiers (Krentz, “Military L anguage”) who are to stand at their post irrespective o f the pressures to abandon it (cf. Phil 1:16) o r as ru n n ers who m ust ad h ere w ithout deviation to the course m arked o ut by the gospel. With it he calls u p o n them to live thoroughly Christian lives (cf. 1:27). But how are they to “stand firm ”? W hat will this thoroughly C hristian life look like? P aul’s answer: “Stand firm thus [ούτω ς].” T hen in a series of im peratives he puts m eaning into the word ούτως, “thus.” T he course m arked out by the gospel will look like this. 2 Εύοδίαν παρακαλώ κα'ι Συντύχην παρακαλώ τό αυτό φρονεΐν εν κυρίω, “[first,] I beg E uodia and I beg Syntyche to agree with each o th er in the L o rd .” “First”— an d this word is added to the translation to make clear the connection betw een v 1 and v 2—unity am ong believers is an essential elem ent in a truly Christian way o f living. Paul appeals to E uodia an d Syntyche “to agree with each o th er in the L o rd .” T he earnestness o f his appeal is seen (1) in the verb he uses to m ake it, παρακαλεΐν, “to urge, exhort, appeal to ,” “to im plore or beg,” and (2) in the fact th at Paul uses it twice so as to heighten its effect by repetition, as though he were addressing the wom en each in turn, and to em phasize the idea that his apostolic exhortation is m ade to both parties equally. This exhortation to live harm oniously to g ether is for a way of life that is fit and p ro p e r for all who claim to have placed themselves u n d e r the Lordship of Christ (τό αυτό φρονείv εν κυρίω, “to agree with each o th er in the L o rd ”) . O nce again the im p o rtan t Pauline word φρονείv, “to have an interest in ,” “to pay sym pathetic attention to ,” “to have concern fo r,” “to th in k ,” “to form or hold an opinion ab o u t,” “to set o n e ’s m ind

Comment

241

on, to be in ten t o n ,” appears (Phil 1:7; 2:3, 5; 3:15, 19; 4:2, 10). And the richness o f m eaning in the phrase τό αυτό φρον6ΐν exceeds any single translation, such as “to agree with each o th e r”; for it em braces n o t only the idea o f possessing “a com m on m in d ” b u t also the idea o f having identical feelings and attitudes toward each other, a total harm ony of life (see Comment on 1:7). T he principal parties involved in this quarrel, E uodia and Syntyche, were women. T he nam es appear quite frequently in inscriptions, always in the fem inine form (BDAG), and Paul refers to them in v 3 with fem inine forms of the pronouns, α ύ τα ΐς, “them [fem .],” and α ϊτ ιν 6 9 , “who [fem .].”T here are thus no grounds for taking one or both of these nam es as nam es of m en, as did T heodore of M opsuestia (ca. a . d . 350-428). H e claim ed to have h eard that Syntyche should be spelled Syntyches, a m a n ’s nam e, and that Syntyches was in fact the Philippian jailer o f Acts 16, the husband of Euodia. But this is an adm itted ru m o r and is totally w ithout support in fact (Michael, V incent). N or is there any support for the fanciful view o f the T ubingen School th at saw E uodia and Syntyche n o t as two individuals b u t as symbols for the Jewish Christians, on the one hand, and the Gentile Christians, on the other, and the σύ£υγ6, “yokefellow,” of v 3 (Syzygos = “the U nifier”) as the apostle Peter, who was charged with m ediating between these two factions within the church and with bringing them together (cf. B arth). N othing is known about these two wom en or the n ature of their quarrel. Just possibly one o f them could have been the Lydia o f Acts 16 (cf. w 14, 40). Λυδία, “Lydia,” is an adjective m eaning “the Lydian,” i.e., the wom an from Lydia of Asia M inor, and eith er “E uodia” or “Syntyche” could have been h er p ro p er nam e. (H em er, Book of Acts, 114, 231, takes the view th at Lydia was in fact a personal nam e, based on inscriptional evidence in Asia M inor.) Lydia’s p ro m in en t role in the founding o f the church at Philippi lends a certain credibility to this conjecture (but this is do u b ted by Bockm uehl, 17). In any case, these two wom en appear to have been im p o rtan t persons within the church and am ong its m ost active workers, perhaps deaconesses; perhaps within each of their hom es a separate congregation m et for worship. Certainly it is clear from the Acts account that wom en played a notew orthy role in the founding and establishing of the M acedonian churches (Acts 16:14,40; 17:4,12; see Thom as, ExpTim 83 [1971-72] 117-20; Gilman, Women). Thus th at these people in particular, two influential wom en who had the potential for upsetting the harm ony o f the larger com m unity, were quarreling caused Paul to beg each, face to face as it were, to make up their differences. T h eir differences may have had to do with church leadership and which o f the two wom en was to have the greater voice and influence within the church at Philippi (see Portefaix, Sisters Rejoice). P aul’s plea here for them to be of the same m ind (τό αυτό φρον6ΐν, “to agree with each o th e r”) recalls Phil 2:15, where the general problem s that plagued the Philippians— self-serving, selfseeking attitudes—were set over against (τούτο φρον6‫׳‬ΐτ6 , “act in this way” [2:5]) the self-sacrificing, self-giving attitude of Christ, who was in the form of God but who p o u red him self out unselfishly in obedience for the good o f others. N or should the m odels o f Tim othy and E paphroditus be overlooked, as Paul holds up these “p attern s” th at the two wom en were failing to em ulate. These two colleagues would have m ore im m ediate appeal, as they were known at Philippi as P aul’s fellow workers. 3 ναι έρωτώ καί σ6,γνήσι6 σ ύ ζυ γε, “yes, a n d I ask you, my loyal yokefellow [s].”

242

Philippians 4:1-9

Paul was a realist. He understood how difficult it would be for E uodia and Syntyche to reach agreem ent on their own. H ence he solicits the help o f a third party, whom he addresses simply as γνήσιε σύ£υγε, “true yokefellow” ( r s v ) . But who was this mysterious person, and why did Paul suddenly address a single individual in a letter otherwise addressed to a whole church (Phil 1:1)? These questions have given rise to alm ost endless and som etimes absurd answers: (1) P aul’s wife (C lem ent o f A lexandria), who R enan {Saint Paul, 148) conjectured was Lydia; (2) the hu sband or b ro th er of E uodia or Syntyche (Chrysostom); (3) E paphroditus (Lightfoot); (4) Timothy, o f whom it was said that he γνησίων, “genuinely” (2:20), cared for the Philippians (Collange); (5) Silas (G. Delling, T D N T 7:749-50); (6) Luke (M anson, BJRL 23 [1939] 199; H ájek, CV7 [1964] 261-62; Fee [1995], 39394); (7) the chief bishop at Philippi (Ellicott); (8) Christ, with the vai, “yes,” in tro d u cin g a prayer to the one who joins people together (W ieseler, Chronologie) ; o r (9) a person nam ed Σύζυγος, “Syzygos” (Michael, J . J. Mü ller; cf. JB: “I ask you, Syzygus, to be truly a ‘com panion’”) . See the discussion in B ockm uehl (241). But the simplest, and perhaps the best, answer is to say that Paul sees the entire Philippian church as a unit, as a single individual, who shares with him the b u rd en o f his apostolic work, and he addresses them so (Fee [1995], 393-94, however, challenges this, stressing the singular vocative form o f the term ). H e sees the Philippian church yoked together with him as two oxen team ed up to accom plish an im p o rtan t task (H oulden). Paul places subtle, though nonetheless powerful, stress on the im portance of com m unity effort by using five words com pounded with the preposition συν, “w ith,” within the space of two verses (w 2-3). Thus he asks (έρωτώ, “I ask”) them to cooperate with him now by resisting division and by effectively working to restore harm ony. συλλαμβάνου α ύ τα ΐς, “to help th em .” T ogeth er the Philippians are to help these women reconcile their differences. Even the verb Paul chooses, συλλαμβάνειv, “to h e lp ” (used sixteen times in the n t bu t only one time by the apostle, i.e., h e r e ), implies this unity o f effort. A lthough through usage it has simply com e to m ean “to aid or assist,” yet com pounded as it is with συν (συλ-), “with, ” the idea of “taking h old along with so m eone” (cf. Acts 26:21) in o rd er to provide n eed ed assistance still lingers. And the construction of έρωτώ, “I ask,” followed by a finite verb (an imperative: συλλαμβάνου, “h e lp ”), w here the infinitive or δ τι recitativum, which introduces a direct quotation, would have been expected, intensifies the sense of urgency: “H elp them ! You must! It is an order, even though I ask [έρωτώ] you!” α ίτ ιν ε ς έν τώ εύαγγελίω συνήθλησάν μοι μετά και Κλήμεντος* και των λοιπών συνεργών μου, ών τά ονόματα έν βίβλω £ω%, “because they are wom en who fought at my side in [the spread of] the gospel along with C lem ent and the rest o f my co-workers. All their nam es are in the book of life.” O ne very im portant reason for helping Euodia and Syntyche is now given: they had fought together side by side with Paul in the struggle to preach the gospel. This reason is in tro d u ced by the relative p ro n o u n α ιτ ιν ε ς , “w ho.” Relative p ro nouns can introduce subordinate causal clauses (see D ana and Mantey, M anual Grammar, 275; cf. Acts 10:41, 47; Rom 6:2; Phil 2:20; O ’Brien, 481; bu t Fee [1995], 395, cites BDAG, 2, for a “qualitative” sense of the relative pronoun: “assist them , inasm uch as they belong to those who . . . ”). συναθλεΐν, “to fight together side by side w ith,” is a m etaphorical word drawn from the games or the gladiatorial arena (Malinowski, BTB 15 [1985] 62). It appears in the n t only here and in Phil 1:27 (see Comment

Comment

243

on 1:27). It implies a united struggle in preaching the gospel, on the one hand, and a sharing in the suffering th at results from the struggle, on the o th er (Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, 1 1 6 , 119-20). T here is also contained in the choice of this verb m ore than a h in t of cooperation on the same level. By using it Paul wishes to say th at these wom en are n o t in any way to be degraded for their disagreem ents; ra th e r they are to be respected highly for their energetic cooperation with him, working at his side as esteem ed m em bers o f his team . T here is no justification whatsoever for m aking the lim iting com m ent that “these two m ust have been am ong those [women] who, having believed, labored among their own sex fo r” the spread o f the gospel (Alford, 179, italics added). They were, rather, P aul’s συνεργών, “co-workers,” equal in im portance to C lem ent and των λοιπών, “the rest,” o f P aul’s fellow laborers. T he phrase “with C lem ent and the rest of my cow orkers” should be connected with the statem ent “they are wom en who fought at my side” (so Fee [1995], 396) and not, as Lightfoot suggests, with “to help th em .” The structure of the sentence argues for this, as does the understanding that the σ έ , “you,” though singular, probably refers to the church as a whole, which would then already have included C lem ent and the rest. Who was this Clement? It is impossible to answer this question, o th er than to say th at in all likelihood he was a Philippian Christian. Evidently he was so well known within the church that Paul did n o t n eed to identify him , and he did not think to do so for strangers who m ight chance to read his letter. C lem ent was a com m on Rom an nam e. H ence to say that he was the C lem ent who later becam e the th ird bishop of Rome (cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.4; 5.6) is simply to be m aking a guess. Such identification rests solely on agreem ent in nam e, no t at all on historical evidence. W ho were τών λοιπών συνεργών μου, “the rest o f my co-workers”? Again it is a question impossible to answer. They too m ust have been Philippians, bu t too num erous to m ention b y nam e (cf. Ellis, N TS 17 [1970-71] 437-52). Yet they did have nam es, and although time and space (and perhaps his very knowledge) did n o t p erm it Paul to list them , God had listed them all in the “book of life.”Just as Philippi and o th er cities like it m ust have had a civic register that included all the nam es of their citizens, so the heavenly com m onw ealth (cf. Phil 3:20; Fee [1995], 397, citing Caird) has its own roll, where God inscribes the nam es of those to whom he prom ises life. T hus it is n o t im portant that succeeding generations know the nam es o f P aul’s co-workers; it is im portant that “God knows them and knows they belong to h im ” (Barth, 120). T he expression “book of life,” often found in late apocalyptic literature (cf. Dan 12:1; 1 Enoch 47:3; Rev 3:5, 20; 15:21,27; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27) and at Q um ran (1QM XII, 3), is drawn from Exod 32:32; Pss 69:28; 139:16, w here in the figurative language of the o t it refers to the register of G od’s covenant people (Lightfoot; M artin [1976]). T he p ro n o u n ών, “whose,” m ight seem to have as its antecedent only συνεργών, “co-workers”—i.e. “co-workers whose nam es are in the book of life”—since both term s are m asculine and plural. But this interpretation is too restrictive and unnecessary, for ών, “w hose,” can be a generic use of the m asculine, in ten d ed to refer n o t only to the rem aining co-workers b u t also to C lem ent and Euodia and Syntyche. T he nam es o f all these are inscribed in the book of life: all are G od’s children. N or is th ere anything about the expression “whose nam es are in the book o f life” to indicate that those people so designated had already died in the

244

Philippians 4:1-9

faith (cf. Luke 10:20), although many interpreters assume this to be the case (cf. Michael, J. J. Mü ller, B eare). For later references, see H erm . Vis. 1.3.2; H erm . Sim. 2:9; 1 Clem. 53.4. 4 χα ίρ ετε εν κυρίω π ά ν τ ο τ ε ‫ ־‬πάλιν έρώ, χα ίρ ετε, “second, rejoice in the Lord at all times. O nce again I will say it, rejoice!” Paul once again tells the Philippians to rejoice in the L ord on all occasions (π ά ν το τε, “at all times,” n o t άε ί, “constantly”). A nd with em phatic determ ination he insists on repeating this injunction, χα ίρ ειν, the verb translated “rejoice,” seems also to have been used as a form ula o f farewell (cf. Beare; G oodspeed, Problems, 174-75; cf. Bruce; W itherington, 112; n e b ). H ence it is possible that at this ju n c tu re in the letter the im perative χα ίρ ετε “com bines a parting benediction with an exhortation to cheerfulness. It is n eith er ‘farewell’ alone, n o r ‘rejoice’ alo n e” (Lightfoot, 15960). Nevertheless, whatever appeal there is h ere to joy, it is m ade with the realization th at a C hristian’s faith έν κυρίω, “in the L ord,” is what m akes such an appeal m eaningful, especially when that one is faced with situations that are conducive to sorrow and m arked by difficulties, hurts, and trials (see the treatm en t o f “jo y ” in the Comment on Phil 1:4). 5 το ε π ιε ικ έ ς ύμών γνωσθήτω πάσ ιν άνθρώποις, “next, let your m agnanim ity be known to everybody.” T he Christian life, furtherm ore, is to be characterized by ε π ιε ικ έ ς , “m agnanim ity.” This quality is such an im portant one that the apostle dem ands th at it becom e evident am ong the Philippian Christians to such a degree th at it will be seen and recognized (γνωσθήτω, “let [it] be know n”) by everybody (πάσιν άνθρώποις, lit. “to all p eo p le”), n o t ju st by their fellow believers (cf. Jo h n 13:35). ε π ιε ικ έ ς , “m agnanim ity,” a n eu ter adjective used as an abstract nou n , is alm ost untranslatable (cf. M M ). R elated as it is to είκός, “reasonable,” it radiates the positive ideas of m agnanim ity or “sweet reasonableness” (to use Matthew A rn old ’s phrase [Literature and Dogma, xii, 2]). Aristotle contrasted it with ακριβοδίκαιος, “strict ju stice.” For him it m eant a generous treatm en t o f others that, while d em anding equity, does n o t insist on the letter o f the law. Willing to adm it limitations, it is prep ared to m ake allowances so that justice does n o t injure. It is a quality, therefore, that keeps one from insisting on o n e ’s full rights, “where rigidity would be h arsh ” (Plum m er, 93; cf. Aristotle, Eth. nic. 5.10 §1137b.3), or from m aking a rigorous and obstinate stand for what isjustly due to one (V incent). In the nt ε π ιεικ ή ς, “m agnanim ity,” keeps com pany with such words as ά μαχος, “p eaceable” (1 Tim 3:3; Tit 3:2), αγαθός, “g o o d ” (1 Pet 2:18), αγνή, “p u re ,” ειρηνική, “peace-loving,” ευπειθής, “open to reaso n ,” and μεστή ελέους, “rich in m ercy” (Jas 3:17). Thus ε π ιε ικ έ ς , “m agnanim ity,” “is that considerate courtesy and respect for the integrity of others which prom pts a [person] n o t to be forever standing on his rights; and it is pre-em inently the character o f Jesus (2 Cor 10:1)” (Caird, 150; cf. H. Preisker, TDNT 2:588-90). This term has som ething to contribute to the debate on Jesus and Paul (see W enham , Paul) in view of the w ord’s use in M att 11:29 (see Leivestad, N TS 12' [1966] 156-64). ό κύριος ε γ γ ύ ς, “T he L ord is n ea r!” W ithout w arning and w ithout any conjunctions to jo in it eith er with what precedes or with what follows, Paul suddenly interjects this phrase. Its m eaning is re n d ere d elusive by the am biguity contained in ε γ γ ύ ς, “n e a r,” which can refer both to space and time. Thus, “the Lord is n e a r” may m ean that the Lord is close, present, and hence aware o f a p erso n ’s conduct, concerned about a p erso n ’s attitude, available to com e to a

Comment

245

p erso n ’s aid, and at han d to assist (cf. l x x P ss 33:19 [ET 34:18]; 118:151 [ET 119:151]; 144:18 [ET 145:18]; see Caird, Michaelis, and especially note 1 Clem. 21.3). O r these words may m ean that the re tu rn of the L ord Jesus C hrist is im m inent, as in the prayer call Marana tha, O u r Lord, com e” (1 Cor 16:22; Rev 22:20; Did. 10:6). T here would thus be good reason to rejoice, m agnanim ously to p u t up with the harassm ent o f pagans, and to live worry free. It is th at the L ord is com ing soon to reward the faithful, to punish the evildoers, to heal all ills, and to right all wrongs (cf. 1 Cor 16:22; H eb 10:24-25; Jas 5:8; Rev 1:7; 3:11; 22:20; cf. 2 Thess 1:7-8; Barn. 21.3). Thus the shortness o f tim e and the nearness o f salvation heig h ten the earnestness of the exhortations (H aupt, Dibelius, B onnard, Beare, Gnilka, H oulden, M artin [1976]; Ridderbos, Paul, 490). It may be wrong, however, to choose between these two interpretations and to remove all ambiguity by translation (cf. g o o d s p e e d , l b , g n b ) . Just possibly Paul deliberately chose this particular word, ε γ γ ύ ς, “n ea r,” with all its ambiguity precisely to include both ideas, of time and o f space, together: the Lord who will soon re tu rn is the Lord who once came so close to hum anity (Phil 2:6-8) as actually to share the hum an lot and who though absent now in body is still n ear at han d in his Spirit to guide, instruct, encourage, infuse with strength, assist, transform , and renew (cf. Jo h n 14:12, 1618, 26; 16:12-13; Rom 8:9-11; 2 Cor 3:17-18; see Collange; Bruce, 117-18; O ’Brien, 488-90). 6 μηδέν μεριμνάτε, “do n o t worry about anything.” Paul continues his exhortation by adding still an o th er im perative w ithout any conjunction. The figure o f speech, called asyndeton, runs th ro u g h o u t this section, w here comm ands are given in rapid-fire fashion w ithout any connecting words to link one com m and to the o th er (see W itherington, 110). Now the o rd er is “do not worry about anything,” or m ore accurately “stop worrying.” O nce again Paul echoes the teaching o f Jesus and reveals his familiarity with the Gospel tradition (cf. Matt 6:25-34; see H unter, Paul and His Predecessors, 52-61; Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, 136- 41; D ungan, Sayings of Jesus; Kim, DPL, 474- 92, who does n o t list Phil 4:6 in his list o f “Possible Echoes”; W enham , Paul). T he verb μεριμνάν, “to worry,” was used in Phil 2:20, w here it had the positive sense “to be solicitously concerned fo r” the welfare o f others. Now, however, it has the negative connotation “anxious harassing care” (Lightfoot, 160), attem pting “to carry the b u rden of the future o n e se lf” (Caird, 151), or “unreasonable anxiety” (Plum m er, 93), especially about things over which one has no control. Paul and the Philippians had am ple reason for anxiety since the one was in prison and the others were th reaten ed with p ersecution (cf. 1:28). So he is n o t speaking of im aginary troubles or phantom anxieties. H ence, when he tells them to stop worrying, to be overly anxious for nothing, leaving them no exceptions (μηδέν, “n o th in g ”; cf. 1 Cor 7:32), it is no t because he makes light of the troubles that they face b u t because he knows that God is g reater than all their troubles (Beare; cf. l x x P s 54:23 [ET 55:22]; 1 Cor 7:32; 1 Pet 5:7; and the “Q ” teaching in the Synoptic Gospels [Matt 6:25-34 par. Luke 12:22-32]). άλλ’ έν π α ν τί τή προσευχή καί τή δεήσει μετά ευ χα ρ ισ τία ς τά α ιτή μ α τα υμών γνωρι£έσθω προς τον θεόν, “b u t in every situation make your requests known to God by prayer and petition with thanksgiving.” W hat then is the alternative to worry? How does one gain and keep o n e ’s equilibrium in a world heaving with anxiety-creating situations? P aul’s answer: by prayer. With the use of three

246

Philippians 4:1-9

synonyms strung together in a row—προσευχή, “prayer,” δεήσει, “p etitio n ,” and α ιτή μ α τα , “requests” (see Comment on Phil 1:4, 9)—Paul em phatically urges the Philippians to find release from anxiety in prayer and yet m ore prayer (cf. 1 Thess 5:17; Pol. Phil. 4.3; 7.2). From personal experience he had learned th at “the way to be anxious about nothing was to be prayerful about everything” (Rainy, cited by Michael, 197, who gives a telling illustration from the life of Principal R ainy). “Make your requests known to G od”— as though God need ed to be inform ed (cf. M att 6:8)—is b u t the apostle’s quaint way o f expressing the very personal nature o f prayer. H e is saying, in effect, that prayer is a conversation with, a plea directed to, a request m ade of, and inform ation given to the suprem e Person o f the universe, who can hear, know, understand, care about, and respond to the concerns th at otherwise would sink people in despair. It may be, however, that the real accent of this sentence is n o t on P aul’s com m and for the Philippians to pray b u t on his instruction that they are to do this μετά ευ χα ρ ισ τία ς, “with thanksgiving” (cf. Rom 1:21 for the im portance of thankfulness). Such G od-directed gratitude accords with the ten o r of Phil 1:1218 and 2:17-18. Barth (122) observes: To begin by praising God for the fact that in this situation, as it is, he is so mightily God— such a beginning is the end of anxiety. To be anxious means that we ourselves suffer, ourselves groan, ourselves seek to see ahead. Thanksgiving means giving God the glory in everything, making room for him, casting our care on him, letting it be his care. The troubles that exercise us then cease to be hidden and bottled up. They are, so to speak, laid open to God, spread out before him.

O n ευ χα ρ ισ τία , “thanksgiving,” see O ’Brien, DPL, 68-71 (with bibliography). 7 καί ή ειρήνη του θεού, “as a result G od’s peace.” The καί here is consecutive: “as a result.” The expression ή ειρήνη του θεού, “the peace of God,” is found nowhere else in the n t . With it Paul is not now referring to the peace with God that the Philippians had as a result of their being justified by faith in Jesus Christ (του θεοί‫׳‬, “of God,” viewed as an objective genitive, as in Rom 5:1); such peace is presupposed. Nor is he exclusively referring to that “inward peace of soul which comes from God, and is grounded in G od’s presence and prom ise ... the fruit of believing prayer” (Vincent, 135; του θεού, “of God,”viewed as a subjective genitive; cf. Rom 14:17; 15:13; Col 3:15). Paul seems here to be referring to the tranquility of G od’s own eternal being (C aird), the peace that God himself has (B arth), the calm serenity that characterizes G od’s very nature and that grateful, trusting Christians are welcome to share (του θεού, “of G od,” viewed as a descriptive genitive; cf. Phil 4:9; Gnilka cites Sipre 42 on Num 6:26; cf. W. Foerster, TDNT 2:411-17). If they do, then not only will inner strife resulting from worry cease, but external strife resulting from disagreements am ong Christians has the potential of coming to an end as well, ειρήνη, “peace,” here reflects the Heb. šālôm, harm ony and good order, when all parts of life are working according to G od’s plan and purpose (for the Greco-Roman background, see Dinkier, Eirene, and for an overview of Paul’s teaching, see Porter, DPL, 695-99). ή ύπερέχουσα πάντα νουν, “which excels all hum an p lan n in g .” Paul now describes this peace by a participial phrase, lit. “which rises above every m in d .” This phrase is open to m ore than one interpretation: (1) the peace of God “surpasses all h um an u n d erstan d in g ” (cf. m o f f a t t , r s v , Ph i l l i p s , g n b , n i v ) ; i.e., it is

Comment

247

so marvelously vast th at no hum an m ind can ever fully co m prehend its significance. (2) G od’s peace is able to produce exceedingly b etter results than hum an planning, or it is far superior to any p erso n ’s schemes for security, or it is m ore effective for rem oving anxiety than any intellectual effort or power of reasoning (P lum m er). Any o f these interpretations is possible, although the latter one b etter fits the context in which this phrase appears. T he context certainly argues against the attem pt to see in these words a subtle rebuke to P aul’s enem ies who claim ed superior knowledge or to those Philippians who were jockeying for position by wanting to surpass or to outstrip their fellow Christians. T he fact that the verb ύπ6ρ6χ6ιν, “to go beyond,” appears three times in this letter, out of the total of four times Paul uses it in all of his letters (Phil 2:3; 3:8; 4:7; Rom 13:1), although striking, can n o t override the context. However, it allows one to say that the expression “the peace o f God which passes all u n d erstan d in g ” m eans that “the ‘u n d erstan d in g ’ ( ‘nous’) which the Philippians p u t into their dissensions ought in the end to be subjected to the peace which God gives” (Collange, 145; cf. Bonnard; M artin [1976]; O ’Brien, 497, argues for the th o u g h t o f G od’s peace surpassing all o u r powers o f com prehension; Black, N o v T 37 [1995] 41-45, however, seeks to explain the verses as an o th er bid by Paul to encourage the Philippians to live “in harm ony with one a n o th e r”) . This expression is found in a section where the apostle seeks to help his friends to cope with anxiety through prayer and thanksgiving and to begin to share in the profundity of G od’s peace, rath er than to rebuke them for their self-centeredness. H e has done that elsewhere (Phil 2:14; so O ’Brien, 497-98). φρουρήσβι τ ά ς καρδιας‫ ־‬υμών καί τά νοήματα ύμών ev Χριστώ Ίησοϋ, “will stand guard over your thoughts and feelings in Christ Jesus.” T he verb φρουρείv is a military term picturing G od’s peace as a d etachm ent of soldiers “standing guard over” (cf. 2 Cor 11:32) a city so as to protect it from attack. Philippi in P aul’s time housed a R om an garrison (see Oakes, Philippians). Thus the m etaphor would have been easily u nderstood and appreciated by the Philippian Christians who read it: G od’s peace, like a garrison of soldiers, will keep guard over ou r thoughts and feelings so th at they will be as safe against the assaults of worry and fear as any fortress. καρδία, “h e a rt,” in the n t never m eans the physical organ that pum ps the blood. N or is it used solely to refer to the center o f o n e ’s em otions (Rom 9:2; 10:1; 2 Cor 2:4; 6:11; Phil 1:7). It is som etimes used to describe the source of th ought (Rom 1:21; Eph 1:21) and m oral choice (1 Cor 7:37; 2 Cor 9:7)— that which “gives im pulse and character to action” (Vincent, 137; J. Behm, TDNT 3:611-13). But here, where Paul places καρδία, “h e a rt,” alongside νόημα, “th o u g h t,” gramm atically in such away as to distinguish the one from the o th er—τάς‫ ־‬καρδίas‫־‬ύμών καί τά νοήματα ύμών, “your hearts and your th o u g h ts” (note the definite articles with both nouns and also the p ro n o u n ύμών, “your”)—καρδία, “h e a rt,” very likely has its m eaning narrow ed to the “seat of o n e ’s em otions or deepest feelings” or simply to the “em otions” and “feelings” themselves, νοήματα, however, are the products of the νους, “m in d ,” and hence “tho u g h ts” (2 Cor 2:11; cf. n e b , j b ; but see J. Behm, TDNT 4:960-61). T ogether these words refer to the entire in n er being of the Christian—em otions, affections, thoughts, and m oral choices (cf. Stacey, Pauline View of Man). This in n er p art of a person, then, so vulnerable to attack by the enemy, is that which G od’s peace is set, like battle-ready soldiers, to protect.

Philippians 4:1-9

248

But this peace that acts as guard o f o n e ’s em otions and thoughts, Paul says, is reserved for, or available only to, those who are εν Χριστώ Ίησου, “in Christ Jesus” (see Comment on this phrase in Phil 1:1). T hat is to say, only in u nion with Christ, “in obedience to his authority and submission to his will” (M artin [1976], 157), can anyone have the secure assurance that he is indeed the object o f the protection o f G o d ’s peace. 8 το λοιπόν, αδελφοί, “and last o f all, my C hristian friends.” Vv 8-9 constitute a single sentence in G reek that is marvelous for its rhetorical expression and for the loftiness of the m oral standards it sets forth. It begins with τό λοιπόν, “and last o f all,” which signals n o t the end of the letter or even its n ear end, bu t ra th e r the last o f the im peratives in a parenetic section that has stated in detail how one is to “stand firm in the L o rd ” (Phil 4:1; so too O ’Brien, 499). This sentence is a conditional sentence. Its protasis (“if” clause) is constructed in such away that, at least for the sake o f argum ent, what is said m ust be assum ed to be true (BDF §372 [1 ]): εϊ τ ις ‫־‬αρετή και ε! τ ις έπ α ινος, “z/there is any m oral excellence and z/there is anything worthy o f praise,” m eans “since there is m oral excellence and since there is anything worthy o f praise.” Based on this assum ption—namely, that m oral excellence and things worthy of praise do exist—Paul proceeds to declare that th ere are two m atters binding up o n Christians. They fairly well sum up what is involved in standing firm in the Lord: (1) λογί£εσθε, “focus your m inds,” and (2) π ρ ά σ σ ετε, “keep putting into practice.” Paul then spells o u t in a highly rhetorical fashion precisely how a C hristian should think and act, m aking use o f several figures o f speech (anaphora, asyndeton, polysyndeton, and hom oioteleuton), in o rd er to m ake his p o in t with emphasis. T he m ain p art of the sentence may be diagram m ed as follows so that these figures may be seen clearly: V8

V9

ταντα λογίζβσθβ όσα εστίν αληθή όσα σεμνά όσα δίκαια όσα αγνά όσα προσφιλή όσα εύφημα ταντα πράσσετε ά και έμάθετε και παρελάβετε και ήκονσατε και είδετε εν έμοί

focus your minds on these things on whatever is truthful whatever is majestic and awe-inspiring whatever is just whatever is pure whatever calls forth love whatever is winsome keep putting into practice the lessons that you learned from me and the traditions that I passed on to you and the things that you heard about me and the things that you saw in me

εϊ τ ις αρετή καί εϊ τ ις έπ α ινο ς, “since there is m oral excellence and since th ere are things worthy o f praise.” R eturning now to discuss first the subordinate (“i f ”) clause o f this sentence, one is im m ediately struck with the two nouns that Paul uses to set the stage for what is to follow: αρετή, “m oral excellence,” and έπ α ινο ς, “so m eth in g worthy of praise.” They are com prehensive qualities that the apostle says m ust characterize a C hristian’s attitude and actions. T he first of these words, αρετή, “m oral excellence,” is rarely used in th e NT (1 Pet 2:9; 2 Pet 1:3), and only here by Paul. It is variously translated “virtue,” “excellence,” and “goodness.” A m ong classical writers it was an all-inclusive term to describe excellence of any kind, w hether th at of a person, an anim al, or a thing. (Perhaps it was this “very

Comment

249

width of significance” that kept n t writers from using it to any great degree; it did n o t have “precision enough for large use in Christian language” [MM, 75].) In the l x x it h ad the restricted m eaning of “glory” or “praise” (H ab 3:3), while to the Stoic philosophers αρετή, “m oral excellence,” m eant the highest good of hum anity, “the only en d to which a m an should devote h im self”(Beare, 148). Very likely Paul, in using this word, had in m ind the Stoic sense o f “m oral excellence or goodness,” in spite of the fact th at for the Stoic αρετή, “m oral excellence,” ten d ed to focus attention on the excellence, merits, and achievem ent o f hum ankind ra th e r than u p o n G od’s deeds (Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, 152). This was p art of the Stoic ideal o f living κατά φ ύσιν, secundum naturam, “according to n a tu re .” “V irtue” is the only good, and the good is that which leads to happiness (ευδαιμονία), based on an even flow o f life (εύττοΐα βίου). T he o th er word, έπ α ινο ς, m eans both “praise” and “som ething worthy of praise” (BDAG). O ften Paul used it of things that m erit the praise of God (Rom 2:29; 1 Cor 4:5). But here in this particular context, where he puts it in the com pany o f αρετή, “m oral excellence,” a word from the vocabulary o f the Stoic moralists, and where he discusses the acknowledged good in pagan culture, he seems rath er to have in view those things that m erit the praise o f hum ankind. Such was its m eaning in contem porary public life, w here it was used of conduct that called down universal hum an approval (cf. H. Preisker, TDNT 2:586-88). Thus Paul seems to be drawing up o n the cultural background of the Philippians and is saying to them : If there is such a thing as moral excellence (and you believe there is), if there is a kind of behavior that elicits universal approval (and you believe there is), then continue to strive for this goodness and attain to this level of behavior that will command the praise of hum ankind and God. You must not fail to live up to the ideals of your fellow men and women, which were also your ideals before you were converted. (Cf. Sevenster, P aul and Seneca, 156.)

In all probability the apostle is here acknowledging th at there was m uch good in pagan life and morality, and he urges his friends (once again he addresses the Philippians as αδελφοί, “brothers [and sisters]”) n o t to be blind to this fact, no r to repudiate it. H e asks, rather, that they recognize and incorporate all that is good in natural morality into their own lives, to pay heed to quite simple bu t solid truths, even if they first learned them from pagan sources. For as Justin Martyr p u t it a century later, “T he tru th which m en in all lands have rightly spoken belongs to u s” (2 Apol. 2.13). T he reason for P aul’s appeal to Stoic morality is elusive. O ne explanation is that he is shifting the g round of his strategy to m ake his appeal to non-Christian ideals, while at the same time incorporating a list o f term s that have their parallel in the o t . If Acts 17:22-31 (Paul’s A reopagus speech) represents how Paul would address a pagan audience, or was tho u g h t by Luke to do so, then we have a parallel. Paul takes his starting p oint in the altar inscription and uses A ratus’s rem ark (“we are divine offspring”) to make his entry into his au d ien ce’s sympathies. At the same time he quickly “christianizes” this Stoic belief by setting h u m an k in d ’s origin no t in A thenian soil b u t in the biblical story o f Adam (Acts 17:26), thereby com bining b oth Greco-Roman elem ents and o t theology, ju st as he does in Phil 4. O ther options for the source of Paul’s m oral teaching, in addition to Stoicism, are

250

Philippians 4:1-9

possible. For example, there are parallels in the Jewish apocalyptic Wisdom literature and in Q um ran (so Wibbing, Tugend- und Lasterkataloge; Kamlah, Form der katalogischen Paränese). The notion of duty, based on “unw ritten laws” (nomina agrapha), i.e., duties to gods, heroes, the elderly, parents, and so on, is often rem arked on and seen to be applied to Christian families and church contexts (Weidinger, Haustafeln). Lists of virtues (as in Phil 4:8) and vices (as elsewhere in the Pauline literature) are com m onplace (see Easton, Pastoral Epistles, 201). The “two ways” teaching is evident in the Didache 1-5 (cf. 6.1-2), with parallels in Barnabas 1820, b u t the idea of a list of contrasting virtues (as in Philippians) and vices goes back a long way, to Pythagoras and then to the early Stoic teachers, who got it from Heraclitus (fifth century b . c .; see further in Martin, NIDNTT, 3:928-32). τα ΰτα λογί£6σθ€, “focus your m inds on these things.” Paul continues his sentence by com ing now to its first m ain verb and object, λογί £6σθαι, “to focus the m ind o n ,” is a strong word and a favorite o f the apostle, used by him thirty-four of the forty times it appears in the n t . It m eans “to reckon, calculate, take into acco u n t,” and as a result “to evaluate” a person, thing, quality, or event (cf. BDAG; M M ). It includes also within the range o f its m eaning the ideas o f “to p o n d er or let o n e ’s m ind dwell o n ” som ething. Perhaps Paul employs it here to imply that the Philippians m ust ever be critical toward h eath en culture and evaluate carefully its standards o f morality. But certainly he does n o t in ten d by its use any encouragem en t to reflection w ithout action. R ather, he intends to say that the Philippian C hristians m ust carefully consider certain things and evaluate them thoughtfully for the ultim ate purpose o f letting these things guide them into good deeds (cf. H. W. H eidland, TDNT 4:289). ταυτα, “these things,” that the Christians at Philippi are asked to evaluate and p u t into practice are now expressed in sonorous fashion, full of fervor and eloquence. Paul lists each “virtue” separately and thus gives each one individual attention by the constant repetition of the relative p ro n o u n δσα, “whatever things.” (These clauses that enum erate the virtues and are in troduced by δσα, “whatever things,” actually com e first in the sentence for em phasis, b u t gram m atically they are subordinate to τα υτα , “these things,” which com es at the end of the sentence: “focus your m inds on these things, namely, the things which are tru e__ ”) T he apostle does this listing in m uch the same way that the m oral philosophers of his day taught, by reciting catalogues of virtues and vices. This fact, added to the d atum th at m any o f the words in P aul’s list are n o t elsewhere used by him or at least n o t by him in the same sense as here, seems to confirm the suggestion, m ade above, th at Paul probably at this p o in t has taken over these qualities, these “virtues,” from po p u lar m oral philosophy fam iliar to his contem poraries in o rd er to show th at th ere was m uch in heath en views that m ight and ought to be valued and retain ed by Christians (Plum m er; Michael; Dibelius; Beare; Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, 154; cf. Vögtle, Tugend- und Lasterkataloge; W ibbing, Tugend- und Lasterkataloge, 80, 83-84, 101-3; 118-19; Kruse, DPL, 962-63, to whose bibliography may be added Engberg-Pedersen, “Stoicism in P hilippians”; Fitzgerald, Friendship; b u t see Lohm eyer and Michaelis, who attem pt, rather, to show the influence o f the Greek Bible on the choice of words found in v 8; cf. M artin [1976]). T he list o f virtues, then, includes in o rd er the following: δσα έ σ τιν αληθή, “on whatever is tru th fu l.” Since the whole series refers to ethical qualities, αληθής m ust m ean “tru e ” in the sense o f “tru th fu l,” and “truth-

Comment

251

fu l” in every aspect of life, including thought, speech, and act. “T ru th telling” may be the im plication, or ra th e r “tru th believing” and practicing, in line with the o t Wisdom tradition. δσα σεμνά, “whatever is majestic and awe-inspiring.” σεμνός, found only here and in the Pastorals (1 Tim 3:8, 11; Tit 2:2), has such a richness about it th at it is im possible to equate it with anyone English word: “h o n est,” “h o n o ra b le ,” “no b le,” “w orthy,” “venerable,” “th at which wins respect or com m ands reverence,” “esteem ed ” (M alherbe, Cynic Epistles, 180.23 [Diogenes, To Charmides]) are some of the suggested translations. Since it was often associated with gods, tem ples, and holy things (cf. BDAG; LSJ), it of necessity included ideas of majesty, dignity, and awe. H ence, although it may n o t be possible to translate σεμνά with a single word, its basic idea is clear. It refers to lofty things, majestic things, things that lift the m ind from the cheap and tawdry to that which is noble and good and o f m oral worth. Perhaps “awe-inspiring” is a good ren d erin g (see Bruce, 147, for G reek parallels). δσα δίκαια, “whatever is ju st.” δίκαιος m eans “ju st,” b u t in the widest sense possible, n o t only in the relation of one person to another, bu t also in the relation of th at person to God (cf. Acts 10:22; Rom 5:7). It concerns giving to God and our fellow hum an beings their due. It involves duty and responsibility. It entails satisfying all obligations, and we respond to what is “dutiful” (cf. W. W ordsworth, Ode to Duty: “stern daughter of the voice of G od”) . δσα αγνά, “whatever is p u re .” αγνός m eans “p u re ,” b u t this m eaning is n o t to be restricted to the idea of “chaste” (as in 2 Cor 11:2; Tit 2:5), in the sense of freedom from bodily sins. It may also refer to cerem onial cleanness that prepares som eone or som ething for God, for his presence and service. And certainly it em braces the idea o f purity in motives and actions, including purity in every part o f life (cf. 2 Cor 7:11; 1 Tim 5:22; Jas 3:17; 1 Pet 3:20; 1 Jo h n 3:3). It touches the m ainspring o f action. δσα προσφιλή, “whatever calls forth love.” προσφιλής is used only here in the n t an d is n o t found at all in the lists of virtues th at were cu rren t in the ancient world (see W ibbing, Tugend- und Lasterkataloge, 101). It has as its fundam ental m eaning “th at which calls forth love,” hence, “lovely,” “am iable,” “attractive,” “winsom e.” “Make yourself attractive [προσφιλή] to the congregation” is the advice of the sage to his child (Sir 4:7), som ething a wise person can do, for exam ple, by gracious speech (Sir 20:13). Thus, the C hristian’s m ind is to be set on things that elicit from others n o t bitterness and hostility but adm iration and affection. δσα εύφημα, “whatever is winsom e.” εύφημος is a word found only here in the Greek Bible (including the n t ) and variously translated as “of good report,” “of good rep u te,” “adm irable,” “gracious,” “gracious in the telling,” “honorable,” “kindly,” “h ig h -to n ed ,” “auspicious” (M alherbe, Cynic Epistles, 150.17 [Diogenes, To Timomachus). Apparently, however, this word is never used elsewhere with a passive m eaning, e.g., “well-spoken of, well-reputed,” as some of the m eanings listed above m ight indicate, b ut only in an active sense of “well-speaking,” hence “winning, attractive” (Lightfoot). It is used, therefore, of “expressing what is kind and likely to win people, and avoiding what is likely to give offence” (Plummer, 97; so Bockmuehl, 253, who offers the translation “winsome, attractive,” akin to προσφιλής, “majestic, awe-inspiring”) . “Not giving offense” may be the implication. These th en are the excellent qualities th at were held in esteem by the culture

252

Philippians 4:1-9

o f P aul’s day (not at all unique to Christianity), which the apostle appropriated and com m ended to his friends at Philippi (see Marshall, Challenge, for an older, b u t still valuable study). H e asked them continuously to focus their m inds (λογί£6σθ6) on these things, to give full critical attention to them , and so to reflect carefully u p o n them with an action-provoking kind of m editation. It was not his desire to ask them m erely to think about such noble m atters w ithout putting them into practice in th eir lives. Yet Sevenster (Paul and Seneca, 155-56) observes: what may be gathered from the fact that [these virtues are] followed immediately by verse 9 is that obedience to “what you have learned and received and heard and seen in m e” is what is ultimately of most im portance for the ch u rch ... . Life and fellowship, as it is here form ulated with the aid of terms taken from Greek moral philosophy, entails obedience to God’s commandments, an obedience which ... proceeds from belonging to Christ and from the possession of the Spirit which is at work in the church. And so it is that there is something rather provisional about verse 8: in appealing to the Philippians Paul takes into account their environm ent in order to obtain every possible support and understanding for what he wishes to say in verse 9.

This m eans th at for Paul, excellent as natural m orality may be, those qualities m en tio n ed in v 8 m ust always be viewed in the light of v 9. T here is no disjunction between the two verses since the connective a και, “and those things w hich,” introduces “a fu rth er and specific elaboration o f the preceding subject at h a n d ” (Bockm uehl, 254). The last word, therefore, lies with distinctively Christian teachings. V 9 gives a greater purpose to P aul’s ethical teaching and, as Fee rem arks ([1995], 420 n. 33), “sum m arizes m uch o f the le tte r.” 9 a και 6μάθ6τ6 . . . τα ϋτα πρασσ6τ6, “and keep putting into practice the lessons th at you learned from m e.” Thus Paul insists that the Philippians continuously p u t into practice— that is to say, they loyally stand by, hold unswervingly to, allow th eir lives to be controlled and altered by— the things that they learned (έμάθβτβ) from him . This new series is introduced by a, “those things w hich,” the definite relative p ro n o u n , n o t by oaa, “whatever things w hich,” the quantitative relative p ro n o u n . G eneral m atters are n o t now in view; ra th e r Paul addresses those particular things that he him self had taught and which the Philippians had learned from him. This teaching is n o t spelled o u t here, b u t one can im agine that what the apostle told the Ephesian elders would be applicable to the Philippian elders as well (Acts 20:20-21): I never shrank from letting you know anything that was for your good, or from teaching you alike in public and from house to house, bearing my testimony, both to Jews and Greeks, of repentance before God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. (Hawthorne’s paraphrase)

και παρ6λάβ6τ6, “and the traditions that I passed on to you.” They m ust also p u t into practice the things that they “received” from Paul ( r s v ). T he verb παρ6λάβ€Τ6, “you received,” is n o t merely a repetition o f eμαθ6τ6, “you learned,” for rhetorical effect. R ather, παραλαμβαρβιρ, “to receive,” in this context is a technical term for the receiving o f a tradition for the purpose of handing it on intact to others (see N orden, Agnostos Theos, 288-89; Cullm ann, “T ra d itio n ”; Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, 248-49; cf. m. 3Abot 1:1: “Moses received the Law from Sinai and

Comment

253

com m itted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders” [trans. Danby, Mishnah; cf. Str‫־‬B 3:444]). With this word Paul in effect is saying that he passed on to the Philippians n o t only the things that had com e to him by revelation, b u t also those established elem ents o f the Christian message that had first been carefully passed on to him by others, e.g., “th at C hrist died for ou r sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, th at he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and th at he appeared to C ephas” (1 Cor 15:3-5). Paul classifies himself, then, as a link in the chain of tradition (H. C onzelm ann, 1 Corinthians, trans. J. W. Leitch, H erm en eia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975] 195-96), an d the word παρ 6 λαμβάν 6 ιv, “to receive,” implies that the obligation of the Philippians was no t only to receive it, believe it, and act up o n it but also to pass it carefully on to others. καί ήκούσατΕ, “and the things that you heard about m e.” They are also to act on what they heard. This is a cryptic rem ark that may m ean either “what you heard me preach ” (but then it simply repeats what has already been said), or “what you heard me saying when I was present with you, not through my preaching, but informally through my many conversations with you” (but this is im probable), or “what you heard of as being characteristic o f me, the kind of person I am, the things I do, how I face trials.” This last understanding is the most probable m eaning because it goes hand in han d with the next phrase in this series. (For a way in which this verse has a later repercussion in the Philippian church, see Pol. Phil. 3.2.) και 618 ctc έν έμοί, “and the things that you saw in me.” They are also to do what they have seen in Paul. Thus, the com m and to do all this that the Philippians have learned and received is n o t given apart from a pattern that shows how it can be done. Paul believed that those who tell others to becom e Christians are obliged to show them what it is to be a Christian. H ence, because there always existed such a close connection between the word Paul preached and the life he lived (G nilka), he could say w ithout em barrassm ent or arrogance: “Look to me! Follow my example! Im itate m e!” (cf. 1 Cor 11:1; Phil 3:17). A lthough έν έμοί, “in m e,” strictly relates to elbere, “you saw,” and one may wish to add “from m e” after the o th er clauses (“what you learned and received and heard from me”) in o rd er to gain sm oothness in translation, it may be th at Paul deliberately placed έν έμοί, “in m e,” at the en d o f the list, n o t only for rhetorical effect, b u t to say as forcefully as possible th at everything he knew, believed, and taught was em bodied in himself, so th at those who learned, received, and h eard could see what doctrine looked like in living form. It appears th at he was o f the conviction th at the truths o f the Christian gospel m ust never be abstracted from action and p u t into high-toned words and phrases, b u t m ust always be expressed in the life of the teacher. καί o θ^ός τή ς Ειρήνης έσ τα ι μ 6θ’ υμών, “If you do, the God of peace will be with you.” O ne m ight have anticipated that Paul would write “the things that you saw . . . in Chris t ” harking back to Phil 2:6-11, if the appeal of the hymn is a call to exemplum ad imitandum, “an exam ple to be im itated.” But it is n o t so. P aul’s wish is th at the Philippians m ight enjoy productive, worry-free lives (μηδέν μ 6 ριμ νάτ 6 , “do n o t worry ab out anything” [4:6]) with their thoughts and feelings guarded by the peace o f God. He has told them that they m ight attain this goal with the aid o f prayer and thanksgiving (4:6). But th at is n o t all that is required. In w 8 and 9 he adds still o th er im portant steps. H e says th at fear, worry, anxiety, depression— all the countless concerns that assail the Philippian C hristians’ m inds—can be kept at bay, if they will continuously reckon up, think over, estim ate aright, and fill

254

Philippians 4:1-9

th eir m inds with all things good and true, and then rise up and p u t into practice the dem ands o f the Christian gospel. “T hen in d e e d ” (again, as in v 7, και is consecutive), Paul says, “the God o f peace will be with you.” T he expression 0 0eog τής* 6 ιρήνη 9 , “the God of p eace,” m eans eith er that God is the source and origin o f peace o r th at he is him self characterized by peace, or both at once. It is an advance in th o u g h t over the prom ise provided in v 7. T here it was said th at G od’s peace would be with them ; now it is said that God himself, who gives peace, or who him self is peace, will be with them (cf. Bigare, AsSeign 58 [1974] 11-15). God is b oth the au th o r and giver of shalom , as in T. Dan 5.2: “you will be at peace, since you have with you the God of peace, and contention will have no hold over you” (cited in Bockm uehl, 255). To think o f God as “the God o f p eace” was a m ost refreshing and encouraging exercise for Paul, who lived constantly in the center o f turm oil and trouble (cf. 2 Cor 11:23-33). As a consequence, he often found him self writing this very phrase to his friends who also were experiencing difficulties o f various kinds. It becam e for him a prayer of benediction: “T he God o f peace will be with you!” (cf. Rom 15:33; 16:20; 2 Cor 13:11; 1 Thess 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 14:33; 2 Thess 3:16; H eb 13:20; for an overview see O ’Brien, DPL, 68-71). Explanation In light o f the fact th at the Philippians are in reality a colony of heaven and that they eagerly anticipate the retu rn of Christ, who will transform their frail, m ortal bodies into glorious bodies, they m ust take their stand as Christians, n o t only holding firmly to the truth o f the gospel b u t behaving in a m an n er consonant with th at truth. Everywhere within this b rief letter P aul’s affection for the Philippians is obvious. But now here is it m ore obvious than here. He addresses them n o t only as “b ro thers [and sisters]” (Phil 4:1), i.e., family m em bers, b u t also as people whom he loves, whom he is longing to see, the source o f his joy and honor. It is his deep affection for the Philippian Christians that prom pts him to describe in detail how they are to stand firm and live consistent with the tru th of the gospel. “Standing firm ” m eans living in harm ony with one another. H ence Paul begs Euodia and Syntyche, two fractious—and m ost likely, factious—wom en, to settle th eir dispute quickly. W hat little is known about these wom en indicates that they were p ro m in en t people within the Christian com m unity at Philippi. They may even have held im p ortant positions of leadership in the church. O nce they had been u n ited in working together side by side with Paul in the arduous task of spreading the gospel as his co-workers. Now, however, some unknow n thing had set them at odds with each other, and the quarrel between these two people th reaten ed to destroy the unity of the whole. T he apostle appeals, therefore, not only to E uodia and Syntyche, but beyond them to a third party, whom he simply addresses as his “loyal yokefellow.” H e asks this one to com e to their aid and to help them find a solution to their problem . W ho was this mysterious person? Many different answers have been offered, but the best o f these is the suggestion that perhaps the single individual was in reality the entire Philippian church, viewed by Paul as one person, yoked together with him to pull h ard to resist every inroad o f division and strive to restore harm ony. “Standing firm ” also m eans that the Philippians m ust rejoice on all occasions, even when those times are a cause n o t for m errim ent but for m ourning. But the

Explanation

255

thing th at keeps such an appeal from being ridiculous is the fact of the C hristian’s faith. It is a faith in Jesus Christ as Lord, who as Lord has the power to subdue all things to his authority (cf. Phil 2:11; 3:21). It is a faith in Jesus C hrist as Lord, who perm itted this situation to occur as it is. It is a faith in Jesus Christ as Lord that causes the Christian willingly to subm it and say “Yes!” In addition, “standing firm ” includes the developm ent of an extraordinary quality th at m ust be so m uch a part of the C hristian’s life th at it will be obvious to everyone, C hristian and non-C hristian alike. It is the quality of “sweet reasonableness,” which enables one to be ju st w ithout being harsh. It is the spirit of m agnanim ity th at was so characteristic of Jesus C hrist him self (2 Cor 10:1, which some in terpreters would read in the light of the incarnational appeal in 2 Cor 8:9). In the m iddle o f everything Paul interjects the exclam ation “T he Lord is near!” But what did he m ean by this? Did he m ean that the L ord is close by, present to aid and give assistance, thus providing fu rth er reason for joy and gentleness? O r did he m ean th at the re tu rn of Christ is im m inent, thus heightening the earnestness o f his com m ands by calling attention to the shortness of time? Most likely Paul was intentionally vague, so that both ideas m ight be fused into one sharp sentence: the Lord, who will com e again, is presently very near in his Spirit. Finally, “standing firm ” m eans n o t giving way to anxiety bu t allowing the peace o f God to stand guard over o n e ’s thoughts and feelings, protecting against attack, as a garrison o f soldiers protects a city against its enemies. T he cure for worry is (1) prayer and thanksgiving, which gives to God every care, every unreasonable anxiety (in contrast to a pastor’s concern for others [Phil 2:20; 2 Cor 11:28]), and every harassing b u rden, and trusts him to take care of these worrisom e m atters; (2) deliberately filling o n e ’s m ind constantly with good thoughts that are praiseworthy, true, majestic and awe-inspiring,just, pure, attractive, and high toned; and (3) putting into practice the suprem e teachings of the gospel that have been learned, both from having h eard them spoken and having seen them lived out in the lives o f Paul and his colleagues. If the Philippians, or any o th er Christians, will be careful to observe and follow these three things, then they will en co u n ter peace th rough the presence of the God of peace.

V G ratitude Expressed fo r the P h ilippians ’ Generosity (4:10-20) Bibliography Bahr, C. J. “The Subscriptions in the Pauline Letters. ”JB L 87 (1968) 27-41. B assler, J. M. God and M am m on: A skin g fo r Money in the New Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 1991. B aum ert, N . “Ist Ph. 4, 10 richtig u bersetzt?” B Z 13 (1969) 256-62. B eet, J. A. “The Christian Secret.” Expositor , 3d ser., 10 (1889) 174-89. B est, E. P a u l a n d H is Converts. Edinburgh: T 8c T Clark, 1988. Black, D. A. P a u l , Apostle o f Weakness: Astheneia and Its Cognates in the P auline Literature. AUS 7.3. New York: Lang, 1984. B o n h o ffe r , A. Epiktet u n d d a s Neue Testament. R W 10. Giessen: Topelm ann, 1911. B orm ann, L. Philippi. 11218. B uchanan, C. O . “E paphroditus’ Sickness and the Letter to the Philippians.” E v Q 36 (1964) 157-66. C apper, B. J. “Paul’s Dispute with Philippi: U nderstanding Paul’s Argum ent in Phil. 1-2 from His Thanks in 4.1-10.” T Z 49 (1993) 193-214. C ollart, P. Philippes, ville de Macedoine depuis ses origines ju s q u ’a la f i n de l’ epoque romaine. Vol. 1. Paris: de Boccard, 1937. D eissm an n , A. Light from the A ncient East. D o d d , C. H . “Paul and Money.” In New Testament Studies. Manchester: M anchester UP, 1953. D ru m m on d , R. J. “A Note on Philippians iv.10-19.” E xp T im 11 (1899-1900) 284, 381. E zell, D. “The Suffering of Christ: Philippians 4.” RevExp 77 (1980) 373-87. Findlay, G. G. Christian Doctrine and Morals Viewed in Their Connexion. London: Kelly, 1894. Fowl, S. E. “Know Your Context: Giving and Receiving Money in Philippians.” I n t 56.1 (2002) 45-58. F ridrichsen, A. The Apostle and H is Message. Uppsala: Lundequistaka Bokhandeln, 1947. G lom bitza, O. “Der D an k des Apostels: Zum Verstandnis von Philipper IV 10-20.” N o v T 7 (1964-65) 135-41.---------. “Mit Furcht u nd Zittern: Zum Verstandnis von Philipper II 1 2 .” N o v T 3 (1959) 100-106. H en n eb u sh , P. “Christian Fellowship in the Epistle to the Philippians.” T B T 1 2 (1964) 793-98. K ennedy, H . A . A. “The Financial Colouring of Philippians iv.1518.” E xpT im 12 (1900-1901) 43-44. Lam bert, J. C. “Note on Philippians iv.10-19.” E xpT im 11 (1899-1900) 333-34. Levy, J. P. “Une Societe de fait dans l’Eglise apostolique (Phil. 4.10-22).” In Melanges Philippe Meylan. Lausanne: Universite de Lausanne, 1963. 2:41-59. M alherbe, A. J. The Cynic Epistles: A Study Edition. SBLSBS 12. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977.---------. “Paul’s Self-Sufficiency (Philippians 4:11).” In Friendship, Flattery and Frankness o f Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World. Ed. J. T. Fitzgerald. NovTSup 82. Leiden: Brill, 1996. 125-39. M anson, T . W. “St. Paul in Ephesus: The Date of the Epistle to the Philippians.” BJRL 23 (1939) 182-200. Reprinted in Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, ed. M. Black (M anchester: M anchester UP, 1962) 149-178. Mayer, B. “Paulus als Vermittler zwischen Epaphroditus und der Gemeinde von Philippi.” B Z 31.2 (1987) 176-88. M eyer, E. Ursprung u n d A nfange des Christentums. 3 vols. Berlin: Cotta, 1921-23. M orris, L. “και απαξ και δ ίς .” N o v T 1 (1956) 205-8. M ott, S. C. “The Power of Giving and Receiving: Reciprocity in Hellenistic Benevolence.” In Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Ed. G. F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. 60-72. M unck,J. P aul a nd the Salvation o f M ankind. Trans. F. Clarke. Atlanta: John Knox, 1959. N ew ton , M. The Concept o f Purity at Q um ran and in the Letters o f Paul. SNTSMS 53. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985. O akes, P. Philippians. O ’B rien, P. T . “Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul.” N T S 21 (1974-75) 144-55. P eterm an , G. W. P a u l’s Gift from Philippi: Conventions o f Gift-Exchange a nd Christian Giving. SNTSMS 92. Cambridge:

Cambridge UP, 1997.---------. ‘“Thankless T hanks’: The Social-Epistolary Convention in Philippians 4 .1 0 -2 0 .” T y n B u l 42 (1991) 2 6 1 -7 0 . P ilh o fe r , P. Philippi. Pratscher, W. “Der

Notes

257

Verzicht des Paulus auf flnanziellen U nterhalt durch seine Gemeinde: Ein Aspekt seiner Missionsweise.” N T S 25 (1979) 284-98. R am say, W. M. “On the Greek Form of the Name Philippians,” JTS o.s. 1 (1900) 11 6 .---------. St. P a u l the Traveller a nd the R om an Citizen. London: H odder & Stoughton, 1905. R eum ann, J. “C ontributions of the Philippian Community to Paul and to Earliest Christianity.” N T S 39 (1993) 438-57. R ollan d , B. “Saint Paul et la pauvrete: Phil. 4.12-14,19-20.” AsSeign 59 (1974) 10-15. S a m p ley , J. P. P auline Partnership in Christ: Christian Community a nd Commitment in L ight o f Rom an Law. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980. Schw eizer, E. Lordship a n d Discipleship. Trans. E. Schweizer. SBT 28. Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1960. Rev. ed. published as Erniedrigung u n d E rhohung bei Jesus u n d seinen Nachfolgern, ATANT 28 (Zurich: Zwingli, 1962). S eesem an n , H . Der Begriff Κ Ο ΙΝ Ω Ν ΙΑ im Neuen Testament. BZNW 14. Giessen: Topelm ann, 1933. S evenster, J. N . P aul and Seneca. NovTSup 4. Leiden: Brill, 1961. Stow ers, S. K. “Friends and Enemies in the Politics of Heaven: Reading Theology in Philippians.” In P auline Theology. Vol. 1, Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon. Ed. J. M. Bassler. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991. 105-21. Suggs, M. J. “Concerning the Date of Paul’s Macedonian Ministry.” N o v T 4 (1960) 6 0 -6 8 .---------. “Koinonia in the New Testam ent.” Mid-Stream 23 (1984) 351-62. W iles, G. P. P aul's Intercessory Prayers: The Significance o f the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters o f St Paul. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1974.

Translation 10O yes, and I rejoice in the Lord greatly because now at last you caused youra thoughtful care of me to blossom once again. Indeed, you have always cared about me, but you have not always had the opportunity to show it. u I am not saying this because of any need I had. For I have learned to be self-sufficient in every situation in which I fin d myself. 12Hence I know how to be humbled, and I know how to abound. In every and all circumstances I have learned the secret of being wellfed and of going hungry, of having more than enough and of having too little. 13I ahve the power to face all such situations in union with the One b who continually infuses me with strength.14And yet it was good of you to become partners with me in my hardships.15N ow cyou Philippians know, as well as I, that when the gospel was in its beginning, when I set out from Macedonia, no other church entered into a partnership with me in an accounting of expenditures and receipts except you alone. 16You know, as well as I, that when I was in Thessalonica, you sent money to meet my needs d more than once.17I do not say this meaning that I have my heart set on your giving. But I certainly do have my heart set on interest increasing that may accrue to your account.18Here, then, is my receiptfor every thing you have given me. I have more than enough. I am fully supplied,e now that I have received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent me. They are a fragrant odor, a sacrifice that God accepts and that pleases him. 19In return, I pray that God may meetf every need you have in accordance with his marvelous wealth in ChristJesus.20Now surely the glory belongs to God our Fatherforever and ever. Amen!

Notes aF G use the genitive definite article του, “the,”which with the infinitive forms a consecutive clause after the intransitive άναθάλλβιν, “to blossom once again” (aveOdXeTe του υπέρ έμου φρονβΐν, “you blossomed once again so that you thoughtfully cared for me”), instead of the accusative definite article t o , “the,” which would be the object of the transitive αναθάλλειν, “to cause to blossom once again” (dveOaXeTC τό υπέρ έμου φρονεΐν, “you caused your thoughtful care of me to blossom once again”) .

258

Philippians 4:10-20

bK2 D2 and the Majority Text add Χριστώ, “Christ,” to make clear who it is who strengthens Paul. If “Christ” had been part of the original text, however, there would have been no reason to omit it, except by accident or possible haplography, i.e., unintentional omission, given the similarity of sounds in the case endings. c$p46D* and a few other witnesses omit 86, “but, now,” perhaps seeing it as superfluous along with καί, “and, also.” dKB F G Ψ and the majority of witnesses read 6ίς‫ ־‬την χρ6ίαυ μοι 6π6μψατ6, “you sent to me for my need”; 46A 81 read την χρ6ίαυ μοι 6π6μψατ6, “you sent what I needed,”omitting the preposition eis‫־‬, “for, ”either by accident after δί ς‫־‬, “twice” (ΔΙΣΕΙΣ), or on purpose so as to provide a direct object for the verb. D* has την χρ6ίαν μου 6π6μψατ6, “you sent my need,” and D2 L P have 619 την χρ6ίαυ μου (Eireμψατ6, “you sent for my need,” both replacing the less usual, but better attested μοι, “to me, ” with the genitive μου, “my.” e^ 46 adds 86, “but,” after the verb π6πλήρωμαι, “but I am fully supplied.” f$P46 ‫ א‬A B D2 and the Majority Text read πληρώσ6ι, “will meet” (future indicative), whereas D* F G 6 33 81 104 326 365 and other witnesses read πληρώσαι, “may [God] meet” (aorist optative). Although less well attested than πληρώσει, “will meet,” there are nevertheless good witnesses in support of πληρώσαι, “may [God] meet,” a reading that better reflects the apostle’s own reverent attitude. He does not say categorically what God will do for his friends, but he prayerfully asks God to come to their aid (see Comment) .

Form/Structure/Setting This part of the letter is Paul’s response to the gift sent to him by the Philippian church through the good offices of their own emissary Epaphroditus (Phil 4:18). In a sense it is the apostle’s formal receipt (note the use o f the technical term άπ6χ6 1y, “to receive in full” [4:18]), acknowledging that the things, w hether in m oney or goods as a “care package,” had arrived intact and had been duly received by him. He has alluded to their kindness earlier in the letter (1:5), and at that point thanked God for them and for their generosity (cf. 1:3,5). But no t until now does he discuss the gift of the Philippians in any detail. The reason for this delay has been variously interpreted: (1) These verses constitute a separate letter of thanks, sent to the Philippian Christians m onths earlier than the letter in which it now appears. Only at a m uch later time, when some unidentified scribe wished to collect all of Paul’s correspondence to the church at Philippi and weave it all into a single epistle, was it by chance placed in this unexpected spot. (This suggestion has been noted and rejected above [Introduction, Integrity of Philippians] .) (2) Paul, as was the custom of his day, dictated the early part of his letter, but picked up the stylus to sign it in his own han d and in doing so wrote his own personal “th a n k you,” quite naturally at the end (cf. B ahr, JBL 87 [1968] 27-41). This explanation accounts for the particle 86, “b u t,” with which this section begins. As Lightfoot (163) observes: “The 86 arrests a subject which is in danger of escaping.... It is as if the apostle said T must no t forget to thank you for your gift’” (see further in the Comment on 4:10). (3) A m ore likely reason is that which suggests that the whole m atter of giving and receiving was a touchy subject with Paul (on the Greco-Roman background see Peterm an, Paul’s Gift from Philippi, chap. 3). And reading between the lines here—listening to what is said and what is n o t said—one m ight easily infer that there was som ething about the Philippians’ gift that was troubling to the apostle. He, therefore, delays discussion o f it until the end of his letter, as one naturally tends to pu t off bringing up sensitive issues by leaving them to the very last m om ent possible (although there has been an allusion to this m atter in 1:3-5). It is known from elsewhere that although Paul cham pioned the right of an

Form/Stru cture/Setting

259

apostle to be supported financially by those to whom he preached the gospel and he never ren o u n ced th at right, he p referred to support him self and his mission by m anual labor. He jealously insisted on doing so in o rd er that (1) he m ight offer the gospel of G od’s free grace w ithout charge (1 Cor 9:18), (2) no o p p o n en t of his could ever accuse him of using his mission as a p retext for greed, and (3) he m ight set the p ro p e r exam ple for others to follow (see 1 Cor 4:8-13, esp. v 12; 8:118; 2 Cor 11:7-10; 1 Thess 2:5-12, esp. v9; 2 Thess 3:7-12, esp. w 8-9; cf. Pratscher, N TS 25 [1979] 284-98). Paul had no hesitation about asking for m oney from his churches to aid others, e.g., the needy Christians injerusalem (1 Cor 16:1-3; 2 Cor 8-9), b u t he refused to do so for him self (see Dodd, “Paul and M oney”) . And yet the M acedonian Christians, who surely would have included the Christians at Philippi, n o t only m ade a generous contribution out of their own deep poverty to the needy saints’ fund (2 Cor 8:1-5; for the “collection for the saints” see R. P. M artin, 2 Corinthians, WBC [Waco, TX: W ord Books, 1986] 248-96, and bibliography th ere), b u t they also m ore than once (Phil 4:16) m ade generous contributions to P aul’s own personal funds (2 Cor 11:8-9). It may be suggested, therefore, th at this violation of one of P aul’s strict principles, entailing giving of a personal gift to him which was n o t only unsolicited, bu t which the M acedonian churches knew from personal experience he opposed (1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8-9), was the very thing th at p ro m pted him to leave this m atter of the gift until the last. It was this that caused him to write a careful reply that com bined cautious gratitude with a gentle b u t firm dem and that they not henceforth infringe on his own selfreliance. N ot elsewhere in all of P aul’s letters, n o r in all of the letters of antiquity th at have survived until the present, is there any o th er acknow ledgm ent of a gift th at can com pare with this one in term s of such a tactful treatm ent of so sensitive a m atter (von Soden; see Plum m er; Michael; Best, Paul, 99-104). T he very structure of this section makes clear what has ju st been said. It exhibits a nervous alternation back and forth (Bockm uehl, 257, speaks of P aul’s “vacillatio n ”) between P aul’s appreciation, on the one han d (Phil 4:10, 14—16, 18—20), and his insistence on his own independence and self-sufficiency, on the o th er (4:11-13, 17). It is of utm ost im portance to him that this m atter of personal in d ep en d en ce should n o t be com prom ised in any way. Thus he cannot write as one who is wholly free to express his thanks w ithout reservations or qualifications (M ichael). In fact, it is rem arkable that in this “thank you” section, Paul does not use the verb 6ύχαριστ6ιν, “to th an k ” som eone for som ething (cf. Rom 16:4; Lohm eyer, 178, speaks here of P aul’s dankloseDank, “thankless thanks,” a phrase picked up by Dibelius and Gnilka). Yet this section is masterfully written, constructed n eith er to offend those who gave their gift out of love n o r to encourage th eir co n tin u ed violation of his strict instructions n o t to send him assistance (cf. B uchanan, E vQ 36 [1964] 161-63; Mayer, BZ31.2 [1987] 176-88). He adm its that he is very glad in the Lord that they once again were able to show their concern for him , b ut he never praises them directly for the tangible form this concern took (Phil 4:18-19 is full of liturgical term s taken from the o t sacrificial rites [Exod 29:18; 25:41; Lev 1:9, 13; Ezek 20:41], where thanksgiving is given to God as part o f the response in w orship). He readily acknowledges that these Philippians alone, o f all the churches he founded, becam e partners with him in the m atter of giving, b u t he tem pers this potentially laudatory rem ark by rem inding them that he never asked for their gift. He feels free to boast about the generosity of the

Philippians 4:10-20

260

Philippians to o th er churches (2 C or 8:1-4; 11:8-9), bu t he is restrained when he addresses the Philippians directly about this m atter. H e inform s them that what they did for him was accepted by God as a costly sacrifice, b u t he weakens this praise by the businesslike tone in which he personally responds to this very same act: “H ere, then, is my receipt for everything you have given me. I have m ore than enough. I am fully supplied” (Phil 4:18). These are words that imply that he wants no m ore o f th eir assistance (but see Glombitza, N o v T 7 [1964-65] 135-41). Yet P aul’s hesitancy does n o t repudiate the appreciation for the Philippians that he has expressed earlier (Phil 2:25-30). T he close literary parallelism between Phil 1:3-11 and 4:10-20 is dem onstrated by P eterm an (Paul's Gift from Philippi, 91-93) , with some link term s uniting the sections. See table 5 for some notew orthy terms. Table 5. Parallel words and phrases in Phil 1:3-11 and 4:10-20 ευχαριστώ, “I th an k ” (1:3); χαράς, ‘jo y ” (1:4)

έχάρην, “I rejoice” (4:10)

κοινωνία, “p artn ersh ip ” (1:5)

έκοινώνησβν, “en tered into a p artn ersh ip ” (4:15)

φρον6ΐν, “feel” (1:7)

φρονείv, “thoughtful care” (4:10)

περισσεύη, “may keep on increasing” (1:9)

π 6 ρισσ6ύ€1ν, “to ab o u n d ” (4:12); π6ρισσ6ύω, “I have m ore than en o u g h ” (4:18)

πβπληρωμένοι, “be filled” (1:11)

π£πλήρωμαι, “I am fully supplied” (4:18); πληρώσαι, “may m eet” (4:19)

καρπόν, “fru it” (1:11)

καρπόν, “interest” (4:17)

Ίησοϋ, ‘Jesus” (1:11)

Ίησοϋ, “Jesus” (4:19)

δόξαν, “glory” (1:11)

δόξα, “glory” (4:20)

Comment 10 έχάρην 86 έν κυρίω μ6γάλως, Ό yes, and I rejoice in the Lord greatly.” O nce again Paul strikes the keynote of the epistle, έχάρην, “I rejoice” (an epistolary aorist). T he particle 86, translated here Ό yes, a n d ,” is often ignored and passed over by the translators but is an im portant word here (contra O ’Brien, 516 n. 7; Fee [1995], 428, rightly describes δέ as “contrastive,” to m ark a transition to a new section). As we saw, it “arrests a subject which is in danger o f escaping” (Lightfoot, 163). It indicates that som ething has ju st occurred to the writer that, if let go any longer, m ight be forgotten altogether. Yet very likely Paul used it for rhetorical effect. It may have been the com ing o f E paphroditus with the gift from

Comment

261

Philippi th at occasioned this rejoicing. Paul could never really forget what the Philippians had done for him , n o r could he even com e close to sending his letter off w ithout these im portant remarks. But he approaches the whole m atter of thanking them for their gift as if it were possible for him n o t to do so. T he assistance provided him by the Philippians and the supposed problem s it created for him were subjects very m uch in his m ind, even m atters he could n o t possibly forget, b u t he waits until the last m om ent to broach them , and then he does so in what appears to be an offhand way. T he 86 m ight be paraphrased Ό yes, and I m ust n o t fo rget” (cf. 1 Cor 16:1; Gal 4:20). In light o f allusions to the P hilippians’ generosity earlier in the letter (Phil 1:3-5; 2:25-30), however, some would in terp re t 86 as simply a connective— “a n d ” or “b u t.” Paul says th at his joy is im m ense. A lthough the idea of “great jo y ” is consonant with the C hristian gospel and often associated with it (Matt 2:10; Luke 2:10; 24:52; Acts 8:8; 15:3), this is the only place w here the apostle quantifies his own experience o f joy. T he adverb he uses, μεγάλως, “greatly, im m ensely,” is found now here else in the n t , and its very uniqueness intensifies what he is saying about the dep th o f his feelings at this point. F urtherm ore, Paul says that his joy is εν κυρίω, “in the L ord.” If one expected him to say instead that his joy was in the generosity of the Philippians, this is no t the case. Paul never says this. H e never thanks them directly for anything they gave him. Yet by saying th at his joy is “in the L o rd ” he is saying that it is thoroughly Christian, flowing out o f his union with Christ and therefore totally free from ingratitude or resentm ent (cf. M ichael). It is an expression of joy that has m arked the entire letter, some sixteen times. δτι ήδη ποτέ άνεθάλετε τό υπέρ έμοϋ φρονεΐν, “because now at last you caused your thoughtful care of me to blossom once again.” Even though for Paul the final, the ultim ate, cause o f his joy was “the L ord,” there was also a m ore im m ediate cause as well. This is stated now by the apostle in a clause introduced by δ τι, “because.” But again it is rem arkable that Paul does n o t say that this im m ediate cause of his joy was the P hilippians’ gift. It was ra th e r what th at gift pointed to, namely, the care and concern (φρονεΐν) of the Philippians for him and their d eterm ination to see to his welfare and, m ore particularly, to see his ministry flourish. W hat gave him joy was n o t goods, however necessary for his work, but people and how they behaved. If a gift of m oney troubled him because it was against his principle to take such a gift for him self from any of his churches, the loving thoughtfulness that pro m p ted his friends to override his wishes and give sacrificially (cf. 2 Cor 8:1-3) pleased him greatly since these offerings were an act o f “liturgy,” a worshipful response to G od’s mission through his servant. T he verb φρονείv is used by Paul to express his “thoughtful care”— the key verb o f this letter (Phil 1:7; 2:2, 5; 3:15,19; 4:2,10). F undam ental to its m eaning is the idea o f “thinking.” Paul, therefore, was never out of the thoughts of the Philippians. But φρονεΐν m eans m ore than m erely “th in k in g ” about som eone; it also describes an active interest in that p erso n ’s affairs— “thinking leading to action.” Thus, because φρονεί v, “thoughtful care,” characterized the relationship of the Philippian Christians to Paul, it m eant that they of necessity would be personally involved in prom oting the welfare o f the apostle by whatever m eans they had at their disposal. For some unknow n reason the Philippians were cut off from Paul for an ex tended perio d o f time, and he from them . As a consequence, doubts may have

262

Philippians 4:10-20

arisen, as would only be natural, about the genuineness of their concern for him. H ence it was with a great sense of relief that this silence of uncertainty was broken with the arrival o f E paphroditus from Philippi (4:18). ήδη ποτό, “now at last” (cf. BDAG), Paul writes his friends, άν6θάλ6τ€ τό ύπέρ 6μου φρον6ΐν, “you caused your thoughtful care of me to blossom once again.” (M anson, BJRL23 [1939] 182200, considered this a sarcastic rebuke if the letter was w ritten from Rome, since th ere had been m any opportunities, including P aul’s second visit to M acedonia [Acts 20:1-6; see fu rth er in Introduction, Place and Date o f Writing] . This rem ark is som etimes taken as an ironic one, as by C apper, TZ49 [ 1993] 207, who thinks that Paul faults them for going back on their prom ise to support him .) T he verb άναθάλλ6 1v , “to cause to blossom once again, ” is a highly m etaphorical word, filled with poetic boldness and colorful in its idea. It was chosen no d o u b t to convey affectionate understanding. This is its only occurrence in the n t , b u t it is used elsewhere to describe trees and flowers “bursting into bloom again” in the springtim e, or plants “sprouting afresh ”from the gro u n d (cf. BDAG). To translate it as “renew ,” “revive,” or “show” ( r s v , Ph i l l i p s , g n b , j b , n i v ) is alm ost to m istranslate it. Paul h ere is n o t com plaining bu t m arveling. Like a person rejoicing over the signs o f spring after a hard winter, so Paul rejoices to see again the signs o f personal concern from Philippi after a long interval of silence. (Just how long is, of course, a relative term , depending on the place of origin o f the epistle.) His carefully chosen word expresses his delight: “Your care for m e has now blossom ed afresh! ” ( n e b ) . W hether this verb is considered intransitive, “you blossom ed once again” (Haupt; Gnilka; Baum ert, BZ 13 [1969] 256-62; cf. l x x P s 27:7; Wis 4:4), or transitive, “you caused [som ething] to blossom once again” (Dibelius, B onnard, Scott, Beare; r s v , g n b , j b , n i v ; cf. l x x Sir 1:18; 11:22; 50:10), makes little difference. Paul is m ost happy because of this “blossom ing.” 6 φ ’ ώ καί 6φρον6ΐτ6, ήκαιρ6ΐσθ6 86, “indeed, you have always cared about me, b ut you have n o t always had the opportunity to show it.” By giving powerful expression to a fresh reason for joy, Paul makes clear that the words “now at last you caused your thoughtful care of me to blossom once again” were not in the least in tended as a criticism. It is introduced by the phrase 6φ’ ώ, “because, fo r” (cf. BDF §235 [2]; Rom 5:12; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:12; but see Baumert, BZ 13 [1969] 256-62), followed by a balanced chiastic (crisscross) sentence that begins with the conjunction καί, “in d eed ,” and ends in an unusual fashion with the conjunction 86, “b u t.” T he conjunctions at the beginning and end bracketing these words; the short, abrupt, precise clauses; the im perfect tenses highlighting the continuous, uninterru p ted flow of the thought and action described here; the chiastic structure of the sentence—all com bine to state afresh and with force this new reason for joy. It was this: Paul had come to realize that the Philippians were not to blam e for the slow arrival of help, b ut rather the circumstances were beyond their control (for the various reasons for the delay, see the helpful summary in Fee [1995], 422 n. 3). The verb άκαιρεΐσθαι, “to be w ithout opportunity,” a late and rare word found only here in the n t , m eans that the Philippians were “without opportunity” (a‫־‬privative with καιρός) to exhibit their willingness and readiness to send aid. It alludes to those unfavorable circumstances—w hether the lack of the right person to send on the long and difficult journey to the place of Paul’s detention (which is true of Rome, but less so of Ephesus and Caesarea), or the lack of funds (cf. 2 Cor 8:2-4; Caird, 153), or the lack of suitable weather for travel— that robbed the Philippians of doing

Comment

263

for Paul what they wished to do. Or, as Bruce (124) suggests, it may allude to Paul n o t being willing to accept the Philippians’ gift. 11 ούχ ότι καθ’ ύστέρησιν λέγω, “I am n o t saying this because of any n eed I h a d .” But having praised the Philippians to this extent, Paul im m ediately begins a disclaimer. As Beet (Expositor, 3d ser., 10 [1889] 174-89) translates: “my gratitude is n o t a b eggar’s thanks for charity” (cited by Jones, 72). ούχ δ τι, “n o t th at,” with which this sentence begins, is a distinctively n t expression. It usually appears w ithout a verb of “saying,” which m ust be supplied by the read er (cf. Jo h n 6:46; 7:22; 2 Cor 1:24; 3:5; 2 Thess 3:9), b u t Paul chooses to include it here (λέγω, “I am saying”; cf. BDF §480 [5]). T he prepositional phrase καθ’ ύστέρησιν, lit. “in accordance with n e e d ,” m erges the idea of norm or standard with that of reason (cf. Rom 2:7; 8:28; 11:5; 16:26; cf. Eph 1:11; 3:3; 1 Tim 1:1 ;T it 1:3), and thus is m ore properly to be translated “because o f any need I h a d ” (BDAG, κατά, II.5δ). T he n o u n ύστέρησις is an o th er of those rare words that show up regularly in this carefully phrased section. Used only here and in Mark 12:44, it denotes “need, lack, or poverty.” Thus, Paul is m aking very clear that his joy at the gift from the Philippians was n o t on account of his being in dire straits at the tim e it arrived (apparently he eith er did n o t n eed or did n o t want their m oney), b u t because he saw in this act of generosity a truly C hristian deed of sacrificial self-giving love (cf. 2 Cor 8:5). He says in effect, “I am glad that you assisted me, yes, but I do n o t say this because I lacked anything or need ed your h elp .” How is it that Paul was able to say this? Was it because he h ad becom e h eir to family property that enabled him to pay all his expenses, including those involved in a costly appeal to Caesar, and thus had no need for outside assistance (cf. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 310-13) ? Possibly, b u t th at is n o t the answer that he him self gives. έγώ γάρ έμαθον έν οίς 6ίμι αυτάρκης elvai, “for I have learned to be selfsufficient in every situation in which I find myself.” P aul’s denial that he needed anything is based on what he had learned. T he p ro n o u n έγώ, “I,” is used emphatically: “w hether or n o t others have learned, / have.” The aorist tense έμαθον, “have learn ed ,” is constative, used here for linear actions that, having been com pleted, are regarded as a whole (BDF §332 [1]). It implies that P aul’s whole experience up to the present, especially as a Christian, has been a schooling whose lessons he has no t failed to m aster (K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 4:410). T he prim ary lesson Paul learned from the school of experience (cf. 2 Cor 11:23-29) was to be αυτάρκης, “self-sufficient,” in all the circum stances of the m om ent (έν ο ίς 6ίμι, “in every situation in which I find m yself’). The adjective αυτάρκης, usually translated “c o n te n t” or “satisfied” ( k jv , m o f f a t t , g o o d s p e e d , r s v , k n o x , Ph i l l i p s , g n b , n i v ) , along with its corresponding noun α ύτά ρκηα , “selfsufficiency” (cf. 2 Cor 9:8), was used to describe the person who through discipline had becom e in d ep en d e n t of external circum stances and who had discovered personal resources that were m ore than adequate for any situation that m ight arise. It was a favorite word in the vocabularies of the Stoic and Cynic philosophers to refer to th at in d ep en d e n t spirit and free outlook on life (αταραξία, “tranquillity”) that characterized the wise m an (cf. M alherbe, CynicEpistles, 124.25 [Diogenes, To the So-Called Greeks\ \ 176.12 [Diogenes, To Plato, the Sage]; 244.4 [Antisthenesto A ristippus]). It expressed the doctrine “that m an should be sufficient unto him self for all things, and able, by the power of his own will, to resist the force of circum stances” (Vincent, 143; cf. Plato, Tim. 33d). Paul, fam iliar with the vocabu-

264

Philippians 4:10-20

lary o f the Stoics and him self in harm ony with many of their ideals (see Comment on Phil 4:8), appears also to have borrow ed αυτάρκης, “self-sufficient,” from them (this is the only place it appears in the n t ) to declare that he too has acquired the virtue o f a spirit free from worry, u n tro u b led by the vicissitudes of external events, in d ep en d e n t o f people and things. A nd Paul cherishes this self-sufficiency. But the difference between Paul, the self-sufficient C hristian, and the self-sufficient Stoic, is vast. Findlay makes the following com parison ( Christian Doctrine, cited by Jones, 73): The self-sufficiency of the Christian is relative: an independence of the world through dependence upon God. The Stoic self-sufficiency pretends to be absolute. One is the contentm ent of faith, the other of pride. Cato and Paul both stand erect and fearless before a persecuting world: one with a look of rigid, defiant scorn, the other with a face now lighted up with unutterable joy in God. . . . The Christian martyr and the Stoic suicide are the final examples of these two memorable and contem poraneous protests against the evils of the world.

T he Stoic saw suicide as the highest form of hum an freedom , independence, and m oral dignity, leading to an escape from slavery (Seneca, Ep. 77.15: nam vita, si monendi virtus abest, servitus est, “For life is slavery if the courage to die is lost”) . Seneca, a contem porary o f Paul, rejected suicide, however, for trivial reasons {exfrivolis causa [Ep. 4.4]) or if part of a libido monendi, “passion for dying” {Ep. 24, 25), yet in certain circumstances suicide was justified as part of necessitates ultimae, “extrem e necessities” {Ep. 17.9). (Cf. 2 Cor 9:8; 1 Tim 6:6; see also Bonhoffer, Epiktet, 109-10, 291, 335-36; G. Kittel, TD N T1:466-67; Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, 113-14; Glombitza, N o vT 7 [1964-65] 135-41; M alherbe, “P aul’s Self-Sufficiency.”) 12 οίδα και ταττ^ινοΰσθαι, οίδα καί π6ρισσ6ύ6ιν, “hence I know how to be hum bled, and I know how to abound.” Paul now begins to explain in detail what he m eans when he says “I have learned to be self-sufficient in every situation.” Some interpreters claim that this explanation, which extends through v 13, is stated in a poetic fashion that makes use o f two three-lined strophes (Lohmeyer, Friedrich, Gnilka, M artin [1976]). A lthough the passage is indeed rhythm ical in form, a poetic verse structure is n o t obvious (C ollange). H ence the passage can best be interpreted by taking the first three finite verbs—οίδα, “I know,” οίδα, “I know,” μβμύημαι, “I have learned the secret”—as exactly parallel to each other, developing the idea already expressed by 6μαθου, “I have learn ed ”( v 11), and the last verb—ισχύω, “I have the pow er”— as a summary statem ent, qualifying what Paul m eans by his idea o f self-sufficiency. With rhetorical repetitiveness Paul twice uses the verb οίδα, “I know,” giving it here the m eaning of “I know how” or “I am able” (BDAG) and showing by its use what it was he had learned: “I have learned; therefore I know: I know how to cope.” The things he learned to cope with are expressed by infinitives, the one either m iddle or passive in voice (ταπεινοϋσθαι, “to hum ble m yself’ or “to be h u m b led ”), the other active in voice (π6ρισσ6ύ6ιν, “to ab o u n d ”). T he verb ταπβινοϋν literally m eans “to lower,” as one would lower the level of water beh in d a dam or the height o f a m ountain or hill (cf. Luke 3:5; see BDAG). Figuratively it m eans “to hum ble, ”both in a good sense and in a bad sense (cf. Matt 18:4; 2 Cor 12:21). H ere Paul uses the infinitive ταπ^ινοϋσθαι with οίδα, “I know,” to m ean eith er (1) th at he knows how “to discipline him self,” “to hum ble h im self’ (m iddle voice), e.g., by fasting (cf. Isa 58:5; see Deissm ann, Light from the Ancient

Comment

265

East, 419), or (2) th at he knows how “to be hum bled, to be b ro u g h t low” (passive voice) by want or poverty. It denotes a going down into deprivation, w hether selfim posed or im posed by external forces, and Paul is saying “I know how to cope with this; I am able for this.” T here is also in this choice of ταπεινοϋσθαι, “to hum ble o n e se lf’ or “to be h u m b led ,” an echo of the self-humbling o f Christ (έταπείνω σεν εαυτόν, “he h u m bled h im self’ [Phil 2:8]), already so poignantly described by the apostle and with which he associates him self (cf. Rolland, AsSeign 59 [1974] 1015; on the m eaning of the whole word see W. G rundm ann, TDNT 9:16-18; Schweizer, Lordship). T he very antithesis of this deprivation is expressed now by περισσεύειν, although one m ight have e x p ected ύψουν, “to exalt.” By contrast to ταπεινοϋσθαι, “to hum ble o n e se lf’ or “to be h u m b led ,” it m eans “to abound, to overflow, to have m ore than enough, to be extrem ely rich .” By linking this infinitive with οίδα, “I know,” Paul says “I also know how to cope with ab u n d an ce.” N ot all of P aul’s life was m arked by a cram ping and oppressive want of resources. He also experienced great prosperity. But in the same way that privations could do him no harm , so “he was equally im m une from harm when fortune sm iled” (Michael, 215). H e knew th at grace was n eed ed to handle prosperity, as well as penury, properly. But there is no indication th at he favored the one state over the other. In the use of περισσεύει v, “to ab o u n d ,” there is also an echo of the overflowing abundance that Paul envisions as characteristic of the new age, inaugurated by C hrist’s com ing (Phil 1:9, 26). It is a distinctively Pauline word (som etim es with special reference to suffering, as in 2 Cor T.3-8), used by the apostle twenty-six of the thirty-nine times it appears in the n t . T he business m etaphors in these verbs are less im portant than the term inology of the messianic age when there is to be “ab u n d an ce” (e.g., Amos 9; see Silva, 62, 238). έ ν π α ν τ ί και έ ν π ά σ ιν μεμύημαι, “in every and all circum stances I have learned the secret.” A th ird thing that Paul knew as a result of his learning experience is expressed now by a verb found now here else in the n t . It is μυεΐν, “to initiate,” a technical term referring to those initiatory rites required of any person who wished to en ter into the secrets and privileges of the mystery religions (BDAG). O nce again Paul appears to borrow ju st the right word from the vocabulary of his pagan environm ent that would be readily understood by his readers to express the precise idea he wished to im part. H e does n o t m ean to say that he autom atically knew the secret o f a contented life; ra th e r he makes clear that he came to know this secret th ro u g h a difficult process that could be described as an initiation (μεμύημαι, “I have learned the secret” [perfect tense]): “I have been very thoroughly initiated into the h um an lot with all of its ups and downs” ( n e b ) . Thus, έν π α ντί και έν πάσιν, “in every and all circum stances,” with which this new sentence begins should be connected adverbially with μεμύημαι, “I have learned the secret. ”In a different genre of literature we find τό τροχόν τ ή ς γενεσεω ς, “the course of hu m an existence” (]as 3:6), which echoes the κύκλος τή ς γενεσεω ς, “circle o f becom ing,” or “wheel of n a tu re ”—a term found in the mystery religion of the O rphics (cf. Proclus, In Platonis Timaeum Commentarii 5, 330a). καί χορτάζεσθαι καί πεινά ν καί περισσεύειν καί ύστερεΐσθαι, “of being well fed and o f going hungry, of having m ore than enough and of having too little.” Now these inclusive and varied circum stances are described in part by two sets of paired infinitives, the first two of which are also linked in M att 5:6. χο ρ τά ζ εσ θ α ι,

266

Philippians 4:10-20

“to be well fed ,” was used of force-feeding anim als for the purpose of fattening them , o f birds gorging themselves on their prey (Rev 19:21), and of satisfying the needs o f a hungry crowd (Matt 14:20). Above all, it denotes am plitude, and Paul uses it to refer to his having plenty to eat w ithout any overtones of brutishness (cf. P lu m m er). πεινάν, “to go hungry,” is the direct opposite of this first verb. Instead o f portraying plenty o f food, it pictures the absence of food and the h u n g er that results (cf. M att 4:2; 12:1). M ore than once Paul experienced the grim , literal reality o f this word as he engaged him self in the work of carrying ou t the Christian mission (1 Cor 4:11-13; 2 Cor 4:8-12; 6:4-5; 11:23-29). To drive hom e fu rth e r his p o in t on the alternating nature of hum an life, Paul repeats him self in the next pair ofinfinitives. H e h a d earlier w ritten paTepriaiv, “n e e d ” (Phil 4 : l l ) , a n d Trep1aaet>e1v, “to a b o u n d ” (4:12); now he writes π6ρισσ6ύ6ιν, “to have m ore than e n o u g h ,” “to ab o u n d ,” a n d voTCpctaGai, “to have too little,” “to be in n e e d .” It is as if Paul were saying: “I have been initiated into all the mysteries o f life. I know the secrets of everyday reality. God has taught m e th rough good times and bad how to cope no t only with h u n g er and privation, b u t with plenty to eat and an abundance of w ealth.” It is as if he were saying that “the vicissitudes o f his life were the rites of adm ission to a secret society” (Beare, 153). 13 πάντα ισχύω έν τω ένδυναμοϋντί μ6, “I have the power to face all such situations in union with the O ne who continually infuses me with strength.” Paul now both reaffirms his self-sufficiency and qualifies it in these famous words, often m isunderstood as a type of trium phalism (O ’Brien, 526; Fee [1995], 434). Those translations that give the impression that Paul m eant he could do anything and that nothing was beyond his powers ( k jv , a s v , m o f f a t t , g o o d s p e e d , r s v , k n o x , n e b , n a s b , n i v ) are misleading to the point of being false, πάντα does literally m ean “all things. ” But the real m eaning of this or any word is determ ined by its context. Thus, irrespective of w hether Paul wrote πάντα, “all things,” or τά πάντα, “all these things,” the context does n o t perm it one to say that he has moved without warning from the particular to the general, from “all these things” to “all things” (but cf. Alford, V incent). πάντα as used here can only refer to “all these situations,” both good and bad, that have ju st been described, “all the prosperous and adverse circum stances” that one m ust encounter in the course of everyday living. Paul says th at he has the power to cope with, o ris com petent and able to handle, all these things. T he verb ισχύω, “I have the pow er,” is n o t a favorite of the apostle and is used by him only two of the twenty-eight times it occurs in the n t (here and in Gal 5:6). Nevertheless, by using this word Paul reaffirms his own sufficiency: “I have the power to face all conditions of life [cf. g n b ] , hum iliation or exaltation, plenty to eat or n o t enough, wealth or poverty, as well as all o th er external circum stances like these. I can en d u re all these things [cf. Gnilka]. I have the resources in myself to m aster them , I am strong to face them down, I can prevail over an d be absolute m aster o f all the vicissitudes of life.” This indeed is the force o f the active voice o f the verb ισχύω, “I have the pow er.” And if this were all Paul h ad in m ind, the charge of trium phalism would be in order. But th en Paul adds a m ost im portant qualifying phrase έ v τω ένδυναμοϋντι μ6, “in u n io n with the O ne who continually infuses m e with stren g th .” And thus is established a g rand paradox. T he secret of P aul’s in d ep en d en ce was his dependence u p o n Christ. His self-sufficiency came from being in vital union with the O ne who is all-sufficient. W ho is this O ther, this all-sufficient One? Paul does no t

Comment

267

say. H e simply identifies the source of his confidence by m eans of a present active participle used as a noun: τώ έ νδυναμοϋντι, “the O ne who continually infuses with stren g th .” T he verb έ vδυναμουν, “to infuse with stren g th ,” however, is used elsewhere to d enote the powerful activity of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Eph 6:10; 1 Tim 1:12; 2 Tim 2:1; 4:17). Thus, those later scribes who added Χριστώ, “C hrist,” to the text properly understood P aul’s in ten t (see Noteb ) . He whose life was seized by Christ, who gladly gave u p all for Christ, who paradoxically gained all by losing all for Christ, who longed to know C hrist and the power of his resurrection (3:710), could only envision Christ as his true source of in n er strength. So although Paul h ad carefully disciplined him self and had discovered within him self untapped resources of power that, when drawn upon, m ade him in d ep en d e n t of outward circum stances, he could never bring him self to deny his need of Christ and his reliance u p o n the strength th at Christ supplied. T he tru th of the m atter is th at in him self Paul did n o t perceive a strong, in d ep en d e n t life. But united with Christ, the source o f ultim ate power, he was able to face life bravely. In 2 Cor 12:910 Paul speaks o f his weaknesses as advantages because they m ade him all the m ore receptive of C hrist’s strength, which is m ade perfect in weakness (see Black, Paul, Apostle of Weakness; cf. Beare): “Most gladly, then, will I ra th e r glory in my weaknesses, th at the power of Christ may rest u p o n me. T herefore I am co n ten t with weaknesses . . . and hardships for the sake of Christ; for when I am weak, then am I strong” (H aw thorne’s p arap h rase). Paul, thus, never allowed his weaknesses or perceived weaknesses to be an excuse for inactivity or for a failure to attem pt the impossible task. They, in a sense, becam e his greatest assets, and in surrendering them to Christ he discovered that they were transform ed for his own en rich m en t and for the en richm ent of others. As Bousset observes, “The work is great, b u t help is equal to the task. God, who calls you, even though he is so high, lends you his hand. His son, his equal, comes down to carry you” (cited by Plum m er, 102; a u th o r’s trans.). 14 ττλήν καλώς έποιήσατε συγκοινωνήσαντές μου τη θλίψει, “and yet it was good of you to becom e partners with me in my hardships.” With the word ττλήν, “b u t,” “yet,” “even so,” “nevertheless,” “all the sam e,” “notw ithstanding,” Paul does two things: (1) he underscores for the Philippians that he could ju st as well have done without their contributions, and (2) he returns to the task of affirming them for the personal care and concern they showed him by these contributions. Paul sees it as very im portant that his desire for and insistence upon independence should not be interpreted by the Philippians as indifference to the love they displayed for him in their giving. And so he says in effect, “A lthough I did n o t need what you sent, yet you did the right, even the beautifully right [καλώς], thing in sharing with me in my troubles.” Thus, in the idiomatic expression καλώς έποιήσατε, “it was good of you” (cf. Acts 10:33; 2 Pet 1:19; 3 Jo h n 6), Paul comes as close to saying “thank you” as he ever does in this letter (Martin [1976]; Bruce, 154). T he aorist participle συγκοινωνήσαντες, “having becom e partners w ith” (recalling Phil 1:5-7, 3:10), refers exclusively to this m ost recent gesture of love and is used circum stantially to denote m anner: “you did the right thing in that you becam e partners with m e.” In this instance they becam e his partners τη θλί ψε ι , “in [my] hardships.” The word θλίψις, “h ard sh ip ,” although on occasion used of the disaster th at is to com e on the world at the en d of the age (Matt 24:29; Mark 13:19; 2 Thess 1:6), is used here in the nontechnical sense of severe hardships, afflictions,

268

Philippians 4:10-20

and burdens, which is the sense in which Paul m ost frequently uses this word (cf. Phil 1:17; 2 C or 1:4, 8; 2:4; 4:17; 1 Thess 1:6). Thus, it seems strained (so also Fee [1995], 438 n. 9) to argue that the apostle, in praising the Philippians, may have chosen this word in o rd er to com m end them for th eir support o f him “as ‘eschatological apostle,’ destined to prom ote G od’s purposes in the spread o f the gospel to the Gentiles and so prepare the way for the d en o u e m e n t of history” (M artin [1976], 164, following Fridrichsen, Apostle, and Munck, Paul, 36-68). R ather, by the practical sympathy of the Philippians in providing m aterial help for Paul an d in sending E paphroditus to him , they had indeed becom e partners with him in his im prisonm ent and sufferings, although they were m any miles rem oved from him . They had taken some o f his b u rd en u p o n themselves in th eir genuine and deep sense o f concern that expressed itself in constructive action on b ehalf o f the apostle and therefore on beh alf of the gospel (Phil 1:12-17; see Seesem ann, Begrif f ΚΟ ΙΝΩ ΝΙΑ, 33-34; Glombitza, Ν ο νΤ Ί [1964-65] 135-41; Collange, 151). A nd it was exactly this sympathy and com panionship th at the apostle valued far m ore than any financial relief th at cam e to him as a result (cf. L ightfoot). O n the gram m atical p o in t of the dative τη θλίψει, “in [my] hardships,” Fee ([1995], 439) com m ents: “Paul puts θλΐψις in the dative as his way o f em phasizing the ‘togetherness’ in h e re n t in the συν [‘w ith’ in συγκοινωυήσαντες, ‘having becom e partners w ith’] .” N ote too how μου, “my,” is b ro u g h t into prom inence to stress the close relationship o f Paul: “to becom e partners with me in my hardships.” 15 οϊδατε δέ καί υμ είς, Φ ιλιππήσ ιοι, “now you Philippians know, as well as I.” Vv 15-16 constitute one long sentence in Greek. It is simple in its construction an d basic idea, having one m ain verb, ο’ί δ α τ ε , “you know,” with two direct objects, each in tro d u ced by ότι, “th a t”: “You know th a t. . . no o th er church en tered into a partn ersh ip with m e . .. except you alone [and] that. . . you sent m oney to m eet my needs m ore th an on ce.” Yet within this simple structure there are difficulties th at n eed explanation. If the text is correct, the sentence begins with two particles: δέ, “now,” and καί, “also” (see N otec). T he first of these, δέ, is often used to se tu p a contrast between two clauses and is then translated “b u t.” H ere, however, it is a simple connective, a transitional particle th at moves the read er on (BDAG) to the acts o f kindness do ne by the Philippians. It cannot be translated at all, or at best by the word “now.” T he second particle, καί, “also,” com pares the Philippians n o t with o th er witnesses to the Philippians ’ generosity, whom Paul m ight m en tio n , but with himself: “You know as well as I,” not “You know as well as others' (cf. V in cen t). T he very fact th at Paul feels com pelled to say this reinforces the idea that he sensed the possibility o f the Philippians in terp retin g his faint praise as a rebuke, which to some ex tent it was (contra O ’Brien, 530). As we have already p ointed out, the apostle deliberately restrained him self in extending his thanks because he wished to m aintain his in d ependence. But at the same time he had no desire to offend by w hat m ight be conceived o f as ingratitude, on his part, for what was an obvious act o f love, on th eir part. H e therefore looked for a m iddle course betw een effusiveness, on the one hand, and rebuke, on the other. H ence w ithout a straightforw ard “th ank you” he nevertheless tells them that they did the right thing in sharing with him (v 14) and rem inds them also th at what good things they did in the past are in his ju d g m e n t quite sufficient to prove their love for him (cf. G nilka), to which n o th in g fu rth e r n eed be added. This is the first and only tim e Paul directly addresses his friends with the

Comment

269

vocative form Φ ιλιππήσ ιοι, “Philippians.” Rarely does he ever do this, th at is, address the readers of his letters by nam e. In fact, the only times he does so are in letters w here he rebukes them and then softens the rebuke by addressing them as “C orinthians” (2 Cor 6:11) or “G alatians” (Gal 3:1). In each case this m an n er of direct address seems to strike a note o f exasperation tem pered by obvious earnestness an d great affection. His address here to the Philippians by nam e appears to be ex tended in the same vein. T he form Φ ιλιππήσ ιοι, “P hilippians,” ra th e r than the m ore regular Φ ιλ ιπ π β ΐς or Φ ιλιππηνοί, indicates th at if Paul in ten d ed any rebuke, he in ten d ed it to be a gentle and loving one (contra Fee [1995], 439 n. 10). For Φ ιλιππήσ ιοι is a G reek transcription o f the Latin Philippenses, the nam e by which R om an citizens living in the colony Augusta Julia Victnx Philippensium, “Julia Augusta C onqueror of P hilippi,” designated them selves. Thus Paul in using this word, which is a monstrum, “m onstrosity,” in Greek, was nevertheless courteously respecting a feeling of justifiable pride on the part o f the Philippians by acknowledging the Latin character o f their city and the dignity th at was theirs as Rom an citizens (see Ramsay, JT S o.s. 1 [1900] 116; Collart, Philippes, 1:212-13; Beare; Bockm uehl, 263, referring to Pilhofer, Philippi, 1:117, who thinks Paul coined the expression; see also Oakes, Philippians, 66-67). He does everything possible to praise them w ithout encouraging them to do m ore for him than they have already done. ότι ev αρχή του Ευαγγελίου, δτε έξήλθον από Μ ακεδονίας, “that when the gospel was in its beginning, when I set ou t from M acedonia. ” W hat can Paul m ean when he writes th at the gospel had its “b eginning” w hen he w ent out from M acedonia? H ad he n o t already been preaching the gospel for m any years, at least for fourteen years, in Syria and Cilicia (Gal 1:18-2:1), in Cyprus and Galatia (Acts 13-14), before ever he came over into M acedonia? Several answers have been suggested: (1) Paul, contrary to what is generally supposed, actually began his m inistry of preaching the gospel in M acedonia in the 40s (Suggs, NovT 4 [1960] 60-68). (2) Paul in fact had preached the gospel elsewhere for many years before he came to M acedonia, b u t by com parison with his work now he considered his earlier mission of no consequence; it could be set aside and forgotten as though it had never occurred (Glombitza, N o vT 7 [1964-65] 140). (3) Paul was thinking o f “the beginning o f the gospel” from the standpoint o f the Philippians, i.e., “the beginning o f the gospel in their vicinity” ( c f . the n i v : “In the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel”; see Dibelius; Scott; and Fee [1995], 440 n. 12, for a full n o te ). (4) Paul for the first time becam e entirely responsible for the mission o f the gospel only when he came into M acedonia and moved ou t from there (G nilka). In his earlier activities he took second place behind Barnabas (Acts 1314). Now th at he is fully in charge “it is possible that he may have regarded Europe as the mission field which fell particularly to his lot and the true starting point o f his *Gospel’” (Collange, 152). A lthough n one o f these suggestions is com pletely satisfactory, the last of them is perhaps the best, if for no o th er reason than that P aul’s move to M acedonia is described in Acts as a “decisive turning-point” for the gospel (Meyer, Ursprung, 3:80, cited by G nilka). T hereafter M acedonia rem ains in the fo reground o f P aul’s mission strategy and is m entioned by him in his letters some th irteen times (M artin [1976]). ούδεμία μοι εκκλησία έκοινώνησεν ε ις λόγον δόσεως και λήμψεως εί μή ύμ εΐς μόνοι, “no o th er church en tered into a partnership with me in an accounting of

270

Philippians 4:10-20

expenditures and receipts except you alo n e.” Paul tells the Philippians that they were uniquely his partners in his missionary endeavors. O nce again there is evidence th at Paul deliberately tem pers his thanks to the Philippians in the fact th at he employs so m any financial term s when he refers here to the assistance that they gave him (cf. Kennedy, ExpTim 12 [1900-1901] 43-44). It is alm ost as though he viewed the entire m atter as a strictly business affair: the Philippians had en tered into a partn ersh ip (έκοινώνησεν) with him (cf. Seesem ann, Begrif f ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ, 33). A nd this partn ership involved a strict accounting (εις λόγον, “in an accountin g ”) o f all transactions between them (see Lightfoot for references to this m eaning o f λόγος). All expenditures and receipts (δόσεως καί λήμψεως) were carefully recorded, δόσις, “giving,” and λήμψις, “receiving,” are words that belong to the com m ercial vocabulary of the ancient world and refer to the debit an d credit sides o f the ledger. They invariably refer to financial transactions (see MM, and the exam ples from the papyri texts collected by Lohm eyer; bu t cf. also Str-B 3:624). So it is unlikely that Chrysostom and those m any com m entators who follow him can be right in saying that this expression m eans th at the Philippians gave (δόσις) m aterial goods and in tu rn received (λήμψις) spiritual goods from Paul (cf. 1 Cor 9:11; Rom 15:27; M artin [1976]), because this mixes two different things, m aterial and spiritual, and thus alters the norm al m eaning o f δόσεως καί λήμψεως, “expenditures and receipts.” More likely, then, these words refer to the financial gift o f the Philippians, on the one hand, and the receipt they received back from the apostle acknowledging its safe arrival, on the o th er hand. (Note in this connection the word ά π εχ ειν , “to receive in full, ”in Phil 4:18, a technical term m eaning to receive a sum in full and give a receipt for it [BDAG].) Paul will use still m ore o f these com m ercial term s as he continues. R ecent studies (Sampley, Pauline Partnership; Stowers, “Friends and E nem ies”; M alherbe, “P aul’s SelfSufficiency”; W itherington) have shown th at these term s are also signs of friendship u niting Paul and the Philippians. 16 ότι καί εν Θεσσαλονίκη καί απαξ καί δ ίς ε ις την χρ εία ν μοι έπεμ ψ α τε, “you know, as well as I, that when I was in Thessalonica, you sent m oney to m eet my needs m ore than once.” Now Paul rem inds them that they know and he knows as well th at (ότι) they had sent things to m eet his needs w hen he was in Thessalonica. This is an am azing fact, and it shows the im m ense concern the Philippians had for Paul, their loyalty to him , and their com m itm ent to the advancem ent o f the gospel he preached. For when Paul, after founding the church in Philippi, left there, he w ent im m ediately to Thessalonica, a city only a short distance away, to carry on his mission (Acts 17:1-9). Thus, soon after their own beginning as a church, the Philippians began their pattern of giving by sending help to relieve the pressure of his needs (εις την χρεία ν, “to m eet my n ee d s”; ε ις , “to ,” with the accusative to denote purpose). It is possible th at Paul was in Thessalonica for a longer period o f tim e than one m ight im agine from reading the Acts account (Gnilka; Collange: cf. E. H aenchen, The Acts of the Apostles, trans. B. Noble, G. Shinn et al. [Philadelphia: W estm inster, 1971] 511-12). P aul’s reference to the labor and hardship he experienced in Thessalonica, working day and night so as n o t to be a b u rd e n to anyone, paying all his own expenses by working at his trade by day and preaching the gospel by night (cf. 1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8), implies that his mission there was an extended one. This th en gave the Philippians opportunity to learn o f the apostle’s strenuous

Comment

271

schedule o f activides and a chance to make it lighter. They did so by sending gifts, welcomed or not, to m eet his needs. Paul acknowledges th at they sent gifts to him καί άπαξ καί δ ίς, a phrase that may be understood in the restricted sense o f “once or twice” (Vincent, Lohm eyer, B o n n ard ), probably m eaning “twice” (cf.Job 5:19; Eccl 11:2; Amos 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13), or m ore generally “m ore than on ce,” i.e., repeatedly (Lightfoot; Gnilka; B. Rigaux, Saint Paul: Les epitres aux Thessaloniciens [Paris: Gabalda, 1956] 461; Morris, NovT 1 [1956] 205-8). Perhaps the m ore restricted m eaning is the in ten d ed m eaning for this phrase, because from P aul’s rem arks w ritten to the Thessalonian church (1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8), one m ight readily infer th at the aid that came from the Philippians fell far short of m eeting all his needs (cf. Collange). 17 ούχ ότι έπι£ητώ τό δόμα, “I do n o t say this m eaning that I have my h eart set on your giving.” O nce again Paul interm ingles his unswerving determ ination to be free from the gifts of anyone with his desire to show his appreciation for the affection th at obviously lies b ehind the giving. H ence, because his acknowledgm en t of the past generosity of the Philippians m ust n o t be in terp reted as an eager desire on his part for m ore, he quickly moves now to deny th at he ever was anxious for (έπι£ητώ) the gift. H e introduces this disclaim er with the idiom atic form ula ούχ ότι, “I do n o t say this m eaning t h a t . . . ” (see Comment on Phil 4:11; BDF §480 [5]), and follows it with the verb έπι£ητώ, “I have my h eart set o n .” The preposition έττί, “o n ,” here com pounded with the verb ζχ]τείν, “to seek,” is in part intensive (“to seek eagerly’) and in p art directional, especially m arking the direction of the action (“to seek eagerly for'; cf. n e b ) . άλλα έπι£ητώ το ν καρπόν τον πλ 60 νά£ 0ντα 6 ίς λόγον υμών, “but I certainly do have my h ea rt set on interest increasing that may accrue to your account.” By way o f em phasis Paul repeats the verb έπιζητώ , “I certainly do have my h ea rt set o n .” T he real object of his intense desire Paul now expresses in a phrase filled once m ore with com m ercial terms. T he first of these is καρπόν, which literally m eans “fru it” (cf. kjv, rsv) in the sense of the “p ro d u c e” of the land generally. But in light o f the m eaning of its cognates καρπεΐαι, “profits,” and καρπίζεσθαι, “to reap the re tu rn ,” and the p resent context in which it appears, καρπός m ust be understood in the sense o f “p ro fit” or “cred it” (see MM, 321). And the participle that m odifies it, πλ 60 νά£ 0ντα, lit. “increasing,” although it does n o t appear elsewhere as a technical word belonging to the vocabulary o f com m erce (against M artin [1976], 167, who says th at it is “a regular banking term for financial grow th”), nevertheless appears to have a com m ercial m eaning thrust upon it by the business words and phrases th at surro u nd it. T he prepositional phrase ε ις λόγον υμών that immediately follows is one of these, m eaning “to your account.” Paul therefore views this gift to him as a spiritual investment en tered as a credit to the account of the P hilippians, an investm ent th a t will increasingly pay them rich dividends (H en d rik sen ). This, then, is what Paul really had his h ea rt set on. And although he could do w ithout the gift and would prefer to do so, he is nevertheless jealous for the welfare of his friends at Philippi. For this reason, namely, that he knows that such an attitude o f liberality pays great dividends in the lives of those who give (cf. 2 Cor 9:8-11), he accepts their generosity. 18 απέχω δε πάντα καί π€ρισσ6ύω· π6πλήρωμαι δεξάμενος παρά Έπαφροδίτου τα παρ’ υμών, “here, then, is my receipt for everything you have given me. I have m ore than enough. I am fully supplied, now that I have received from E paphroditus

272

Philippians 4:10-20

the gifts you sent m e.” Paul was n o t at all eager for this m ost recent gift th at came to him from the Philippians. But he did accept it. Now he sends back with E paphroditus his receipt, saying the gift has been duly received. Everything still is do n e in a very businesslike m anner, απέχω πάντα, often translated quite literally “I have all” ( k j v , cf. also P h i l l i p s , l b , j b ) , really m eans “h ere then is my receipt for everything” ( g n b ) . ά π έχ ειν , as has been shown by Deissm ann (Light from the Ancient East, 110-12) from exam ples in the papyri and ostraca, was a technical expression used in drawing up a receipt, m eaning “to be paid in full,” and regularly ap p eared at the bottom o f the receipt (cf. MM; BDAG; Lohm eyer; B onnard; Gnilka). T he two verbs that im m ediately follow, περισσεύω, “I have m ore th an e n o u g h ,” and πεπλήρωμαι, “I am fully supplied” (which repeats and intensifies the idea expressed in περισσεύω), seem to imply a pleading for no m ore gifts. Paul has all that he needs and m ore, and thus could n o t possibly ask anything fu rth er from the Philippians. T he b earer of this final gift (τά παρ’ υμών, lit. “the things from you”) was Epaphroditus, whom Paul earlier had described as a m essenger sent by the church at Philippi to provide for him the things that were lacking (Phil 2:25; cf. 2:30). οσμήν ευωδίας, θυσίαν δεκτήν, εύάρεστον τω θεω, “they are a fragrant odor, a sacrifice that God accepts and that pleases him .” Suddenly Paul turns from the vocabulary of banking to the language of worship in order to finish his description of this gift from the Philippians. O f first im portance is Paul’s rem ark that although he himself was the immediate recipient of their generosity, the ultimate recipient was God (τω θεω, “to G od”). With this statem ent he lifts their gift from the level of m ere mutual courtesy and compassion and looks upon it in its relation to God (Jones). At the same time he enunciates an im portant principle, namely, that whatever is done for the servant is in reality done for the Master; that whatever is given to a child of God is given to God himself (cf. Matt 10:40-42; 25:31-40; Acts 9:3-5). With sacrificial language Paul describes τά πα ρ ’ υμών, “the gifts you sent m e,” as οσμήν ευωδίας, lit. “an odor of fragrance,” “a fragrant o d o r,” and θυσίαν, “a sacrifice.” T he first of these is a com m on expression taken over from the o t . It pictures God as literally taking pleasure in the smell o f the sacrifices offered by his people (cf. Gen 8:21). Symbolically it refers to the quality an offering m ust possess in o rd e r for it to be pleasing and acceptable to God (Exod 29:18, 25, 41; Lev 1:9, 13; Ezek 20:41; cf. Eph 5:2). Thus, in describing their gift as οσμήν ευωδίας, “a fragrant o d o r,” Paul makes clear to the Philippians th at it is of the first rank, of the highest quality. T he second o f these terms, θυσίαν, “a sacrifice,” again is a com m on o t word to refer literally to the m ultitude o f anim al sacrifices offered to G od (cf. Lev 1:2-13), e.g., the sacrifices o f birds (Lev 1:13-17), grain (Lev 2:1-10), and the firstfruits of the harvest (Lev 2:12-13). Yet even within the o t itself this word began to be spiritualized so th at “a crushed and hum bled spirit” ( l x x P s 50:18-19 [ET 51:1617]) could be viewed as an equally valid sacrifice acceptable to God, in fact, the kind o f sacrifice th at God preferred. Such a spiritualizing o f the Levitical sacrifices co n tin u ed and was bro ad en ed in m eaning as time w ent on to include prayer and praise (1QS VIII, 7-9; IX, 35; X, 6), doing good deeds, and sharing of possessions (H eb 13:16). Thus, it was b u t natural for Paul to in terp re t the assistance provided him by the Philippians at great cost to themselves (cf. 2 Cor 8:1-2) as the p ro p e r sacrifice th at would be pleasing and acceptable to God (cf. Rom 12:1). H ere again

Comment

273

b oth the term inology and the th o u g h t of Phil 2:17 recur. Collange (153) coneludes, “T he apostle’s activity and the financial help of the Philippians which supports it form a unity the ‘j u d g e ’ o f which is G od.” 19 ό δέ θεός μου πληρώσει πάσαν χρείαν υμών κατά τό πλούτος αυτού έν δόξη έν Χριστώ Ίησοϋ, “in return, I pray that God may m eet every need you have in accordance with his marvelous wealth in Christ Jesus.” This verse is closely and carefully linked with what has ju st been said, no t only by the conjunction δ ε, “an d ,” “now,” “in re tu rn ,” but also by the deliberate repetition of two highly im portant words from the im m ediate context: πεπλήρωμαι, “I am fully supplied [orhave been filled] ” (v 18), par. πληρώσει, “[God] will m eet [or will fill]” (v 19), and χρείαν μοι, “my n e e d ” (v 16), par. χρείαν υμών, “your n ee d ” (v 19). Thus, in v 19 Paul has in m ind exactly the same kind of needs that he was talking about in v 16, namely, present material needs that can only be m et right now by m aterial resources. He has not suddenly shifted to discuss spiritual needs (εν δόξη, “in glory,” understood as placing them in glorious union with Christ Jesus [Lightfoot]) or to promise his Philippian friends that God will m eet their needs in the future έν δόξη, “in glory,” understood as the glorious age to come (Michaelis, Lohm eyer). The phrase έν δόξη, “in glory,” m ust n o t be taken with the verb πληρώσει, “will m eet,” in such a way as to point to the future kingdom (“God will m eet every need you have in glory‫ )״‬but be perceived only as reflecting a Hebrew adverbial construction (“God will m eet every need you have in a glorious manner‫)״‬. O r έν δόξη, “in glory, ”may be understood as an adjective modifying the noun πλούτος, “wealth,” m eaning “glorious or marvelous wealth.” The needs that are u n d er consideration here are similar to those kinds of needs that Paul him self had experienced due to hardships, suffering, deprivations, and afflictions (θλίψεις [v 14]) that could be alleviated only by earthly goods and services and by hum an associates. A textual question concerns w hether Paul wrote 0 ... θεός μου πληρώσει πάσαν χρείαν υμών, “m y God willmeet [future indicative] everyneedyouhave,”oro ... θεός μου πληρώσαι πάσαν χρείαν υμών, “may my God meet [aorist optative] every need you have” (see Notef ) . T he future indicative (πληρώσει) states a fact prom ising the Philippians what God will do; the aorist optative (πληρώσαι; n o t the aorist infinitive as Collange, 148, identifies it) expresses a wish, offers a prayer to God, makes a request o f him. M anuscript evidence alone favors the future indicative πληρώσει, “[God] will m eet,” reading, though there are some excellent witnesses in support o f the aorist optative πληρώσαι, “may [God] m eet.” But the following considerations favor the aorist optative reading here (so too Schenk, 51-54): (1) M aterial, physical needs are exclusively u n d e r discussion here. (2) Paul elsewhere, in a similar context, refuses to say what God will do in m eeting such m aterial needs, although he confidently says what God can do (2 Cor 9:8). (3) A lthough the optative m ood was dying o u t in Koine Greek, Paul nevertheless is fam iliar with its usage (he uses it thirty-one times; BDF §65 [2]) and is quite capable o f em ploying it correctly. (4) Paul occasionally comes n ear the close o f his letters with a prayer asking God to do som ething favorable for his friends and using precisely the same form ula th at appears here in 4:19: δέ, “and, b u t” (postpositive) + ό θεός, “G od”/ ό κύριος, “the L o rd ” + optative verb (Rom 15:5; 1 Thess 5:23; 2 Thess 3:16). (5) P aul’s final benedictions (Rom 15:33; 1 C or 16:23; 2 Cor 13:13; Gal 6:18; Eph 6:24), asking th at G od’s presence be with his readers and his grace upon them , imply the optative εϊη, “may [it] b e,” even when the optative is n o t present. Even

274

P hilippians 4:10-20

if the future indicative πληρώσει, “[God] will m eet,” reading is accepted, the verse m ust still be translated so as to express a wish prayer, n o t a simple statem ent of fact (cf. Wiles, Paul's Intercessory Prayers, 101-7, who notes how P aul’s prayer here harks back to Phil 1:9-11): “In retu rn for [δε ] your m eeting my needs, I pray that my God will m eet every need that you have” (cf. k n o x , n a b ) . Such an in terp retatio n (a) does n o t have Paul saying what God will or will n o t do, (b) allows God the freedom to be God, to fulfill needs or n o t as he sees best, even the needs of the Philippians, (c) wards off disappointm ent or disillusionm ent when m aterial, physical needs are n o t m et, and (d) keeps one from having to make excuses for God, from drawing fine lines o f distinction between needs and wants, and from pushing off the fulfillm ent o f needs until the eschatological day to avoid any em barrassm ent (so O ’Brien, 546, b u t contra Fee [1995], 452 n. 12). G od’s ability to m eet the P hilippians’ need is κατά τό πλούτος αυτού έν δόξη, lit. “according to his wealth in glory.” κατά, “according to ,” with the accusative m eans th at “the rew arding will n o t be m erely from his wealth, but also in a m an n er th at befits his wealth—on a scale worthy of His w ealth” (Michael, 226, italics original). Since G od’s wealth is limitless, it is therefore impossible to exhaust it. Paul thus can n o t ask too m uch from God as he prays for the needs of his friends. As has already been argued, these needs are present m aterial needs that the Philippians have h ere and now (cf. 2 Cor 8:2). H ence έν δόξη, “in glory,” should n o t be given any futuristic m eaning bu t should be curtailed and lim ited here to a description o f G od’s wealth: it is m agnificent, eye-catching, splendid, renow ned (cf. BDAG). T he prepositional phrase e v Χριστώ Ίησοϋ, “in C hristjesus,” is in the em phatic position at the en d of the sentence. But it is to be taken with the verb πληρώσαι, “may [God] m eet, ” because the treasures o f God are unlocked and m ade available in Christ. God makes his wealth known and fulfills needs only because of and in Christ (cf. Col 2:10: έστέ έν αύτώ πεπληρωμένοι, “you are filled up in h im ,” i.e., Christ; 1 Cor 1:5: kv π α ντί έπλουτισθητε kv αύτώ, “you have been m ade rich [by God] in h im ,” i.e., Christ). 20 τώ δέ θεώ και πατρί ήμών ή δόξα ε ις τούς αιώνας τών αιώνων, αμήν, “now surely the glory belongs to God our F ather forever and ever. A m en!” In v 19 Paul used a rare expression o . . . θεός μου, “my G od” (only here and in Phil 1:3), so as to distinguish him self and his needs from the Philippians and their needs. But now, as he breaks o ut into a doxology, he addresses the doxology τώ . . . θεώ καί πατρι ήμών, “to God our F ather,” uniting him self once again with his converts in a song o f praise to the one who provides for the needs of all his people. In the doxologies of the n t , δ ό ξ α , “glory,” usually has the definite article, as it does here (Rom 11:36; 16:27; Gal 1:5; Eph 3:21; 2 Tim 4:18; H eb 13:21; 1 Pet 4:11; 2 Pet 3:18; b u t also Luke 2:14; 19:38). The definite article signals to the read er that it is “that glory,” “that h o n o r,” “that sp len d o r” that properly belongs to God and is rightly ascribed to him th at is in focus, δ ό ξ α , “glory,” as it is used in the Bible ( o t and n t ) , is an elusive word with m eanings ranging from “divine h o n o r,” “divine sp len d o r,” “divine pow er,” “visible divine rad ian ce,” to the “divine m ode o f bein g .” Thus, w hen people give glory to God (cf.Jer 13:16; Pss 18:1; 28:1-2; 113:9; Rev 4:9; 5:13; 7:12) or burst o ut in a doxological refrain, as here, they are n o t adding to God som ething th at is n o t already present bu t are actively acknowledging or extolling God for what he already is (cf. Isa 42:8 with 41:12; see also Luke 2:14; 19:38; Rom

Explanation

275

11:36; cf. G. Kittel, TDNT 2:244-48). T herefore, this doxology presupposes th at the verb 6’iv ai, “to b e,” which is missing and m ust be supplied, is the indicative έσ τίν , “is,” “belongs,” ra th e r than the optative eιη, “may [it] b e ,” “b e ” (cf. 1 Pet 4 :Π ).

T he doxology is p resen ted ™ .. . Θ6ώ και πατρι ημών, “to God o u r Father. ”Very likely the definite article (τώ) is used only with the n o u n Θ6ώ, “G od”: “to the God, the one suprem e God o f the universe.” But by adding πατρι ημών, “ou r F ath er,” Paul rem inds the Philippians th at this God, so m agnificent and splendid, is “our F ath er,” a ten d er phrase picked up from the prayer Jesus taught his first disciples (cf. M att 6:9; Luke 11:2, reflecting the Aramaic ’abba)and cherished by his church ever since. This praise to God is c ls τούς αιώνας τών αιώνων, lit. “into the ages of the ages.” T he idea expressed by the G reek “is o f cycles consisting of, em bracing, o th er cycles, ad infinitum; the ever-developing ‘ages’ o f heavenly life” (Moule, 89). This phrase, unique to the nt, represents a long, indefinite period. Praise to God, therefore, is n o t restricted to “this age” b u t belongs appropriately to “the age to co m e” as well—an d to ages u p o n ages yet to follow, to “an incalculable vastness of d u ra tio n ” (Plum m er, 106). And to this is ad ded the αμήν, “am en ,” that spontaneous and joyful endorsem en t of all th at has been said. It is the “yes” o f the worshiping church to God and the acknow ledgm ent and acceptance of the prom ises he has m ade in Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Cor 14:16; 2 C or 1:20; see H. Schlier, TDNT 1:336-38). Explanation Some com m entators consider that this section (Phil 4:10-20) was originally a separate letter of thanks w ritten by Paul before he wrote the m ain p art of his epistle to the Philippians. This submission, if accepted, would m eet the objection th at Paul leaves his thanks until the close o f the letter and also that a lengthy period o f time has elapsed since his mission to Philippi and arrival in Rome (assum ing the R om an provenance o f the le tte r). T he argum ents for this view, however, are no t convincing (see Introduction, Integrity of Philippians), and thus the exegesis here proceeds on the assum ption th at w 10-20 are an integral p art o f the whole letter. If we are asked why then did Paul leave his “thank you” to the last, several answers are forthcoming: (1) The fact of the m atter is that he did not do this. At the beginning of his letter he thanks God and the Philippians for their generous partnership with him in the spread of the gospel (1:3, 5). (2) If Paul dictated this letter, as was his custom, and took up the stylus, as usual, to sign it, it would be most appropriate for him to express more fully his appreciation in his own handwriting at the end of the letter (see Η. Y. Gamble, Jr., The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977] 94,145-46, cited in O ’Brien, 551). (3) But most likely Paul left his thanks to the last because the whole m atter of receiving gifts from the churches he founded was a very sensitive issue with him. And as one who hesitates to bring up a delicate m atter, the apostle waits until he can wait no longer. Thus, in a carefully worded statem ent he thanks the Philippians for their kindness to him, without ever really thanking them. O ne senses in this section a nervous alternation back and forth between acknowledging his indebtedness to the Philippians, on the one hand, and asserting his independence from them, on the other.

276

Philippians 4:10-20

Paul begins by telling the Philippians th at he is glad that their concern for him has blossom ed again. For some unstated reason the Philippians were unable to make contact with Paul for a period o f time. And ju st how long depends on the dating o f the letter. No message o f any kind cam e through to let the apostle know how his friends at Philippi fared o r if they cared at all for him or for the gospel he preached. Doubts arose. T hen all o f a sudden there came a breakthrough. E paphroditus arrived on a mission by the church to be his co-worker and fellow soldier, n o t only carrying instructions to do whatever Paul n eed ed to have done (cf. 2:25), b u t also bringing an abundance of m aterial goods or financial resources (4:19) so as to free him from whatever sufferings or hardships th at poverty m ight have inflicted u p o n him. This overwhelm ing generosity m ade him very happy, but only because it showed that all during the silent period the Philippians h ad never stopped thinking o f him and planning how they m ight help him . V incent (152) observes, “H e values their gift principally as an expression of the spirit o f Christ in them , and as an evidence o f their Christian proficiency.” But this gift caused him problem s. It violated his principle of paying his own way by working with his hands, so that he m ight him self be free of d ep en d in g on others, an d to m ake the gospel free o f charge to everyone (though he forsook the principle as well as observed it, as we see from Acts 18:5, which suggests that the m oney th at came with Silas and Tim othy set him free from the necessity of tentm aking [Acts 18:3]). C onsequently he swings suddenly from praising the Philippians to inform ing them that he did n o t n eed th eir gift, that he had learned self-sufficiency, th at he knew how to cope with all the ups and downs of life, that he had been initiated into the vicissitudes o f existence—h u n g er and fullness, too m uch an d too little, privation and plenty— and was able to accept and survive eith er w ithout preference. H e affirms, alm ost too em phatically it seems, that he has the power to face all such situations on his own, w ithout help from anyone. But th en he catches himself, stops, and gladly acknowledges that in reality his in d ep en d en ce com es only from his dep en d en ce up o n Christ. It is Christ who continuously infuses him with strength. T h en Paul turns back to affirm ing the Philippians n o t only for what they had ju st given to him b u t also for what they had given to him on previous occasions as well. But even as he praises them , his praise seems checked, reined in som ewhat by the businesslike way in which he discusses what they have done. They alone, of all the churches he founded, en tered into a partnership with him . Between them and him th ere was a strict accounting o f expenditures and receipts. They were generous in th eir giving, but he never asked for their gifts. T he only thing he sought was th at the Philippians m ight follow the principle th at the generous will be treated generously, that those who sow bountifully will reap bountifully, that they m ight get a good re tu rn on their investm ent, and that interest m ight increase and be credited to their account. H e speaks in banking term s o f sending them a receipt for the gifts they sent him through E paphroditus, duly m arked by him “paid in full.” O ne last time, it seems, he pleads for his in d ep en d en ce and implicitly begs th at they send no m ore. His words are “I have m ore than enough. I am fully supplied!” (Phil 4:18). But P aul’s greatest praise for their gifts com es when he likens them to the fragrant o d o r th at arose from p ro p e r sacrifices, properly p re p are d and offered so as to m easure u p to the quality standards req u ired o f them to be pleasing and

Explanation

277

acceptable to God. F urtherm ore, he says, the things that had com e from them to him actually h ad com e from them to God and were accepted by God. By this statem ent he is saying that their gifts were of the very highest quality. So in retu rn for supplying his needs ou t o f their poverty (cf. 2 Cor 8:2), he asks God to m eet all th eir needs o u t o f his riches, in accordance with his vast assets “on a scale worthy o f his w ealth” (Phil 4:19). And as he reflects then on the limitless resources that exist in God, he can not refrain from breaking ou t in a joyous doxology: “T he glory belongs to the suprem e God who is also o u r Father. A m en!” T he language o f this section (4:10-20) is at once “priestly” (Newton, Concept of Purity, 60-68), liturgical, com m ercial, and personal, showing P aul’s versatility in his com m and o f speech. These features lend a timeless appeal on giving and receiving, while they pose a challenge to Christians in a rich society. T he text will be read in a different way by those who study the Scripture in a world of poverty and econom ic distress. Elem ents that go to m ake up the three-way network of Paul, the Philippians, and God (Fowl’s characterization [Int 56.1 (2002) 45-58]) p resen t a challenge to in terp ret Scripture both theologically and contextually.

VI. Conclusion

(4:21-23)

Bibliography B rooke, D ., ed. Private Letters, Pagan a nd Christian. New York: Dutton, 1930. C ham pion, L. G. Benedictions and Doxologies in the Epistles o f Paul. Oxford: Kemp Hall, 1934. D oty, W. G. Letters in Primitive Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973. G am ble, Η . Y., Jr. The Textual History o f the Letter to the Romans: A Study in Textual and Literary Criticism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. M anson, T. W. “St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans—and O thers.” BJRL 31 (1948) 224-40. Reprinted in The Romans Debate, ed. K. P. Donfried, rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991) 3-15. O ’B rien, P. T. “Benediction, Blessing, Doxology, Thanksgiving.” DPL. 68-71. P ilh ofer, P. Philippi. R oller, O . Das Formulae der paulinischen Briefe: E in Beitrag zur Lehre von antiken Briefen. BWANT 58. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1933. Wu, J. L. “Liturgical Elements.” DPL. 557-60.

Translation 21Give my greetings to every one of the saints in ChristJesus. The brothers [and sisters] who are with me here send you their greetings, 22as do all the saints, especially those of the imperial household.23May the grace of the LordJesus Christ be with you each one? Amen.b’c

Notes aInstead of μετά του πνεύματος υμών, “with your spirit,” 2‫ א‬Ψ and the Majority Text read μετά πάντων υμών, “with you all.” The change may have been because there was misunderstanding of the anthropology expressed here. Why would “grace”be ascribed only to the “spirit,”when human beings are both body and spirit? Or the change may have been accidental due to similarity in appearance. 15αμήν, “Amen,” although omitted by NA27, following B F G, is nevertheless strongly attested by $p46 ‫ א‬A D Ψ and the Majority Text (so also O’Brien, 555, and Bockmuehl, 271). cMost mss add a subscriptio, “subscription”: (1) Προς‫ ־‬Φιλιππησίους, “To the Philippians” (‫ א‬A B* Ψ 33), or (2) Προς ΦιΧιππησίους έγράφη από 'Ρώμης (εξ ’Αθηνών 945) (διά Έπαφροδίτου 075 1739 1881 Majority Text), “To the Philippians, written from Rome (from Athens) (through Epaphroditus) ” (B1 6). $p46 and a few other Greek mss have no subscription.

Form/Structure/Setting Paul now concludes his letter. It is tim e to say farewell. A nd although he does this essentially in accordance with the p attern o f ancient letter writing, he does n o t h ere, n o r in any o f his letters, use the standard 6ρρωσο/6ρρωσθ6, “farewell,” 6 ύτύ χ€ 1 , “good luck,” or 6ύπραττ6τ€, “good-bye” (as in P.Oxy. 115) th at one is accustom ed to find at the en d of pagan or even Christian letters (cf. H u n t and Edgar, SelectPapyri, 1:269-395; Acts 15:29; 23:30; Ig n . Eph. 21.2; Ign. Magn. 15; Ign. Rom. 10.3). Instead, his favorite word is som e form o f the verb άσπά£6σθαι, “to g reet,” by which he n o t only signs off b u t sends personal greetings from himself, his associates, an d o th er Christians aro u n d him to his dear friends who will read what he has w ritten (cf. Rom 16; 1 C or 16:19-20; 2 Cor 13:12; Col 4:10-15; 1 Thess 5:26; Phlm 23; cf. 2 Tim 4:19, 21; Tit 3:15). P aul’s letters n o t only accord with the

Form /Structure/Setting

279

p attern o f ancient letter writing, b u t they radically differ from th at p attern as well. T he Epistle to the Philippians shows this to be true. T he stark €ρρωσο/6ρρωσθ6, “farewell,” or some such form ula with which o th er contem porary letters were b ro u g h t to a close is am plified by Paul in such a way as to reveal the w arm th of Christian relations, the marvel o f Christian ideas and ideals, and the O ne who motivates an d gives m eaning to all (cf. C ollange). In this simple farewell appear such profoundly im portant words as “saints,” “brothers [and sisters],” “grace,” “Christ Jesus,” and “L ord.” T he doxology in v 20, which has the appearance o f a p ro p e r ending to a letter, confirm s in the m inds o f some th at w 10-20 constitute a separate letter o f thanks to the Philippian church. Vv 21-23, therefore, are o u t o f o rd e r and belong as a conclusion to one o f the o th er letters contained in Philippians, perhaps to th at letter m ade up o f chaps. 1-2. This suggestion has already been rejected in favor o f seeing each p art o f Philippians as integral to the whole (Introduction, Integnty of Philippians). A considerable nu m b er of nt epistles en d m uch like Philippians in a four-part structure m ade up o f (1) personal inform ation an d instructions (w 1019); (2) a form al benediction or doxology (v 20); (3) b rief personal counsel, expressed less formally (w 21-22); and (4) a simple benediction as a final greeting (v 23; cf. F. V. Filson, “Yesterday”: A Study of Hebrews in the Light of Chapter 13, SBT 2.4 [Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1967] 22-24; see 1 and 2 C orinthians, Galatians, 2 Timothy, Hebrews). As H oulden (115-16) notes: This structure seems almost as stereotyped as the opening pattern of greeting followed by thanksgiving. It arises from the dual purpose of nearly all the New Testament letters; they were both general communications to a congregation or group of congregations and also personal letters to friends. The first two sections of the fourfold pattern spring from the first purpose, the last two from the second. T he letter to the Philippians is the m ost intim ate o f all o f P aul’s letters. H ere the personal pro n ouns “I ” and “you” abound. T he generosity o f the church at Philippi exceeded that o f all the churches Paul founded or was associated with (Phil 4:15), and this generosity reflected the deep affection the Philippians had for Paul. Obviously the feeling was m utual. Thus, it is surprising to discover in a section reserved for greetings that n o t one person is greeted by nam e (contrast Rom 16). (Some scholars do u b t w hether Paul knew all the nam es o f those sending greetings and receiving them in Rom 16 since he had n o t visited Rome. M anson, BJRL 31 [1948] 224-40, has argued th at Rom 16 is p art o f a letter to Ephesus. See the com m entaries on Rom ans and Gamble, Textual History, who supports the Rom an provenance of chap. 16.) O ne could wish it h ad been otherwise, i.e., that instead o f a com prehensive general greeting some o f the Christians m ight have been singled o u t and identified by what they had done. If this had happened, those living at a distance from Philippi in space and time, unfam iliar with the believers there, would have had a b etter chance of understanding the people and events associated with this church. P aul’s reason for greeting no one in particular no d o u b t stem m ed from his wish th at all his readers m ight feel that they were each one equally d ear to him (Scott), an inclusiveness evident especially in Phil 1:3, 7, 8 , which em phasize the word “all.”

280

Philippians 4:21-23

Comment 21 άσπάσασθβ πάντα ά γιον ev Χριστώ Ίησου, “give my greetings to every one o f the saints in Christ Jesus.” This letter o f Paul was addressed “to all G od’s people [ayioig, lit. saints] . . . with the overseers who serve” (Phil 1:1). It is this address th at makes the final greeting striking. For now Paul is n o t writing directions to the Philippian church as a whole, as he did at the beginning, b u t to certain individuals within the church, who in tu rn are to pass along his greetings to πάντα άγιον, “every one of the saints,” belonging to th at church. T he verb άσπάσασθβ, “give my greetings to ,” is second person plural: “you all give my greetings to [th e m ].” But who are these individuals to whom Paul gives these final instructions? It is im possible to give a definitive answer to this question, and “a trifle such as this makes us realize how little we know about the organization in these early ch u rch es” (Beare, 157; cf. Bockm uehl, 268). But we can probably say m ore th an th at “the best guess is th at the Philippians are to greet one another, and so cem ent cordial relations as they are b ro u g h t together by P aul’s le tte r” (M artin [1976], 169). Paul n o t only h ad the linguistic tools available to him to say “greet one a n o th e r,” if th at is what he in ten d ed to say, b u t on m ore than one occasion he actually used the salutation άσπάσασθβ άλλήλους, “greet one another’ (1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12). It is likely, then, that Paul calls u p o n the leaders, the overseers o f the church, to pass along his greetings to the Christian fellowship. In spite o f the w ording o f the opening address (Phil 1:1), this letter would n o t have been h an d ed over by E paphroditus to the church as a whole; he would have given it to the responsible officials of the church, who would th en have read it aloud to the assem bled congregation. These officials were to give P aul’s greetings to πάντα άγιον, “every one of the saints.” His w ording here, although surprising, is nonetheless precise. T he phrase π άντα άγιον, lit. “every saint,” is singular, and its uniqueness m ust n o t be lost by translating it as “all the saints” ( n i v , n r s v ; cf. g n b ) . For with the singular Paul conveys his love and affection to each individual Christian alike (A lford). N one is to be treated differently from any other. In a church troubled by disunity the apostle will n o t take sides; every believer is, as it were, the sole object o f his greeting. Perhaps then, as has been suggested, this is why Paul, contrary to his usual custom , m entions no one by nam e in these final greetings (Collange). T he initial greeting concludes with the fam iliar Pauline phrase έν Χριστώ Ίησου, “in Christ Jesus” (for its m eaning see the Comment on Phil 1:1; 2:5). It is variously taken with the verb άσπάσασθβ (“give my greetings in [the fellowship of] Christ Jesus to . . . ”; cf. n e b , and see Alford, Jones, Lightfoot, Plum m er, Dibelius) o r the n o u n phrase πάντα ά γιον (“every one o f the saints who are in C hristjesus”; cf. r s v , and see M oule, H endriksen, M artin [1976]). A lthough the m atter may be reg arded as o f no great im portance (Vincent), for the sake of precision the following observations may be made: (1) T he phrase “in C hristjesus” is taken with “saints” in Phil 1:1. (2) Since the phrase stands in closest proxim ity to “every one o f the saints” h ere and to be a “saint” in the Pauline sense of the word m eans to be one o f G od’s special people by virtue o f being u nited to Christ, being “in union with C hrist,” it is b etter to link the phrase “in C hrist” with the phrase “every one o f the saints” than with the verb “give greetings to .” άσπά£ονται υμάς‫־‬οί συν έμοι άδβλφοί, “the brothers [and sisters] who are with

Comment

281

me here send you their greetings.” Paul is n o t alone in sending greetings to the Philippians; he belongs to a com m unity of faith that joins him in saluting the congregation at Philippi. How large this group was o r the n ature o f its com posi‫־‬ tion is inform ation that is n o t provided and cannot be recovered. Certainly the group m ust be restricted to such people as Tim othy (Phil 2:19) and perhaps Luke (cf. Acts 20:1-6; 27:1), close personal associates o f the apostle, as distinguished from the Christians who lived in the place o f his captivity and were n o t so intim ately identified with the apostle and his work. These latter will be referred to in the next verse (cf. also Phil 1:15-17; 2:20-21). 22 άσπά£ονται υμάς π ά ν τε ς οί ά γιο ι, μάλιστα δε οί εκ τή ς Καίσαρος οικία ς, “as do all the saints, especially those of the im perial household.” Greetings com e to Philippi from Paul, from his close com panions, and now from π ά ν τε ς οί ά γιο ι, “all the saints,” in the place of his writing. But th ere is a group h ere th at is singled o u t as sending its special greetings: οί εκ τή ς Καίσαρος οικίας, “those of the im perial household. ”T he expression οικία Καίσαρος, “household of Caesar,” is used in the literature to refer both to the highest officials in the Rom an governm ent an d to the lowest servants in the em p ero r’s employ (Lightfoot, especially the d etached note “C aesar’s H ousehold,” 171-78). Since there is no evidence th at m em bers o f the royal family or any high public officials attached to the praetorium had converted to Christianity as early as this letter o f Paul (cf. Phil 1:13), it is likely th at Paul is speaking now o f R om an soldiers stationed in the barracks o r slaves or freedm en handling the dom estic affairs o f the em peror or proconsul, o r both. T he reason these are singled out may be to show that the gospel was beginning to penetrate even these loftier circles, or to indicate that th ere was a link “between the Christian m em bers o f the im perial staff on governm ent service at the place of P aul’s im prisonm ent an d the citizens of Philippi, which was a R om an colony” (M artin [1976], 170; Michaelis, Scott; see Pilhofer, Philippi, an d Introduction, Place and Date o f Wr ting, for the bearing of this phrase on the lette r’s place of o rig in ). 23 ή χά ρ ις του κυρίου Ίησοϋ Χριστοί) μετά του πνεύμ ατος υμών, “may the grace o f the L ord Jesus Christ be with you each o n e .” Paul begins his letter with χά ρ ις, “grace” (Phil 1:2); he now concludes it with th at same rich word. With few exceptions (Col 1:2; 1 Thess 1:1), w henever Paul begins his letters, he speaks of “the grace o f God o u r F ather and of the Lord Jesus C hrist.” With equally few exceptions (Eph 6:23; 1 Tim 6:21; 2 Tim 4:22; T it 3:15 within the Pauline corpus), in the benediction at the close of these same letters Paul only speaks of the grace o f the Lord Jesus Christ. This fact leads one to conclude th at for Paul Christ has the rig h t to perform the divine role with full authority. H e is the source of grace, the fo u n tain h ead of free beneficent saving love (χάρις, “grace”). He is the one who bestows this grace freely on his church. H e is the one through whom undeserving h u m ankind comes to know the mercy, love, and favor of God. He is the L ord whom the church confesses (cf. Comment on Phil 2:11). P aul’s final benediction (see C ham pion, Benedictions, and m ore generally O ’Brien, DPL, 68-71), then, is th at this grace o f Jesus C hrist as Lord may be μετά του π νεύμ ατος υμών, lit. “with your spirit.” This expression sounds strange to m o d ern ears. Thus, several things should be noted: (1) T he fact that πνεύμ ατος, “spirit,” is singular and υμών, “your,” is plural does n o t necessarily lead to the conclusion th at Paul is stressing “the unity of the body o f believers in which one

282

Philippians 4:21-23

spirit is to be fo u n d ” (M artin [1976], 171). T he distributive singular—as in πεπωρωμενην ε χ ε τε την καρδίαν υμών, “you [plural] have a h ard en ed h e a rt” (M ark 8:17), m eaning, “each o f you has a h ard en ed h e a rt”—is a com m on enough p h en o m en o n in both classical and nt G reek (Smyth, Greek Grammar; 269 §998; BDF §140). H ence the singular here has no significant m eaning beyond the fact th at P aul’s prayer is for C hrist’s grace to rest and abide u p o n the spirit o f each one o f his readers (cf. Bockm uehl, 271). (2) T he word πνεύμα, “spirit,” is frequently used in the nt o f the whole person, b u t especially o f the m ental an d spiritual aspects belonging to personality (cf. E. Schweizer, T D N T 6:435). (3) T he phrase μετά του π νεύμ ατος υμών, “with your spirit, ”is n o t unique to Philippians (against B eare); it appears also in Gal 6:18; Phlm 25 (cf. 2 Tim 4:22). It stands in the same position in these benedictions as— and replaces the m ore usual— μεθ’ υμών, “with you.” (4) H ence in all likelihood Paul m eans to say noth in g m ore p ro fo u n d by the expression “with your spirit” than to say “with you.” It should thus be translated accordingly. αμήν, “A m en.” If this is p art o f the original, and the evidence for it is strong (see Note b), it reflects eith er P aul’s own response to the benediction, authenticating what has ju st been p ro n o u n ced (“A m en!” “It is tru e!”; cf. Rom 16:22; 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; 2 Thess 3:17; see Collange; Wu, DPL, 557-60), or the affirmative response o f the congregation to the divine prom ise on which the hoped-for blessing rests (“A m en!” “Yes, let it be so!”; cf. Rev 1:7; 1 Cor 14:16; 2 C or 1:20; see H. Schlier, TDNT 1:336-38). Explanation In a style characteristic o f all his letters Paul brings this one addressed to the Philippians to a close with a greeting and benediction. H e may be asking the leaders o f the church to convey his personal greetings to each and every Christian at Philippi, irrespective o f who they may be o r w hat they may have done or failed to do. So im p o rtan t is it th at no n e be excluded from this greeting th at Paul refuses to nam e anyone, lest he offend any by an accidental om ission o f th eir nam es. W hat is m ore, his close associates (such as Tim othy and perhaps Luke), those persons intim ately involved with him in his apostolic work, send th eir greetings along with his. T h ere is a b o n d o f affection there th at strengthens the good wishes that com e from Paul. Paul wants the Philippians to know th at n o t only he and his fellow workers care for them and are interested in th eir welfare, b u t every C hristian in the local ch urch has the same attitude as well. They, too, w ant th eir greetings passed along. But within this church there is a special group, one especially interested in the Christians at Philippi. These may have been soldiers, slaves, or freedm en who, because they h ad been involved in the service o f the em p ero r o r proconsul in provincial m atters for an extended period o f time, had com e to know m any o f the believers in the Rom an city o f Philippi. These wish to be rem em b ered to them in a special way. This seemingly casual rem ark shows th at the gospel was beginning to m ake its way into the im perial h ousehold o r civil service. (And the cordiality o f the greeting may suggest th at the distance betw een Philippi and the place o f the apostle’s im prisonm ent was n o t too great.) T he letter ends with a benedictory prayer, calling down u p o n the church at

Explanation

283

Philippi the gracious, saving activity o f God th at comes to them solely through Jesus Christ, whom they confess as Lord. This them e has pervaded the letter, whose “ruling m o tif’ may well be “living u n d e r C hrist’s lordship” (so Phil 2:6-11). With the concluding “A m en” Paul affirms the tru th o f what he has said, and the congregation responds with its “yes” to the prom ises o f God heard in the benediction.

285

Index of M odern A uthors A b b o tt, T . K. 84 A b r a h a m s o n , V. A. x x xiv A c h t e m e i e r , P. J . xxvi A d k in s , L. 1 , 5 A d k in s , R. A. 1 , 5 A h e r n , B. M . 178 A la n d , B. lx iii A la n d , K. lx iii A les, D. d ’ 92 A le x a n d e r , L. A. lxiv, lx ix , lx x i, 36 A lfo rd , H . xxiv, 32, 173, 2 4 3 , 26 6 , 28 0 A lig h ie ri, D a n te lvii A lk ie r, S. lxiv, lxvii, lxviii, 158 A lta n e r , B. x x x ii A n tin , P. 36, 57 A r n d t, W . F. x lii, 19, 22, 27, 30, •31, 32, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 58, 60 , 71, 75, 76, 83, 87, 114, 115, 124, 125, 127, 140, 145, 146, 148, 154, 156, 162, 176, 183, 188, 190, 197, 198, 20 6 , 207, 21 2 , 213, 21 8 , 22 2 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 9 , 2 41, 2 4 2 , 2 4 9 , 2 5 0 , 2 5 1 , 2 6 2 , 26 3 , 2 6 4 , 26 5 , 2 6 8 , 27 0 , 27 2 , 2 7 4 A r n o ld , C. E. 9 2 , 128 A r n o ld , M . 23 6 , 2 4 4 A rv e d s o n , T . 92 A rz t, P. 15 A s tin g , A. 1 , 7 A tk in s o n , B. F. C . 6 5 , 75 A u n e , D. E. xxvi, lx x i, 36, 40 B a a r d a , T . 9 2 , 99 B a d h a m , F. F. 92 B a e c k , L. 178 B a h r, C . J . x x x , x x x ii, 1, 4, 36, 25 6 , 258 B a k irtz is, C. xxvi, x x x , xx x ii, xxxiv, xxxv, x x x ix , xli, 158, 161 B a k k e n , N . K. 92 B a rc la y , J . M . G . 2 2 7 , 231 B a rc la y , W . xxiv, 79, 82, 9 2 B a r k e r, G . W. xxvi B a r n e tt, P . 1 B a rn ik o l, E. xxviii, x x ix , 92 B a r re tt, C. K. xxvi, liv, lx, 8, 18, 65, 76, 135, 146, 178, 198, 223 B a r th , K. xxiv, 16, 20, 24, 29, 45, 48, 51, 5 4 ,5 9 ,6 1 , 6 8 ,8 3 , 8 6 ,8 7 , 8 8 ,1 1 5 , 1 2 0 , 122, 144, 148, 164, 167, 173, 174, 177, 181, 2 0 2 , 2 2 4 , 2 2 6 , 2 3 9 , 2 4 1 , 2 4 3 , 24 6 , 2 4 6 B a r th , M . 84 B a r tle tt, V. 36 B a rts c h , H .-W . 92 B asivi, C . lxiv, lxvii B a ssle r, J . M. 2 5 6 B a u c k h a m , R. J . lx, lx iii, 9 2 , 131 B a u e r, K. A. 92 B a u e r , W . x lii, 19, 22, 2 7 , 30, 31, 32, 44, 45 , 46, 47, 50 , 58, 6 0 , 71, 75, 76, 83, 8 7 ,1 1 4 ,1 1 5 , 1 2 4 ,1 2 5 , 1 2 7 ,1 4 0 , 1 4 5 , 146, 148, 154, 156, 162, 176, 183, 188, 190, 197, 198, 2 0 6 , 20 7 , 212, 2 1 3 , 2 1 8 , 2 2 2 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 9 , 2 4 1 , 24 2 , 24 9 , 2 5 0 , 2 5 1 , 2 6 2 , 2 6 3 , 26 4 , 265, 268, 270, 272, 274 B a u e r n f e i n d , O . 163 B a u g h e r , L. 92 B a u m b a c h , G . 1, lii

B a u m e rt, N . 2 5 6 , 262 B a u r, F. C . xxviii, x x ix , 1 B e a r d s le e , W . A. 2 0 2 , 20 9 B e a r e , F. W . xxiv, x x x i, x x x ii, xxx v ii, lii, liii, 1, 6, 10, 30, 33, 49, 64, 67, 69, 71, 76, 85, 89, 100, 103, 104, 1 06, 114, 119, 123, 125, 126, 127, 128, 143, 148, 152, 154, 155, 166, 1 68, 174, 176, 177, 185, 186, 191, 195, 197, 200, 206, 2 0 7 , 2 1 0 , 2 1 2 , 2 1 3 , 22 1 , 224, 232, 2 4 4 , 24 5 , 24 9 , 2 5 0 , 262, 266, 26 7 , 2 6 9 , 28 0 , 282 B e a sle y -M u rra y , G . R. xxiv, 1, 2 0 6 , 2 0 8 B e c k e r, J . 2 2 7 ,2 2 9 B e e t, J . A. 9 2 , 1 58, 2 3 6 , 2 5 6 , 26 3 B e h m ,J . xxvi, 110, 111, 114, 2 2 4 , 2 4 7 B e n g e l, J . A. xxiv, lvii, 29, 32, 129, 149 B e n o it, P. xxiv, 27, 44, 92 , 1 0 0 ,1 1 3 ,1 8 1 B e r g e r, K. 1 B e r tr a m , G . 24, 26, 36 , 51 , 86 , 125, 163 B est, E. xxviii, x x ix , 1, 2 5 6 , 25 9 B e tz , H . D . lviii, 17, 5 5 , 152, 176 , 178, 182, 195, 215, 21 7 , 2 2 0 , 221 B e u t l e r .J . 42 B e y e r, H . W . 10 B i e te n h a r d , H . 126 B ig a re , C . 36, 54 , 2 3 6 , 2 5 4 B iggs, C. R. D. xxiv B ille rb e c k , P. liii, 2 8 , 1 2 5 ,1 4 6 ,1 7 4 ,1 8 4 , 185, 188, 2 5 3 , 2 7 0 B in d e r, H . 15, 21, 65, 72, 9 2 , 119, 178, 195 B in d le y , J . H . 92 B itz e r, L. lxiv, lxv B j e rk e lu n d , C. J . 79, 82, 135, 148 B lack , D. A. 36, 47 , 79, 8 1 , 2 3 6 , 2 4 7 , 2 5 6 , 26 7 B lack , M . lx iii, 9 2 , 112 B la n c , R. 92 B lass, F. 2 2 , 2 4 ,2 5 , 2 9 , 4 4 ,4 6 , 48, 5 1 ,5 7 , 63, 70, 73, 80 , 8 2 , 85, 107, 110, 114, 118, 124, 129, 143, 145, 149, 156, 161, 174, 184, 190, 192, 196, 20 0 , 20 6 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 21 3 , 21 8 , 2 3 2 , 239, 2 4 8 , 26 2 , 26 3 , 2 7 1 , 2 7 3 , 282 B le v in s, J . L. xxvi, xxxvii B lo o m q u is t, L. G . xxvi, lxiv, lxvii, lxviii, 36, 3 9 ,4 0 ,4 1 ,6 5 ,6 6 , 6 7 ,9 2 , 1 1 9 ,1 5 9 , 169 B o c k m u e h l, M. xxiv, xxvi, x x x ii, xxxv, xxxvi, xxxvii, x x x v iii, xli, lxv, lviii, lx iii, lx ix , 1 7 ,1 9 ,2 7 , 3 3 ,4 1 , 4 3 ,4 5 , 4 6 , 49, 5 0 , 53, 57, 68, 71, 78, 80, 9 1 , 92 , 106, 108, 113, 140, 143, 152, 161, 173, 175, 176, 186, 188, 191, 192, 196, 2 0 0 , 2 0 1 , 20 3 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 0 , 212, 2 19, 2 2 4 , 2 2 7 , 2 3 1 , 2 3 3 , 2 40, 241, 242, 251, 252, 254, 259, 2 6 9 , 2 7 8 , 2 8 0 , 282 B o ld , W . 92 B o m a n , T . 92 B o n h o e f f e r , D. lvii, 22 7 B o n h o f f e r , A. xxiv, 31, 4 3 , 2 5 6 , 2 6 4 B o n n a r d , P. xxiv, x liii, 2 6 ,3 6 ,4 6 ,5 7 ,6 2 , 6 8 ,7 0 ,8 2 ,8 9 ,1 0 0 ,1 0 3 ,1 0 4 ,1 1 3 ,1 2 7 , 139, 140, 148, 154, 171, 181, 190, 20 6 , 2 3 9 , 24 5 , 24 7 , 2 6 2 , 2 7 1 , 27 2 B o r m a n n , L. xxvi, xx x , xx x i, x x x ii, xxxiv,

xxxv, xx x v i, xx x v ii, 6 5 , 72, 2 5 6 B o r n h a u s e r , K. 9 2 , 22 7 , 233 B o r n k a m m , G. xxvi, x x x , x x x i, x x x iii, liv, lx B o ttg e r , P. C . 22 7 B o u s s e t, W. 1 , 7 , 26 7 B o u ttie r , M . 1 , 8 B o u y e r, L. 92 B o w e n , C . R. x x x ix , xliii B o y e r, C. 92 B r a u c h , Μ. T . 1 7 8 ,1 9 5 B re w e r, R. R. 65, 69 B rig g s, S. 9 2 ,1 1 9 B ro m ile y , G. W . 195 B r o o k e , D . 1 ,2 7 8 B ro w n , C. 9 1 , 9 2 ,1 1 1 , 1 3 1 B ro w n , R. E. xxvi, xli, x lix , 44 B ro w n , S. 92 B ru c e , F. F. xxiv, x x x , xx x ii, xxxiv, xxxvi, x x x ix , x li, xlvii, 7 2 ,7 9 ,8 4 ,8 6 ,9 2 ,1 0 6 , 184, 24 4 , 245, 2 5 1 , 2 6 3 , 26 7 B r u c k e r, R. lx, lx ii, lxiv, lxvii, 9 1 , 9 2 , 102, 133 B r u n , L. 1 B r u p p a c h e r , H . 92 B u c h a n a n , B. 92 , 160 B u c h a n a n , C . O . x x x , x x x ix , xli, 159, 256, 259 B u c h s e l, F. 1 , 8 , 3 2 , 8 7 B u l tm a n n , R. xxvi, lx, lxxvi, 15, 17, 51, 5 2 , 55, 63, 8 5 ,9 2 ,1 1 2 , 1 3 5 ,1 4 4 , 1 7 8 , 182, 195, 2 0 2 , 20 6 , 20 8 , 209, 213 B u r n , J . H . 142 B y rn e , B. 9 2 ,1 1 0 C a d b u r y , H . J . x xvii, xxxv, xlvi C a d o u x , C. J . x x x ix C a ird , G . B. xxiv, 5 ,2 4 ,2 7 , 28 , 33, 54, 59, 61, 67, 83, 111, 119, 122, 127, 139, 143, 146, 147, 148, 154, 155, 156, 163, 173, 174, 186, 194, 195, 198, 2 0 0 , 2 0 7 , 21 0 , 231, 23 4 , 243, 244, 2 4 5 , 2 46, 262 C a lla h a n , A. D. 9 5 ,1 0 2 C a lv in , J. xxiv, 117, 177 C a m p b e ll, J . Y. 1 5 , 2 2 ,7 9 C a m p b e ll, R. A. 1 C am p en h au sen , H. von 1, 10 C a p p e r , B. 36, 43, 2 5 6 , 2 6 2 C a r m i g n a c ,J . 92 C a r s o n , D. A. xxvi, xli C a s te lli, E. A. 92, 107 C e r fa u x , L. lx, 92, 101, 106, 114, 115, 124 C h a m b e r l in , J . S. F. 93 C h a m b e rs , T . W . 2 3 6 C h a m p io n , L. G. 2 7 8 , 281 C h a p a , J . lxiv, lxvii C h e v a llie r, M .-A. 1, 10 C h o lm o n d e le y , F. G. 93 C h r i s t o u , P . 1 5 1 ,1 5 4 C h r y s a n ta k i, C. K. xxxviii C o l la n g e , J .-F . xxiv, x x x , x x x i, x x x ii, xx x v ii, x lii, x liii, xlviii, 4 , 5 ,1 0 , 1 1 ,1 7 , 22, 2 3 , 26, 30, 32 , 33, 34, 43, 44 , 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 57 , 61, 62, 68 , 70, 7 1 , 8 2 ,8 5 , 8 6 , 8 9 ,1 0 0 ,1 1 1 , 112, 114, 120, 121, 122, 124, 125, 130, 140,

286

Index

of

Modern A uthors

4 1 ,1 4 2 ,1 4 3 , 1 4 5 ,1 4 9 , 1 5 2 ,1 5 4 , 1 5 5 , 163, 164, 165, 166, 173, 174, 176, 178, 184, 185, 188, 190, 1 93, 196, 198, 2 0 0 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 9 , 2 1 0 , 2 2 1 , 2 3 2 , 239, 240, 242, 245, 247, 264, 268, 2 6 9 ,2 7 0 ,2 7 1 ,2 7 3 ,2 7 3 ,2 7 9 ,2 8 0 ,2 8 2 C o lla r t, P. xxxiv, x x x v ii, 2 5 6 , 2 6 9 C o lp e , C . 9 3 ,1 1 2 C o n t r i, A. 9 3 , 124 C o n z e l m a n n , H . xx x iv , xxxv, xxxvi, lx, 1, 8, 12, 2 1 , 146, 178, 195, 2 2 3 , 25 3 C o o k , D . x x x , 135, 149 C o p p e n s ,J . 9 3 , 104 C o p p i e te r s , H . x x x ix C o rw e n , V. 9 C o u s a r , C. B. xxiv, 3 6 ,3 9 , 40, 4 2 ,4 7 , 60, 61, 70, 9 3 , 109, 122, 123, 135 C o x , S. 2 2 7 C r a d d o c k , F. B. xxiv, 64, 192 C r a n f i e ld , C . E. B. 86, 195 C ro y , C . 4 0 C u l lm a n n , O . xxvi, lx, 36, 59, 61, 9 3 , 111, 1 12, 125, 2 0 2 , 2 0 9 , 2 3 6 , 252 C u l p e p p e r , R. A. x x x , x x x iii, 151, 152, 159

D id ie r , G . 135, 147 D in k ie r , E. 2 3 6 , 2 4 6 D ix , G . 1 D o c k x , S. x x x ix , xlv D o d d , B. J . 9 1 , 9 3 , 9 6 , 104, 106, 118, 128, 170 D o d d , C. H . x x x ix , x li, 36, 61 , 9 3 , 2 5 6 , 259 D o e r n e , M . 15 D o ty , W . G . xxvi, 1, 3, 36, 4 0 , 151, 152, 278 D o u g h ty , D. J , li, liii D riv e r, G . R. 1 D ro g e , A .J . 3 6 , 5 5 , 5 6 D r u m m o n d , R. J . 2 5 6 D u n c a n , G . S. x x x ix , x liii, xliv D u n g a n , D . L. 2 3 6 , 24 5 D u n n J . D. G . xxvi, lx, 8 ,3 6 ,5 1 , 9 3 ,1 0 4 , 105, 108, 110, 111, 112, 113, 135, 140, 141, 170, 174, 176, 178, 187, 190, 195 D u p o n t ,J . 3 6 , 6 0 ,9 3 ,1 7 8 ,1 8 6 ,1 9 1 ,2 0 3 , 2 0 7 , 20 8 D u p o n t- S o m m e r, A. xxvi, 88 D y e r, J . A. 2 0 3 ,2 0 6

D a c q u i n o , P. x x x ix , 9 3 , 106, 124 D a h l, N . A. 1 5 9 ,1 6 0 ,1 7 8 , 1 8 9 D ailly, T . F. 36 D a lto n , W .J . x x x , x x x iii, 22 7 , 22 9 D a n a , Η . E. xxvi, 242 D a n b y , H . xxvi, 25 3 D a n k e r , F. W . x lii, 19, 22, 27, 30, 3 1 ,3 2 , 44, 45, 4 6 , 4 7 , 50, 5 8 , 60, 71 , 75, 76, 83, 8 7 , 114, 115, 124, 125, 127, 140, 145, 146, 148, 154, 156, 162, 176, 183, 188, 190, 197, 198, 20 6 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 2 1 3 , 2 1 8 , 2 2 2 , 2 3 1 , 23 9 , 2 4 1 , 2 4 2 , 2 4 9 , 2 5 0 , 2 5 1 , 2 6 2 , 26 3 , 2 64, 265, 268, 270, 272, 274 D a u b e , D . 135, 137, 2 0 3 , 2 1 3 D av ies, J . L. 15 D av ies, W . D. xxvi, lx, 3 6 ,5 9 ,6 5 ,6 9 ,1 7 0 , 177, 178, 1 9 1 ,2 3 6 , 2 4 5 , 252 D aw e, D . G. 9 3 , 121 D e a n e , S. A. 9 3 D e B o e r, W . P. xxiv, 9 3 , 106, 2 1 5 , 21 7 , 219 D e b r u n n e r , A. 2 2 ,2 4 , 25, 2 9 ,4 4 , 46, 48, 5 1 ,5 7 ,6 3 , 7 0 ,7 3 ,8 0 , 8 2 ,8 5 , 1 0 7 ,1 1 0 , 114, 118, 124, 129, 143, 145, 149, 156, 161, 174, 184, 190, 192, 196, 2 0 0 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 2 1 3 , 21 8 , 23 2 , 2 3 9 , 2 4 8 , 2 6 2 , 2 6 3 , 27 1 , 2 7 3 , 28 2 D e i c h g r a b e r , R. 9 3 , 119, 133 D e is s m a n n , A. xxvi, x x x ix , x lii, xliii, xliv, xlviii, x lix , lx x i, 1, 3, 7, 8, 15, 18, 28, 36, 41 , 135, 147, 159, 161, 162, 167, 178, 187, 2 3 6 , 2 4 0 , 2 5 6 , 2 6 4 , 2 7 2 D e L a c e y , D . R . lx, lx iii, 93 D e llin g , G . xxvi, x x x , x x x ii, 51, 9 3 , 125, 242 D e n is , A. M . 1 3 5 ,1 4 9 D e r r e t t, J . D . M . 135, 148, 162 D e Silva, D . A. 36, 63, 135, 147 D e V o g e l, C .J . 3 6 , 6 0 D e V r i e s , C . E. 1, liii, 170, 175 D ew ailly, L. M . 15 D ib e liu s , M . xxiv, xxvi, x x x iii, xl, lvii, lxvii, lx v iii, 26 , 45 , 46 , 5 5 , 5 7 , 62, 70, 85 , 9 3 , 100, 103, 112, 115, 125, 170, 171, 173, 174, 185, 190, 191, 197, 2 0 0 , 2 3 0 , 2 3 1 , 2 4 5 , 25 0 , 2 5 9 , 2 6 2 , 2 6 9 ,2 8 0 D ic k e n s , A. G . liii

E a s to n , B. S. 23 6 , 2 5 0 E c k m a n , B. 9 3 , 100 E d g a r , C. C . xxvi, 1 , 3 ,1 2 , 1 5 ,1 7 , 37, 41 , 174, 2 7 8 E d w a rd s , J . R. 91 E h r h a r d t , A. 9 3 ,1 1 5 E ic h h o lz , G. 15, 135, 142 E llic o tt, C .J . xxiv, 173, 242 E llis, E. E. xxvi, lx, lxi, 8, 36, 59, 6 0 ,1 5 9 , 162, 164, 2 3 6 , 2 4 3 E n g b e r g - P e d e r s e n , T . 15, 31, 2 3 6 , 2 5 0 E n g e r s , M . 2 2 7 , 231 E n s lin , M . S. xxvi, xxviii, xxviii, 9 3 , 106 E r n e s ti, H . 9 3 E r n s t, J . xxiv, 1 E scan d e, A. 1 ,6 E v an s, C . A. 110 E v a n s o n , E. xxviii, x x ix E w ald , P. xxiv, 19, 143, 2 0 6 , 2 2 4 E x le r, F. X . J . 36 E zell, D. 2 3 6 , 2 5 6 F a irw e a th e r, E. R. 93 F e e , G . D . xxiv, xxxv, x li, lix, lx ix , Ixxvi, 26 , 27, 28, 29, 30, 40, 43, 50, 51, 53, 62 , 6 5 , 67, 70, 71, 72, 74, 81, 83, 84, 9 1 , 9 3 , 100, 101, 103, 106, 137, 139, 140, 143, 174, 184, 190, 196, 197, 2 0 0 , 2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 2 1 4 , 2 4 2 , 2 4 3 , 25 2 , 260, 262, 266, 268, 269, 274 F e in e , P. xxvi, x x x i, x x x v iii, xl, x liii, lx, 220, 224 F e r g u s o n , J . xl, x liii, 93 F e r n a n d e z , E. L. 203 F e r r a r , W .J . 178 F e u ille t, A. xxvii, 36 F ils e n , F. V. 27 9 F in d la y , G . G . 25 6 , 2 6 4 F in la y s o n , S. K. 135, 146 F in le y , Μ . B. 9 3 F itz g e r a ld , J . T . 2 3 6 ,2 5 0 F itz m y e r.J . A. xxiv, x x x i, lx, lxi, 1 ,3 , 12, 34, 9 3 , 111, 123, 177, 178, 180, 2 0 3 , 207 F la n a g a n , N . 2 2 7 , 2 2 9 F o a k e s -J a c k s o n , F. J . x x xiv F o e r s te r, W . 13, 4 9 , 74, 9 3 , 126, 128, 130, 2 3 2 , 2 4 6 F o r d , H . W . 15, 22, 79

F o r e s te ll, J . T . 1 7 9 ,1 9 1 ,2 0 3 F o rs y th , P. T . 117 F oss, O . 93 F ow l, S. E. x ii, lxiv, lxviii, 6 5 , 7 4 ,9 3 ,1 0 6 , 109, 2 5 6 , 2 7 7 F r id r i c h s e n , A. 6 5 , 76, 9 3 , 9 9 , 151, 170, 2 0 3 , 20 8 , 2 5 6 , 26 8 F r ie d r ic h , G. xxiv, li, lii, liii, 23, 2 05, 239, 264 F u c h s , E. 135 F u c h s , L. 22 7 , 231 F u lle r , R. H . xxvi, liv, 9 3 , 119 F u n k , R. W . 2 2 ,2 4 , 25, 29, 3 6 ,4 0 , 4 4 ,4 6 , 48, 51, 57 , 63, 70, 73, 80 , 82, 85, 107, 110, 114, 118, 124, 129, 135, 141, 143, 145, 149, 156, 161, 174, 184, 190, 192, 196, 2 0 0 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 7 , 212, 213, 218, 2 3 2 , 2 3 9 , 24 8 , 2 6 2 , 2 6 3 , 271, 273, 282 F u r n e s s , J . M. 9 4 , 1 0 3 , 1 1 6 , 1 1 7 F u r n is h , V. x x x , x x x iii, 9 3 , 1 0 6 ,1 7 0 ,1 7 3 G a id e , G . 15 G a m b e r, K. 9 4 , 100 G a m b le , H . Y‫ ״‬J r . 275, 2 7 8 , 27 9 G a p p e r t, G . 36 G a r c ia M a rtin e z , F. 18 G a r la n d , D. E. x x x , x x x iii, lv, lviii, lxiv, lx ix , 1 5 ,1 8 , 30, 3 6 ,1 7 9 ,1 8 2 , 2 2 7 , 23 0 G a r tn e r , B. 1 7 9 ,1 9 1 G e n th s , D . 36, 63 G e o f f rio n , T . C . 65, 70, 135, 147, 2 3 6 G e o rg e , A. R. 1 5 ,2 2 ,7 9 ,8 4 G e o r g i, D. li, lii, 9 4 , 103, 104, 112, 179, 184 G e w ie s s ,J . 9 4 G ib b s , J . G. 9 4 G if fo r d , E. H . 9 4 G ilm a n , F. M . 2 3 6 , 241 G ilse , J . v a n 9 4 G i n g r ic h , F. W. x lii, 19, 22, 27, 30, 31, 32, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 5 8 , 60, 71, 75, 76, 83, 87, 114, 115, 124, 125, 127, 140, 145, 146, 148, 154, 156, 162, 176, 183, 188, 190, 197, 198, 206, 207, 212, 213, 218, 222, 231, 239, 2 4 1 , 24 2 , 24 9 , 2 5 0 , 25 1 , 2 6 2 , 263, 2 6 4 , 2 6 5 , 26 8 , 2 7 0 , 2 7 2 , 27 4 G la s so n , T . F. 9 4 ,1 1 2 G lassw ell, Μ. E. 1 7 0 ,1 7 5 G lo e r, W . H . 9 4 , 102 G lo m b itz a , O . 79, 135, 141, 25 6 , 26 0 , 264, 2 6 8 , 2 6 9 G lo tz , G. 2 0 3 , 21 0 G n i l k a .J . xxiv, x x ix , x x x i, x x x ii, x liii, li, lv, lvii, lx iii, 4, 5, 6, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 30 , 31, 32, 34, 44, 45, 49, 51, 54, 56, 62, 67, 69, 70, 77, 87, 8 8 , 89, 103, 108, 112, 124, 127, 137, 140, 143, 148, 149, 152, 154, 159, 168, 185, 188, 189, 191, 197, 2 0 0 , 2 0 6 , 210, 211, 2 2 0 , 232, 2 4 5 , 246, 253, 259, 2 6 2 , 2 6 4 , 2 6 6 , 2 6 8 , 269, 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 ,2 7 2 G o e t z m a n n ,J . 8 6 G o g u e l, M. 1 7 9 ,1 8 7 G o o d s p e e d , E. J . 2 3 6 ,2 4 4 G o p p e l t, L. 218 G o r e , C . 117 G r a n t, R. M . xxvi, xlii G ra v e s, M . 94 G ra y s to n , K. xxiv, 3 0 ,1 2 1 ,1 7 0 ,1 7 2 ,1 7 4 , 219 G r e e n , J . B. xxvi G r e e n e , W . C. 65, 68

Index o f M odern Authors

G re e v e n , Η . 20 G r e lo t, P . 9 4 ,1 1 6 G r e m m e ls , C. 179 G riffith s , D. R. 94 G r im m , W . 9 4 G r o tiu s , H . 121 G r u d e m , W. A. 65 , 74 G r u n d m a n n , W . 59, 62, 88 , 187, 2 4 0 ,2 6 5 G u e lic h , R. A. 23 G u ig n e b e rt, C. 94 G u n d r y , R. H . 36, 5 3 , 9 4 ,1 0 4 ,1 1 9 , 233 G u n d r y V olf, J . M . 135, 141, 145, 179, 201 G u n t h e r , J . J . xl, xlvi, li, 170, 172, 20 5 , 22 0 G u t b r o d , W. 184, 185 G u t h r ie , D . xxvi, xlviii G u t t g e m a n n s , E. 6 5 , 77, 2 2 7 , 22 9

199,

22 7 , 148, 203,

H a e n c h e n , E. xxxiv, x xxvii, xx x v iii, 2 7 0 H a g n e r , D . A. 1 7 0 ,1 7 6 H a in , Q . 9 4 H a in z , J . 79 H a je k , M . 2 3 6 , 242 H a ll, D . R. 65, 71 H a m a n n , Η . P. 9 4 H a m m e r ic h , L. L. 9 4 , 115, 116 H a n s e n , G . W . xii H a n s s le r , B. 9 4 H a r d e r , G . 15 H a r n a c k , A. 2 2 0 , 222 H a r r is , J . R . 2 3 6 H a r r is , M .J . 3 6 , 5 9 , 9 4 , 1 1 0 H a r r is , R. 159 H a r r is o n , E. F. xxvi H a r r is o n , P . N . x x x , x x x i, x x x ii, x l, 159, 160 H a r tm a n , L. 9 4 , 127 H a rv e y , J . 9 4 H a u c k , F. 22 H a u p t , E. xxiv, 58, 8 0 , 2 0 6 , 23 9 , 245, 262 H a w th o r n , T . 36, 47 H a w th o r n e , G. F. 65, 74, 76, 94, 103, 114, 115, 116, 121, 135, 138, 151, 1 7 9 , 1 8 9 ,1 9 9 ,2 0 0 ,2 1 5 ,2 3 6 ,2 5 2 ,2 6 7 H ay s, R. B. 36, 4 9 ,9 4 ,1 0 6 ,1 7 9 ,1 9 0 ,1 9 5 H e i d la n d , H . W . 25 0 H e i n z e l m a n n , G . xxiv, 27 H e l m b o l d , A. K. 94 H e m e r , C . J . xx x v ii, 23 6 , 241 H e n d r ik s e n , W . xxiv, 24, 44 , 45, 54, 84, 106, 117, 155, 165, 196, 2 1 0 , 211, 271, 280 H e n g e l , M . lx, lxi, 9 4 , 123, 127, 130, 179, 185, 189 H e n l e , F. A. x x x iv H e n n e b u s h , P. 25 6 H e n r y , P . lx x , 9 4 , 117 H e r in g , J . 9 4 , 100, 111, 125 H ill, C. C . 179, 185 H ill, D . 7 9 ,1 7 9 ,1 8 7 H in s h a w , V. xl, x liii, xliv H o f f m a n , P. 37 H o fiu s , O . 9 5 ,1 1 3 H o lla d a y , C. R. li, 22 0 H o llo w a y , P . A. xxvi, lxiv, lxv, lxvi, lxviii, 15, 17, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 31 , 32, 37, 42, 56, 65 , 67 , 68 , 79, 81 , 8 2 , 9 1 , 170 H o lz m e is te r , U . 15, 9 5 , 2 3 6 H o o k e r , M. D . xxiv, xxviii, x x ix , lxiv, lxviii, 9 1 ,9 5 , 101, 102, 104, 111, 179, 196

H o o v e r , R. W . 9 5 ,1 1 5 H o p k in s , K. lx, 1, 5 H o r a n , B. W . 95 H o r n e , C. M . 95 H o r t , F . J . A . 1 ,7 2 H o u l d e n J . L. xxiv, 1 2 ,3 2 ,4 9 , 111, 135, 142, 161, 173, 182, 2 2 1 , 22 4 , 2 2 5 , 2 4 2 , 2 4 5 , 27 9 H o w a rd , G . 9 5 , 111 H o w a rd , W . F. xxvii H u b y , J . xxv H u d s o n , D . F. 95 H u n t , A. S. xxvi, 1, 3 , 1 2 , 1 5 , 1 7 , 37 , 41, 174, 278 H u n t e r , A. M . xxvi, 23 6 , 245 H u n z i n g e r , C. H . 95 H u r s t, L. D. 9 5 ,1 1 1 H u r t a d o , L. W . 9 5 , 106, 112, 119, 128, 131 H u t s o n , Η . H . xxvii, x x ix H u t t e r , U . 65 J a q u e t t e , J . L. 37, 5 6 J e r e m ia s , G . 1 J e r e m i a s ,J . xxvi, lx, lx ii, 1 ,9 , 52, 65, 76, 9 5 , 100, 101, 119, 179, 186 J e rv e ll, J . 9 5 , 129, 179, 198, 199 J e w e tt, R. x x x , li, lii, lv, 37, 47, 57, 63, 170, 174, 179, 198, 2 2 0 J o h n s o n , H . 9 5 , 120 J o h n s o n , L. x l, x li, xlvi J o h n s t o n , G . 37, 65 J o n e s , H . S. 9, 10, 5 9 , 68 , 72, 156, 166, 167, 2 1 7 , 2 3 4 , 251 J o n e s , M . xxv, x x x , 13, 24, 5 8 , 70 , 71, 117, 148, 154, 155, 173, 198, 2 1 2 , 220, 224, 263, 264, 272, 280 J o n g e , H . J . d e 1 5 9 ,1 6 7 J o u o n , P. 9 5 , 1 5 1 ,1 5 4 J u l i c h e r , A. 95 K a h le fe ld , H . xxv K a h le r, C . N . 95 K a m la h , E. 2 3 6 , 250 K a m p h a u s , F. 9 5 K a rris , R. J . xxviii, x x ix , 9 5 , 100, 109 K a s e m a n n , E. xl, xliv, lxviii, lx ix , 37, 47, 9 1 , 9 5 , 1 03, 104, 106, 109, 110, 112, 114, 118, 119, 1 20, 123, 128, 135, 137, 179, 195, 196 K a t te n b u s c h , F. 95 K e c k , L. E. xxv, 5, 117, 119, 120, 187, 196 K e m m le r, D . W . 79, 82 K e n n e d y , G . A. 15, 17, 37, 42, 51 K e n n e d y , H . A. A. xxv, xxvi, xxx iv , 1, 8, 114, 127, 2 5 6 , 27 0 K e r te lg e , K. 179, 195 K ilp a tric k , G . D . 170, 174 K im , S. xxvi, lx, lxi, lx ii, 9 5 , 128, 170, 176, 179, 187, 2 3 6 , 2 4 5 K itte l, G . 4 5 ,1 3 9 , 2 6 4 , 2 7 5 K ittr e d g e , C . B. 37, 4 0 , 9 5 , 107 K la u s n e r , J . lx K l e in k n e c h t, K. T . 65, 75, 9 5 , 124 K lijn , A. F. J . xxvi, x x x , li, lii, liii, liv, 20 3 , 2 0 6 , 21 1 , 22 0 , 2 2 5 , 2 2 7 , 231 K n a p p , D. T . 9 5 K n o x ,J . xl K n o x , W . L. x l ,x l i , lx, 9 5 , 115 K o e s te r, H . xxvi, x x x , x x x i, x x x ii, x x x iii, xxxiv, xxxv, x x x ix , x li, li, liii, liv, 29, 58 , 9 5 , 102, 1 58, 161, 170, 175, 20 3 , 2 0 5 , 2 0 6 , 2 1 1 , 22 0 , 2 2 1 , 22 5 K o p e rs k i, V. x x x , x x x , x x x i, lxiv, lxxviii, 1 7 9 , 1 8 7 ,1 9 0 , 1 9 1 ,1 9 2 ,1 9 3 ,1 9 5 ,1 9 8

287 K o s k e n n ie m i, H . xxvi, 1, 37, 40 K 5 s t e n b e r g e r , A. J . xxxiv, xxxviii K r a ftc h ic k , S .J . 9 5 ,1 3 5 K r a m e r , W . 15, 25, 151, 153 K r e itz e r, L. J . lx, lx iii, lxiv, lxvi, lxvii, lxviii, lx ix , 9 5 , 9 6 , 1 00, 2 2 7 , 2 3 3 K re n tz , E. M . 65, 67, 79, 87, 135, 147, 2 3 6 , 24 0 K r e tz m a n n , P. E. 9 6 K r in e tz k i, L. 9 6 , 124 K ru s e , C. G . 23 6 , 25 0 K u h l, E. 135 K u h n , Η . B. 179 K u h n , K. G . 7, 184 K u m m e l, W . G . xxvi, xxvii, 1, lx, 37, 61, 65, 74, 9 6 , 129, 179, 187 R u n g , H . 12 K u s c h e l, K -J. 9 6 L a b o u r t,J . 96 L a d d , G . E. xxvii, lx, 60 L a e u c h li, S. 37, 60 L a k e , K. xxvii, x x x , x x x ii, xxxv, xlvi, 87, 141 L a k e , S. x x x , x x x ii L a m b e r t, J . C. 2 5 6 L a m p e , G . W . H . 170, 176 L a n d m e s s e r, C. 9 6 L a n e , W . L. xxvi L a n g , F. 192 L a rs s o n , E. 9 6 , 106 L a s h , C .J . A. 9 6 ,1 0 2 L a u e re r, Η . 1 L e e , G. M . 37, 59 L e e , Μ . V. 37 L e e s , H . C. 159, 167, 168 L e iv e s ta d , R. 2 3 6 , 24 4 L e m a ir e , A. 2 ,1 1 L e m e r le , P. xxxiv, xxxv, 22 7 , 231 L e o n - D u f o u r, X . 179 L e v ie, J . 22 7 L e v y ,J . P . 2 5 6 L ew is, E. 9 6 L id d e ll, H . G . 9 ,1 0 ,5 9 , 68, 7 2 ,1 5 6 ,1 6 6 , 167, 2 1 7 , 2 3 4 , 251 L ig h tf o o t, J . B. xxv, xxviii, x x x ii, lii, 2, 11, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28 , 30, 32, 43, 44, 46, 69, 71, 73, 80, 9 9 , 106, 107, 114, 117, 127, 128, 129, 144, 148, 154, 160, 164, 167, 183, 184, 187, 192, 197, 207, 2 1 0 , 21 2 , 21 8 , 22 5 , 2 2 8 , 2 4 2 , 2 4 3 , 2 4 4 , 2 4 5 , 2 5 1 , 25 8 , 2 6 0 , 2 6 8 , 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 , 2 7 3 , 2 8 0 , 281 L ig ie r, L. 9 6 L i n c o ln , A. T . 37, 61, 65 , 70, 2 2 7 L i n d e n , J . R. 135 L i n to n , O . li L isco , H . xl, x liii L ju n g m a n , H . 179, 195 L le w e ly n , S. R. 159, 160 L o f th o u s e , W . F. 65, 76, 2 1 5 , 218 L o h , I.-J. xxv, 72 , 77, 80, 140, 154, 164, 1 9 1 ,1 9 8 L o h f in k , G . 1 7 9 ,1 8 7 L o h m e y e r , E. xxv, xlvi, liv, lvi, lvii, lxiv, lxvii, 2 , 1 2 , 21 , 2 2 , 31, 37 , 44 , 56 , 60, 61, 62, 67, 70, 71, 77, 81 , 82, 83, 84 , 8 6 , 9 0 ,9 1 , 9 6 ,1 0 0 ,1 0 2 ,1 0 4 ,1 0 9 ,1 1 0 , 113, 119, 120, 121, 123, 124, 125, 128, 130, 131, 137, 141, 148, 149, 153, 163, 173, 191, 199, 2 1 1 , 22 1 , 2 2 9 , 2 3 8 , 23 9 , 240, 250, 25 9 , 2 6 4 , 270, 271, 272, 273 L o n g e n e c k e r , R. N . lx, 2, 8, 179, 195 L o o fs, F. 2 , 9 6 , 1 1 1 , 1 1 7

288 L o s ie , L. A. 9 6 , 105, 107 L o u f, A. 9 6 L u c ie n , R. 9 6 L u t e r , A. B. 37 L u t g e r t , W. 1 7 0 ,2 0 3 ,2 0 6 L u t h e r , M . 5 5 ,2 0 2 ,2 1 2 L y o n s, G . 37, 41 M ack ay , B. S. x x x , x x x ii, x x x iii, 159, 165, 170, 171, 179, 182 M a c k in to s h , H . R. 117 M a c L e o d , D .J . 9 1 , 9 6 , 1 1 6 , 1 1 7 M a g n e .J . 9 6 M a lh e r b e , A. J . xl, 2, 4, 79, 87, 151, 154, 2 3 6 , 2 5 1 , 2 5 6 , 2 6 3 , 2 6 4 , 27 0 M a lin o w sk i, F. X. xxxiv, xxxviii, 2 3 6 ,2 4 2 M a n n s , F. 96, 124 M a n s o n , T . W . xl, x liii, 2, 12, 135, 149, 236, 242, 256, 262, 278, 279 M a n te y , J . R. xxvi, 242 M a rc h e s e lli, C. C . 9 6 , 129 M a rs h a ll, I. H . xxv, lx, lx i, 24, 96, 106, 107, 135, 140, 179, 185, 2 3 6 , 25 2 M a rs h a ll, P. 37, 44, 54, 179, 182, 2 0 3 ,

212 M a r t in , R. P. xxv, x x v ii, x x ix , x x x ii, x x x v ii, x l, xliv, xlv, 1, li, lii, liv, lviii, lxi, lxvi, lxvii, lxviii, lx ix , 2, 4, 5, 19, 20 , 21, 22, 24, 26, 32, 34, 47 , 49, 54, 57, 62 , 67, 68, 69 , 70, 72, 75, 76, 79, 80, 83, 84, 89 , 9 0 , 9 1 , 9 6 , 9 9 , 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 133, 135, 137, 138, 140, 143, 144, 145, 146, 148, 149, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 160, 162, 164, 167, 168, 170, 173, 175, 177, 179, 181, 182, 184, 186, 190, 191, 1 92, 193, 195, 1 96, 198, 199, 200, 21 4 , 218, 2 2 1 , 22 2 , 229, 2 30, 232, 233, 234, 236, 239, 240, 243, 245, 247, 2 4 8 , 2 5 0 , 25 9 , 2 6 4 , 2 6 7 , 268, 2 6 9 , 2 7 0 , 2 7 1 , 28 0 , 2 8 1 , 28 2 M a rx s e n , W . x x v iii, x liii, x lix M a s s ie ,J . 9 6 M a ss o n , C . 102 M a y er, B. 159, 2 5 6 , 2 5 9 M c A r th u r , Η . K. xx v iii, x x ix M c D e r m o tt, J . M . 1 5 , 2 2 , 7 9 , 8 4 M c D o n a ld , W . A. xxxiv, xxxvii M c G ra th , A. E. 1 7 9 ,1 9 5 M c L e m a n , J . xxviii, x x ix M c M ic h a e l, W . F. 2 1 5 , 21 7 M c N e ile , A. H . xxvii, x liii M e e c h a m , H . G. 135, 146, 162 M e e k s , W . A. xxx iv , x x x v iii, 9 6 ,1 0 9 , 2 2 7 M e in e r tz , M . 9 6 M e la n c h th o n , P. 193 M e lic k , R. R . xxv, 70 M e n g e l, B. xxvii, xxx iv , xx x v i, 2, 6, 170 M e tz g e r, B. M . lxiii M e y er, E. 23, 199, 2 5 6 , 26 9 M e y er, H . A. W . xxv, lii, 4, 32, 166 M ic h a e l, J . H . xxv, x x ix , x x x , x x x ii, 5, 12, 26, 33, 34, 37, 45, 48, 5 7 , 62, 72, 83, 85, 9 9 , 127, 135, 140, 142, 143, 145, 148, 154, 161, 162, 165, 166, 168, 176, 189, 190, 192, 195, 197, 198, 2 0 0 , 2 0 8 , 2 0 9 , 2 2 1 , 2 2 4 , 24 1 , 242, 2 4 4 , 2 4 6 , 2 5 0 , 2 5 9 , 2 6 1 ,2 6 5 , 2 7 4 M ic h a e lis , W . xx v , x x v ii, x x x , x x x ii, x x x iii, xl, x liii, 52, 6 7 , 71 , 9 6 , 103, 115, 124, 129, 130, 140, 161, 217, 2 1 9 , 2 3 2 , 2 4 5 , 2 5 0 , 2 7 3 , 281

Index

of

Modern A uthors

M ic h a e ls , J . R. xxvi M ic h e l, O . 9 6 , 1 2 0 , 1 2 1 , 1 7 4 M ille r, E. C. 65, 69 M illig a n , G . x lii, 10, 2 8 , 32, 43, 4 9 , 114, 140, 144, 156, 162, 164, 188, 233, 244, 249, 250, 270, 271, 272 M it to n ,C . L. x x x , x x x ii, x l, xliv, 1 7 9 ,1 8 7 M o e h rin g , H . R. 1 7 0 ,1 7 7 M o ff a tt,J . x xvii, lxiv, lx x , 12, 26, 7 1 ,9 1 , 159, 164, 173, 179, 1 93, 2 1 6 , 2 3 6 M o m m s e n , T . x x x ix M o n s e ll, J . S. B. 21 4 M o o , D .J . xxvi M o o re , G. F. 7, 179, 186, 2 2 0 , 222 M o rg a n , R. 9 1 , 9 6 , 104, 110, 112, 113, 114 M o rle t, R.-M . xxv, 19 M o rr ic e , W . G . 15, 20 M o rris, L. xxvi, 2 5 6 , 271 M o rro w , S. B. 37, 5 3 M o rto n , A. Q . x x v iii, x x ix M o tt, S. C . 2 5 6 M o u le , C. F. D. xxvii, lx, lx iii, 2, 8, 14, 18, 29, 37, 54, 59 , 60, 61, 65, 75, 85, 86, 9 6 , 106, 108, 116, 118, 127, 128, 146, 173, 179, 185, 194, 196, 197, 1 9 9 ,2 0 6 ,2 0 9 ,2 1 2 ,2 1 8 ,2 2 2 ,2 7 5 ,2 8 0 M o u le , H . C . G . xxv, 8 4 ,8 5 ,8 7 ,1 0 6 ,1 2 4 , 126, 127, 128, 165 M o u lto n , J . H . xxvii, x lii, 9, 10, 14, 28, 32, 4 3 , 4 5 , 49, 70, 77, 80, 81, 85, 86, 114, 140, 141, 144, 146, 156, 162, 164, 188, 2 3 3 , 2 4 4 , 2 4 9 , 2 5 0 , 270, 2 7 1 ,2 7 2 M o w in c k e l, S. 9 7 M u lle r, C . 180 M u lle r, J . J . xxv, 4, 21, 24, 2 5 , 28, 106, 139, 173, 176, 2 0 6 , 2 1 1 , 2 2 1 , 224, 242, 244 M u lle r, U . B. xxv, 79, 9 1 , 97 M u lle r-B a rd o ff, J . x x x , x x x i M u llin s , T . Y. 37 M u n c k , J . lx, 135, 145, 2 5 6 , 2 6 8 M u rp h y - O ’G o n n o r ,J . 97, 111, 112 M yers, J . M . 24 N e s tle , E. lx iii, 16 N e u f e ld , V. H . 97 N e u g e b a u e r , F. 2, 7, 79 N e w to n , M . 2 3 6 , 2 5 6 , 2 7 7 N id a , E. A. xxv, 7 2 , 7 7 ,8 0 ,1 4 0 ,1 5 4 ,1 6 4 , 1 9 1 ,1 9 8 N isiu s, J . B. 9 7 N o c k , A. D . lx, lxi N o r d e n , E. 9 7 , 100, 102, 109, 2 2 7 , 2 3 4 , 2 3 6 , 252 O a k e s , P. xxvii, xxviii, xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvi, xxxviii, lxi, lxiv, lxviii, lxix, lxxiii, lxxvi, lxxviii, 2, 9 1 , 9 7 , 103, 107, 123, 124, 151, 152, 159, 163, 170, 22 7 , 2 2 9 , 2 33, 23 6 , 24 7 , 2 5 6 , 2 6 9 O ’B r ie n , P. T . xxv, x x x i, xli, lix , 15, 18, 19, 21, 2 3 , 27, 28, 29, 34 , 37, 43, 46, 47, 5 3 , 69, 71, 72, 74, 79, 81, 82, 83, 8 4 , 8 5 , 9 1 , 9 7 , 9 9 , 1 0 0 , 1 0 3 , 106, 118, 119, 129, 137, 141, 161, 184, 186, 187, 189, 21 2 , 2 1 5 , 21 8 , 2 2 5 , 2 3 2 , 236, 242, 245, 246, 247, 248, 254, 2 5 6 , 2 6 0 ,2 6 6 ,2 6 8 , 27 4 , 2 7 5 ,2 7 8 ,2 8 1 O e d e r , G. L. xlv O e p k e , A. 8, 60 , 74, 8 7 , 117, 2 1 3 , 22 4 O g a r a , F. 15, 9 7 , 2 3 6 O g g , G . xl O l b r ic h t , T . H . 37, 42

O l lro g , W .-H . 2, 10, 151, 158, 159, 162 O m a n s o n , R. L. 1 5 , 2 0 , 2 1 , 3 7 , 4 3 O ’N e ill, J . C . 9 7 , 1 0 1 ,1 0 9 , 1 1 5 O r o p e z a , B. J . 135, 140, 141, 143 O s ie k , C. xxv, 43, 46 , 5 0 , 53, 63 O t t o , R . E. 1 8 0 ,2 0 0 O w e n ,J . J . 180 P a lm e r , D. W . 37, 55 , 56 P a r r o t , A. 1 8 0 ,1 8 5 P a u lu s , Η . E. G. xl, xlvi P e d e r s e n , S. 135, 142 P e n n a , R. lxiv, lxxviii P e r k in s , P. 37, 65 P e r r e t , J . 37 P e r r i n , N . xxvii, x x xvii P e ry , A. xxv P e s c h , R. 37 P e ta n e l-O llif, E. 9 7 P e t e r l in , D. xxvii, lv, lvii, 2, 8, 11, 79, 81, 85, 86, 89 , 135, 143, 2 0 3 , 2 0 8 , 2 3 6 , 239 P e t e r m a n , G. W . xxvii, x x x , x x x i, lv, lvii, 15, 31, 2 5 6 , 2 5 8 , 2 6 0 P e t e r s e n , K. 97 P f itz n e r, V. C. x xvii, lx, 65, 71, 135, 147, 2 0 3 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 9 , 2 3 7 , 2 4 0 , 24 3 P ic a r d , C. x x x iv P i lh o f e r , P. xxvii, xxx iv , xxx v i, xx x v ii, x x x v iii, x x x ix , lxiv, lx x ii, 2, 65, 72, 2 2 7 , 2 3 1 , 25 6 , 2 6 9 , 2 7 8 , 281 P i n t a r d ,J . 97 P l u m m e r , A. xxv, 3 2 ,1 0 6 ,1 1 7 ,1 1 9 ,1 2 0 , 127, 142, 1 48, 164, 199, 2 1 0 , 24 4 , 2 4 5 , 2 4 7 , 25 0 , 25 1 , 2 5 9 , 2 6 6 , 267, 2 7 5 , 28 0 P o lh ill, J . B. 170, 180, 2 0 3 P o lla r d , T . E. x x x , x x x iii, 170, 171, 180, 182 P o r te f a ix , L. xxxiv, x x x v iii, 2 3 7 , 241 P o r te r , F. C. 97 P o r te r , S. E. xx x v i, 37, 42, 79, 2 3 7 , 2 4 6 P o w ell, W . 9 7 P r a ts c h e r , W . 2 5 6 , 2 5 9 P r e is k e r, H . 2 4 4 , 24 9 P r e to r iu s , E. A. C. 9 0 P r e u s c h e n , E. x x x i P r id e a u x , S. P. T . 9 7 P ro ck sch , O . 7 Q u i n n , E. 12 Q u i n n , J . D. 180 R ad, G. von 184 R a h tje n , B. D. x x x , x x x i, x x x ii R a in y , R. xxv, 2 4 6 R a m say , W . M . xxvii, xxx iv , x x x v ii, 4, 257, 263, 269 R a p s k e , B. 37 R e e d , J . T . xxvii, x x x , x x x i, lv, lix, lxiv, lxvii, lx ix , Ixxi, lx x ii, 15, 17, 27, 37, 40, 65, 67, 79, 8 4 ,1 3 5 , 137, 170, 171, 173, 174, 180, 183 R e e v e s, R. R. 37 R e f s h a n g e , E. x x x , x x x ii R e ic k e , B. x l, x li, xlvi, xlviii, 1, 2, 10, 37, 44, 79 , 83, 9 7 , 180 R e id , D. G . 9 7 , 128 R e itz e n s te in , R. 9 7 , 112 R e n a n , E. 2 3 7 , 24 2 R e n g s to rf , K. H . 119, 143, 163, 26 3 R e n g s to rf , R. 5 R e u le , G . 9 7 R e u m a n n , J . 15, 34, 180, 195, 2 2 7 , 22 9 , 25 7

Index of Modern Authors

R h ijn , C . H . R ic h a rd , L. R i c h a rd s o n , R ic h a rd s o n ,

van 237 9 7 ,1 1 7 A. 65, 77, 180, 195 P. x x x , xxxiv, li, liii, 2 2 0 ,

222 R id d e rb o s , Η . N . x xvii, lx, 2, 8, 37, 57, 6 1 , 9 7 , 111, 130, 135, 142, 170, 177, 180, 183, 187, 2 2 4 , 2 2 7 , 2 3 4 , 2 4 5 R id d le , D . W . xxvii, x x ix R ig a u x , B. li, liv, 2 0 3 , 20 5 , 271 R issi, M. 9 1 , 9 7 , 1 0 4 , 1 1 0 , 1 1 9 R ist, J . M . 159 R o a c h , S. N . 180 R o b b in s , C .J . lxiv, lxvi R o b e r t, A. xxvii R o b e r ts , C. H . 2 R o b e r ts , J . H . 37 R o b e rts , T . R. 6 5 , 70 R o b in s o n , D . W . B. 9 7 , 180, 195 R o b in s o n , 1. A. T . xl, xlvi, xlvii, 1, 180, 187 R o b in s o n , J . M . 16, 17 R o b in s o n , W . C ., J r . 97 R o h d e , J. 2 R o lla n d , B. 2 5 7 , 2 6 5 R o lle r, O . 2 , 1 6 , 1 8 , 3 7 , 4 1 , 2 7 8 R o o k e , D. W. 9 6 , 100 R o s c o e , P .J . lx, 1, 5 R o s s ,J . M . 1 6 , 9 7 ,1 1 6 R o w lin g s o n , D. T . x l, x liii R u p r e c h t, A. A. 5 R u ssell, R. 37 S a ld a r in i, A. J . 1 8 0 ,1 8 6 S a lle r o n , L. 9 7 S a m p le y , J . P. lx ix , 79, 8 5 ,1 5 9 , 2 5 7 , 27 0 S a n d , A. ' 37, 5 7 S a n d e rs , E. P. xxvii, 16, 19, 37, 61, 170, 176, 180, 195, 2 2 0 , 22 2 S a n d e rs , J . A, 9 7 ,1 0 4 S a n d e rs , J . T . 37, 9 7 , 112 Sass, G. 2, 6 S c a lig e r, J . J . 167 S c h a lle r, B. 38, 49 S c h e g g e t, G . H . t e r 9 7 S c h e n k , W. xxv, x x ix , x x x i, xxxvi, lviii, lix , lxv, 8, 9, 12, 173, 183, 2 2 4 , 2 7 3 S c h in z , W . H . Ixxxiv, xxxviii S c h lie r , H . 189, 2 7 5 , 282 S c h lo s s e r, J . lx S c h m id , J. x l, x li, xliv S c h m id t, J . xxx iv , xx x v S c h m id t, O . 38 S c h m id t, R. 135 S c h m ith a ls , W. xxvii, x x x , x x x i, x x x ii, x x x iii, li, liv, Ivi, 180, 191, 2 0 3 , 206, 2 0 7 , 2 1 1 , 22 0 , 22 4 S c h m itz , O . 82 S c h n a c k e n b u r g , R. 180, 198 S c h n e id e r , J . 120 S c h n e id e r , N . 22 7 S c h n e lle , U . xxvii, x x x ii S c h n ie w in d , J . 1 6 ,2 3 S c h o e p s , H . lx S c h o n f e ld , H . J . 55 S c h o o n - J a n s s e n , J . Iv, lviii, lix S c h r e i b e r , S. 38 S c h r e i n e r , T . R. x xvii, 9 7 , 109, 170, 176 S c h r e n k , G . 143, 144 S c h u b e r t , P. 16, 18, 19 S c h u lz , A. 2 1 5 ,2 1 7 S c h u r e r , E. xxxiv, 2 2 0 , 222 S c h u s s le r F io re n z a , E. lxiv, lxxii S c h u t z ,J . H . 3 8 , 4 7 ,6 5 S c h w e itz e r, A. lx, 2, 7, 38, 61, 9 7 , 108

S c h w e iz e r, E. x x x , x x x ii, 2, 10, 5 1 , 53 , 71, 9 7 , 104, 110, 111, 113, 177, 2 5 7 , 26 5 , 2 8 2 S c h w e m e r, A. M . lx, lxi S c o tt, E. F. xxv, xlviii, lvii, 30 , 34, 4 2 , 70, 103, 106, 143, 166, 170, 176, 2 2 1 , 2 2 4 , 2 6 2 , 2 6 9 , 2 7 9 , 281 S c o tt, R. xliv, 9 ,1 0 , 5 9 , 68, 72, 1 5 6 ,1 6 6 , 167, 21 7 , 23 4 , 251 S c ro g g s, R. 9 7 , 180, 198 S e e le y , D . xxviii, lx ix , 9 1 , 97 S e e s e m a n n , H . 16, 22, 79, 84 , 180, 198, 257, 268, 270 S elw yn, E. xxxiv, 128 S e v e n s te r, 1. N . 23 7 , 2 4 9 , 2 5 0 , 2 5 2 , 257, 264 S h e rw in -W h ite , A. N . xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvii, x x x ix , 2 2 7 , 231 S ib e r, P. 180, 198, 227 Silva, M . xxv, xli, Ixiii, 17, 21, 23, 24, 29, 33, 81 , 99, 140, 196, 2 0 3 , 2 2 4 , 2 2 5 , 23 8 , 265 S k e a t, T . C . 2 S m y th , H . W . xxvii, 73, 2 8 2 S o d e n , H . v o n xxv, 162, 166, 2 5 9 S o d in g , T . 9 7 S o u te r , A. x x x ii S p ic q , C. 1 6 , 2 9 , 8 0 , 8 3 , 9 7 , 1 1 1 S p in k s , B. D . 2, 6 S p itta , F. xl, xlvi S ta ce y , D. 2 3 7 , 2 4 7 S ta g g , F. 65, 97, 135 S ta h lin , G . 43 , 83 S ta n le y , D . M . x l, xliv, 38 , 61 , 9 7 , 180, 2 1 5 ,2 2 7 S t a n to n , G. N . 98, 106 S ta u ff e r, E. xxvii, lx, lxi, 2 ,1 3 ,2 0 , 4 5 ,5 6 , 5 9 ,6 5 ,7 5 ,7 6 ,1 8 0 ,1 8 7 ,2 0 3 ,2 1 1 ,2 2 7 , 231 S t e e n b u r g , D . 9 8 , 111 S te g n e r , W . R. 22 8 , 231 S te in , M. 98 S t e n d a h l , K. 180, 187 S te n g e r , W . 134 S t e p h e n s o n , A. A. 9 8 S te w a rt, J . S. 1 8 0 , 1 8 7 ,2 3 7 S to c k , W . 2, 7 S to w e rs, S. K. 16, 25, 2 5 6 , 2 5 7 , 2 7 0 S tra c k , H . liii, 28, 125, 146, 174, 184, 185, 188, 2 5 3 , 2 7 0 S tra n g e , E. x x x ii S t r a t h m a n n , H . 164, 175, 231 S tra u s s , D. F. 113 S tre c k e r, G . 98 , 2 2 8 , 2 2 9 S t r e i d e r , I. 38 S tre ik e r, L. D. 98 S trim p le , R. B. 9 0 , 9 8 S t u h lm a c h e r , P. lx, lx ii, 16, 2 3 ,1 8 0 ,1 9 5 S u g g s, M .J . xl, 2 5 7 , 2 6 9 S u m n e y , J . li, 2 0 3 , 205 Sw allow , J . E. 98 Sw ift, R. C. lv, lviii S y k u tris ,J . 2 S y n g e , F. C . xxv, 47, 126, 148, 155, 2 0 6 T a b o r , J . D. 3 6 ,5 5 T a l b e r t , C. H . 9 8 ,1 1 1 T a n n e h il l , R. C . 170, 180, 191, 197 T a s k e r, R. V. G . 9 8 , 121 T a y lo r, V. 22 8 , 23 2 T h e k k e k a r a , M . 98, 116 T h i e lm a n , F. xii, xxv, 70, 233 T h i e r i n g , B. E. 2, 10 T h o m a s, J. 98 T h o m a s , T . A. 9 8 , 121

289 T h o m a s , W . D . xxx iv , x x x v iii, 2 3 7 , 241 T h o m p s o n , Μ . M . xxvi, 120 T h o m s o n , P. 135 T h r a e d e , K. 2 T h r a ll , Μ . E. x xvii, 4 8 , 190 T h u r s to n , B. B. 9 8 , 126 T i e d e , D . L. li, lii T i ll m a n , F. xxv, 175 T r a k a te llis , D. C . 98 T r u d i n g e r , P. 9 8 , 115 T u r n e r , G . A. 20 3 T u r n e r , Μ . B. 2 0 3 ,2 1 3 T u r n e r , N . xxvii, 43 T y n d a le , W . 55 T y s o n , J . B. li U n n ik , W . C . v a n 38, 42 , 53, 180, 185 U r q u h a r t, W . S. 38 V a llo tto n , P. 180, 190, 195 V a n D r u n e n , D. 159 V a n n i, U . 9 8 , 120 V in c e n t, M . R. xxv, 2 1 ,2 2 ,2 8 ,3 1 ,3 2 ,4 3 , 44, 4 5 , 49, 5 1 ,5 5 , 62, 76, 87 , 88, 106, 114, 120, 154, 155, 166, 168, 183, 185, 188, 190, 192, 20 0 , 2 0 6 , 209, 21 1 , 2 1 3 , 22 2 , 24 0 , 2 4 1 , 2 4 4 , 2 4 6 , 24 7 , 263, 26 6 , 2 6 8 , 27 1 , 2 7 6 , 2 8 0 V o g tle , A. 2 3 7 , 2 5 0 V o k e s, F. E. 98 V o lle n w e id e r , S. 38, 54, 9 8 , 115 V o lte r , W . D . xxviii, x x ix , x x x V olz, P. 2 2 8 , 231 V o r s te r , W . S. 38 W a lla c e , D. H . 9 8 ,1 1 1 W a lte r, N . 65 W a n s in k , C . S. xl, 38 W a rr e n , J . 135 W a rr e n , W . 9 8 , 1 1 6 ,1 1 7 W a ts o n , D . F. lv, lviii, lix, lxiv, Ixvii, 16, 18, 38, 40, 65, 67 W a tts, J . C . 2 3 7 W e b e r , Η . E. 2 W eb ster, J . B. 9 8 ,1 0 6 W e d d e r b u r n , A. J . M . xl, xlvii, 38 W e e d a , W. H . 2 3 7 W e g e n e r , M .J . 98 W e id in g e r, K. 23 7 , 25 0 W e is e r, A. 60 W eiss, B. xxv W eiss, J . x x x , x x x i, xxx iv , xxxvii, 12, 16, 26, 32, 98, 100, 2 1 2 , 2 1 4 , 221, 2 2 4 W e n h a m , D. 2 3 7 , 2 4 4 , 245 W e s tc o tt, B. H . 72 W e tz e l, L. 9 8 W e y m o u th , R. F. 38 W h ite , J . L. xxvi, 16, 1 7 , 3 8 ,4 0 , 4 1 , 151, 152 W h ite , L. M . xx x iv , xx x v ii, x x x v iii, lxiv, lx x i, 2, 11, 135, 139 W h ite le y , D. E. H . xxvii, lx, lx i, 60 W h itta k e r , M . xxviii, x x ix W ib b in g , S. 2 3 7 , 2 5 0 , 251 W ick, P. xxvii, x x x , x x x i, x x x ii, x li, lv, lviii, lix , lxiv, lx ix , Ixx, lx x ii, 65, 6 7 W ie s e le r, K. G . 2 3 7 , 242 W ik e n h a u s e r, A. xxvii, x x x ii, xl W ilc o x , M . 9 8 ,1 2 3 W iles, G. P. 16, 18, 33, 38, 237, 257, 274 W illia m s , C. S. C. xxxv W illia m s , N . P. 20 3 , 20 7 W ilp e rt, P. 159 W ils o n , R. E. 98 W ils o n , W . E. 98

290 W in te r, B. W . xxxvi, 38, 47, 65, 69, 135, 143 W in te r, S. lx ix , 162 W it h e r i n g t o n , B., I l l xxv, xxxiv, x x x ix , Ixxvi, 19, 2 7 , 2 4 4 , 2 4 5 , 2 7 0 W o h le n b e r g , G . xxiv, 19, 143, 2 2 4 W o n g , T . Y.-C. 9 8 ,1 1 6 W o o d , J . T . x l, x liii

Index

of

Modern A uthors

W o rd s w o rth , W . 251 W o rth a m , R. A. 9 8 W rig h t, N . T . lx, lx iii, lxiv, lx x , Ixxi, 98, 103, 115, 116, 119 W u, J . L. 6 , 2 7 8 ,2 8 2 W ulf, F. 38, 215 Y a m a u c h i, E. Y oung, M. W.

9 8 ,1 1 2 16

Y oung, N. H .

98

Z a h n , T . xxvii Z e rw ick , M . 170 Z ie s le r, J . A. 1 6 ,3 4 ,1 8 0 Z m ije w s k i,J . 180, 182 Z u n tz , G . xxx v Z w aa n , J . d e 2 2 8 , 231

291

Index o f Principal Topics A ble, ab ility 2 6 5 ,2 6 6 A b o u n d , a b o u n d in g 30, 265 A c k n o w le d g e 128, 129, 274, 275 A c tiu m xxxv A d a m 8 , 1 1 1 ,1 1 2 , 1 1 5 ,1 2 4 , 1 4 6 A ffe c tio n 26, 27, 35, 8 4 -8 7 , 269 A fflic tio n 4 1 -4 2 , 55, 75, 1 9 8 -2 0 0 , 2 6 7 -7 0 A g e to c o m e 30, 275 A le x a n d e r ( th e G re a t) xxxv, 113 A m b ro s ia s te r 64 A m e n 2 7 8 ,2 8 2 A n tig o n e 56 A n ti-S e m itism x x x ix A n to n y xxxv A n x ie ty 162, 164, 165, 2 4 5 -4 6 , 255 A p h r o d ite 162 A p o c a ly p tic 2 2 8 ,2 3 2 A p o s tle , a p o s tle s h ip , a p o s to lic a u th o r ity 3, 4, 65, 76, 163, 166 A p p ro v e 3 2 -3 3 A q u ila xliv, xlvi A s h a m e d 5 2 -5 3 A tta in 213 A ttitu d e 26, 89, 107, 173, 211, 212 A u g u s tu s xxxv A u th e n tic ity x x v iii-x x x A u th o r s h ip x x v iii-x x x , x xxii B a rn a b a s 269 Belly 224 B e n e d ic tio n 281, 2 8 2 -8 3 B e n ja m in 185 B is h o p s xxxiv, 9 - 1 2 B la m e le ss 3 3 -3 4 , 1 4 4 -4 5 B o a s tin g 63, 1 4 6 -4 7 , 176, 181, 225, 259 B ody 1 7 7 ,2 3 3 -3 4 B o d y o f le t t e r 3 9 - 4 2 ,1 7 1 B o ld n e s s 53 B o o k o f life 2 4 2 ,2 4 3 B ow th e k n e e 1 2 6 -2 8 B r o th e r ( s ) [ a n d sisters] li, 42, 4 5 -4 6 , 86, 279 B ru tu s xxxv C a e s a re a xl, 44 C a e s a r ’s h o u s e h o ld xli, xlv, 281 C a lig u la lxix C assius xxxv C a ta lo g o f vices 48, 87, 250 C a ta lo g o f v irtu e s 2 5 0 -5 2 C h r is t lx i-lx iii, 14, 5 3 -5 7 , 137, 181, 1 8 8 -8 9 , 190, 191, 193, 279 e m p t i e d h im s e lf 1 1 6 - 2 1 ,1 2 3 e x a lta tio n 102, 123, 1 2 6 -2 9 fello w s h ip w ith 60 h u m a n ity lxxvii, 109, 111, 118, 119,

“w ith C h r is t” 5 9 -6 2 , 108 C h rist-h y m n lxi, lxii, lxxiv-lxxvii, 9 0 -1 3 5 , 1 5 7 ,2 2 8 -2 9 , 234 a u th o r s h ip 103, 1 3 2 -3 4 c e n te r o f 128 f o rm lx iv -lx x ii, lxxv, 91, 100--103, 1 3 1 -3 4 s o u rc e ( s ) 1 0 3 -4 , 131 C h risto lo g y lxxii, lxxiii-lxxviii, ! 9 0 - 1 3 5 ,‫׳׳‬ C h u rc h 10, 67, 1 8 6 -8 7 , 216, 232 C irc u m c is io n liii, liv, 172, 173, 1 7 7 -7 8 , 184, 221, 222 C itiz e n s h ip G re c o -R o m a n xxxvi, xxxix, 68, 6 9 -7 0 , 77 h e a v e n ly 70, 77, 231, 232, 251 C ity-state 69 C la u d iu s lxxi C le m e n t o f A le x a n d ria xx ix C le m e n t o f P h ilip p i xxxviii, 243 C le m e n t o f R o m e xxviii, xliii C o lo n y xxxvi, liv, lxix, 70, 78, 231, 234 C o lo n y o f h e a v e n liv, 228, 232, 234, 25 4 C o m p a s s io n 85 C o m p le te 85 C o n c e it 87, 137 C o n fe s s 1 2 8 -2 9 C o n fe s s io n o f f a ith 1 2 8 ,1 2 9 C o n f id e n c e 2 3 -2 4 , 78, 181, 183, 216 C o n f o r m e d to C h r is t’s d e a th I f 7 -2 0 0 C o r i n th xl, x lv-xlvi, 23 C o u r a g e 44—45, 73 C re a tio n (n ew c re a tio n ) ¥ 4 , 25, 128, 188 C ro ss 1 2 2 - 2 3 ,2 2 3 C ro w n 240 C ru c ifix io n 1 2 2 - 2 3 ,2 2 3 C ynic 87, 263 D a m a sc u s r o a d lx i-lx ii, 55, 188, 189, 201, 208, 2 1 0 -1 1 D ay o f C h r is t (Jesus) 25, 3 2 -3 3 , 49, 147 D e a c o n s , d e a c o n e s s e s xxxiv, 8-1 2, 241 D e a th 5 4 -5 6 , 59, 198 D e a th o f C h r is t lxi, 12, 27, 101, 1 22-23, 183, 198, 223 D e a th o n th e c ro ss lx i-lx ii, 101, 223 D e fe n s e ( o f P a u l) 28, 64 D e p a r t 5 8 ,5 9 D e s tru c tio n lii, liv, 7 3 -7 4 , 226 D ile m m a ( o f P a u l) 5 8 - 6 2 D is p u te s 1 4 3 -4 4 D isu n ity lvii, 6, 14, 140, 208 D iv in e-m an th e o lo g y li-lii, 47 D o g s liii, 172, 173, 174 D o x o lo g y 34, 2 7 4 -7 5 D u n g 192 D yers xxxvii

121 h u m ilia tio n 61, 102 “in C h r is t” lxxii, lxxiii, lxxvii, 7 -8 , 1 9 5 ,2 6 6 -6 7 , 274 las t A d a m 59, 104—5, 111 L o r d lxvii, 1 3 -1 4 , 106, 124, 1 2 5 -2 6 , 191, 192, 279, 281, 283 m o d e l to fo llo w 104, 106, 109, 135 lo rd s h ip o f lx i-lx iii, lxxii, lx x iii-lx x v i, lxxvii, 1 3 -1 4 , 124, 125, 192, 193, 283 p r e e x is te n c e Ixi, 111, 115, 125, 132, 21 6

E ld e rs 11 E n c o u r a g e m e n t ( e x h o r ta tio n ) 8 2 -8 3 , 107, 137 E n e m ie s ( o f th e cross) 2 2 0 -2 3 , 226, 228 Envy 4 5 ,4 7 E p a p h r o d itu s xxxviii, xli, xlv, xlviii, lvii, lxxvii, 81, 138, 1 6 1 -6 9 E p h e s u s xl, x liii-x lv , 1 E q u a lity w ith G o d 1 1 5 - 1 6 ,1 2 5 - 2 6

E s c h a to lo g y f u tu r e 49, 74, 78, 200, 228 r e a liz e d lv, 200, 207, 225, 254 E sse n es 9 E th ic s lxxviii, 31, 106, 107, 230 E u o d ia xxxviii, 2 4 0 -4 2 , 2 5 4 Evil, e v ild o e rs liii, 172, 174, 222 E x a lta tio n 1 2 5 - 3 1 ,2 3 0 E x a m p le o f C h r is t lxxvii, 104, 135, 146 o f E p a p h r o d itu s lxvii, 81, 218, 219 o f P a u l lxvii, 68, 213, 216, 2 1 8 -1 9 o f T im o th y lxvii, 219 E x p e c ta tio n o f C h r is t lxii, 61, 232 F a ith lxii, 42, 66, 73, 74, 1 9 5 -9 6 F alse te a c h in g 2 2 0 -2 7 F a rew e ll 2 7 8 -8 3 F a te 13, 156 F a t h e r lxii, 13, 131, 1 5 5 -5 6 F e a r ( a n d tre m b lin g ) 43, 78, 141 F elix xlvi, 44 F ello w sh ip 7 1 ,7 5 ,8 3 F ello w s o ld ie r 6 6 - 6 7 ,1 6 2 - 6 3 F ello w w o rk e r. See W o rk e rs F e stu s 1 ,4 4 F ilth 1 9 2 ,2 0 1 F le sh 57, 177, 183 F o o d r e g u la tio n s 172, 173, 221, 222 F o rg iv e n e ss 48 F o r m (m orphe) 1 1 0 -1 6 , 1 1 8 -1 9 , 123 F o rm (schem a) 114 F r a g ra n t o d o r 272 F r u it 3 3 - 3 4 ,5 7 ,2 7 1 F r u it o f la b o r 57 G a in

55, 182, 188, 1 8 9 -9 0 , 192, 193, 2 0 1 ,2 7 1 G ift, g iv in g xliv, lvii, lxxiii, 23, 2 5 8 -6 0 , 2 7 0 -7 2 , 2 7 5 -7 7 G lo ry 111, 117, 130, 234, 273, 2 7 4 -7 5 G n o stics, g n o stic ism liii-liv, 104, 11 2 -1 3 , 205, 2 0 6 -7 , 211 G o a l 5 5 ,2 0 9 - 1 0 G o d ·lxii, lxiii, 13, 25, 51, 1 1 5 -1 6 , 131, 196, 214, 2 3 2 -3 3 G o d -fe a re rs xxxvii G o o d w ill 1 4 2 -4 3 G o o d w o rk 24 G ospel xlvi, 2 2 -2 3 , 68, 242, 243, 254, 261, 269, 281 G ra c e 12, 27, 279, 281 G re e k s xxxvi G r e e tin g s 1 2 -1 3 , 279, 2 8 0 -8 1 , 2 8 2 -8 3 G ru m b lin g 1 4 3 -4 4 G u ild w o rk e rs xxxvii H a r m o n y 81, 89, 101, 143, 254 H e a r t 2 6 ,2 4 7 H e a v e n lxi, lxii, 56, 124 H e a v e n ly m a n 113 H e b re w 185 H e lle n is m , H e lle n ists, h e lle n iz a tio n 101, 104, 185 H e r m a s xxviii H e r o d A g r ip p a xlvi, 44 H e r o d th e G r e a t xlvi, xlix H ig h c a llin g o f G o d 210

3, 6,

Index

292 H o ly 6, 7 H o ly o n e s (sa in ts) 6 - 7 , 279 H o m e s ic k 1 6 2 ,2 3 9 H o p e 52, 129, 1 5 2 -5 3 H u m a n ity 118, 198 H u m ility 81, 88, 89, 90, 109, 124, 182, 200, 2 6 5 - 6 6 H y m n . See C h r is t h y m n H y m n s in g in g 1 3 3 -3 4 I g n a tiu s o f A n tio c h xxviii, 9 Im a g e 110 Im ita te , im ita tio n lxxii, 106, 2 1 7 -1 9 , 225 Im p e ria l c u lt xxxvii, lxviii-lxxi, 113, 233 I n c a r n a ti o n 122, 125, 132 “I n C h r is t.” See C h ris t In itia tio n 265, 266 In te g rity ( o f th e e p is tle ) x x x -x x x iv , lviii, 171, 229, 275 In te r c e s s io n 20 I n te r m e d i a t e s ta te 56, 59, 6 0 -6 1 I re n a e u s xxix Isra e l 59, 143, 146, 175, 184 Iu s italicum xxv, 231 J e a lo u s y 87 J e r u s a le m liv, 44, 185, 259 J e r u s a le m r e l i e f f u n d xliv, xlvii, 22, 279 Je su s 23, 51, 102, 103, 109, 111, 117, 119, 122, 2 3 2 -3 3 lew s xxxvi, xliii, xlvii, liii, liv, 72, 174—76, 194 J o b 49 J o y lxxi, 2 0 -2 1 , 48, 85, 167, 239, 240, 244, 261, 275 J u d a iz e rs lii, 183 J u d g e 2 1 0 ,2 1 1 J u d g m e n t 25, 52, 74, 193 J u li u s C a e s a r xxxv J u s t, ju stn e s s, ju stific a tio n lxxviii, 195-96,

211 J u s ti n M a rty r

xxviii

Kenosis 1 1 7 ,1 2 1 K n o w in g C h ris t 1 9 6 -9 7 K now ledge 3 0 -3 1 , 4 8 - 4 9 ,1 9 0 - 9 1 , 2 0 6 -7 , 2 1 4 -1 5 , 2 6 4 -6 6 Law 175, 176, 194, 2 2 4 L e a rn 253, 263 L e t te r w ritin g 3 - 4 , 12, 17, 64, 279, 282 L ib a tio n 1 4 8 -4 9 L ib e rtin e s 224 L ife 5 5 - 6 2 ,6 4 L ig h ts 146, 150 L ik e n e s s 120 L o n g in g fo r. See Y earn “L o r d is n e a r ” 245, 255 L o r d ’s P ra y e r 13 L oss 88, 1 8 9 -9 0 , 192, 193, 201 L ove 29, 81, 83, 85, 86, 88, 251, 263, 268, 280, 281 L u k e x x x v i-x x x v ii, xlvi, xlix , 281, 282 L y d ia x x x v ii-x x x v iii, 241 M a c e d o n ia xxxv, 269 M ag n ify 53 M a rc io n xxix M a rc io n ite p r o lo g u e s xl M a rty rd o m lvi-lvii, 148, 198, 200 M e lito o f S a rd is xxviii M in is te r 164 M o d e o f b e in g 1 1 2 -1 3 M otives 48

of

Principal T opics

M u ra to ria n c a n o n xx ix M u tila tio n , m u ti la t o r liii, 172, 175 M ystery r e lig io n s lxi, 265, 266 M ysticism 7 ,2 3 3 N a m e 1 2 6 -2 7 , 128, 2 8 0 N a m e o f J e s u s 1 2 6 -2 7 N e a p o lis xxxv N e e d 2 7 4 ,2 7 5 N e r o Ixix N ew ( tr u e ) Isra e l 7, 172 O a th 28 O b e y 122, 125, 126 O c ta v ia n xxxv O ly m p ic G a m e s 210 O p p o n e n t s x x x ii-x x x iii, xliv, 1-lv, 4 6 -4 8 , 72, 1 7 2 ,1 7 3 -7 7 ,1 8 2 , 205, 231, 234 ordo salutis lxxviii O v e rs e e rs 8 -1 2 P a ro u s ia ( C h r is t’s) lxi, Ixii, Ixxvii, 25, 193, 209, 233, 235 P a r o u s ia ( P a u l’s) 6 3 -6 4 , 140 P a r tn e r , p a r t n e r s h i p lxxi, 18, 2 1 -2 2 , 24, 2 7 ,2 5 9 , 2 6 7 -7 0 P a tte r n 88, 2 1 8 -1 9 P e a c e Ixiii, 12, 246, 248 P e r c e p tio n 3 1 ,3 4 P e rfe c t, p e rf e c tio n liv, 2 1 1 -1 3 , 214—15 P e r s e c u te , p e rs e c u tio n 67, 186 P h a ris e e s 1 8 5 -8 7 P h ilip o f M a c e d o n xxxiv P h ilip p i. See R e c ip ie n ts P h ilip p ia n s x x x iv -x x x ix P o ly c a rp xxix, xxxii P o w er 234 P o w e r o f C h r i s t ’s r e s u r r e c tio n 234 P x a e to riu m xli, xlii, xliii, x lv-xlvi, 44, 64 P ra is e 53, 2 7 3 -7 7 P ra y e r 1 8 - 2 2 ,2 7 3 - 7 7 P r e a c h in g 27, 44, 4 6 -4 8 , 64 P risc illa xliv, xlvi P ris o n ( im p ris o n m e n t) xxxix-1, 4, 27, 43, 4 9 -5 3 , 55, 64, 144, 161, 219 P riz e 1 4 7 ,2 1 0 - 1 1 ,2 1 5 P ro fit. See G ain P r o p h e ts (as “se rv a n ts ”) 5 P r o te c t 24 7 P ro v e n a n c e xl-1 C a e s a re a xlvi-1, xlix C o r in th xlv-xlvi E p h e s u s x liii-x lv , 1 R o m e x li-x liii, xlvii, xlviii P r o v id e n c e lx xvii-lxxviii, 79 P u r e 33 P u r p o s e o f Iv -lix P u rs u e 1 8 6 ,2 0 9 Q u arrel Q u m ran

2 3 9 ,2 4 1 88, 206, 243

R e c e ip t 2 5 8 ,2 7 1 - 7 2 R e c e iv in g 258 R e c ip ie n ts x x x iv -x x x ix R e c k o n 250 R e c o n c ilia tio n 232 R efu se. See D u n g R e le ase f ro m p r is o n 51, 141, 150 R e m em b ran ce 1 8 -1 9 R e s u r re c tio n o f C h ris t 27, 181, 183, 197, 1 9 8 -9 9 , 267 o f C h ris tia n s liv, lxi, 2 0 0 -2 0 1 , 215, 930

R eveal 5 8 ,2 1 3 R e v e re n c e 251 R h e to ric 74, 89, 205 R h e to ric a l analysis Ixxiv-Ixii, 3 9 -4 0 , 91, 1 3 7 -3 8 R ig h te o u s n e s s liv, lxii, 177, 183, 188, 194 R isk ta k in g 168 Rivalry‫׳‬ li, lvii, 47 R o m a n E m p ir e xxxv, 231 R o m a n g a rr is o n xlvi R o m a n o fficials 44, 281 R o m e xxxv, xxxvi, x li-x liii, 213 R u n n in g 207, 2 0 9 -1 1 S a b b a th 173 S a c rific e 1 0 5 -6 , 137, 272 S a in ts. See H o ly o n e s S alv atio n lxi, 12, 15, 4 9 -5 0 , 7 3 -7 4 , 230, 232 S a n c tific a tio n lxxviii S a ta n 1 1 5 ,1 8 4 S a v io r 2 3 2 -3 3 , 234 S elf-giving 122, 124, 125 S e lf-in te re s t 1 5 4 ,2 3 8 S e lfis h n es s li, 87, 238 S elf-su fficien cy 259, 2 6 3 - 6 4 S e rv a n t 10, 103 S erv ice 62, 64, 148, 149, 150 S h a m e 5 1 -5 2 , 224 S h in e 1 4 5 -4 6 S ic k n ess 165, 1 6 8 -6 9 S ig n a tu r e xxxiii Silas x x x v ii-x x x ix Slave (slaver)163 ,1 1 8 -2 0 ,110 ,15 ,5 -6 (‫׳‬ S le e p 5 9 -6 1 S o n o f M a n 121 S p irit H o ly S p irit lxi, 30, 70, 83, 176 h u m a n s p irit 7 0 , 7 1 ,8 4 o f J e s u s 5 0 -5 1 S ta n d firm lri, 66, 70, 240, 248, 254, 255 S ta tu s 113 S to ic, S to ic ism lxxviii, 31, 68, 249, 2 6 3 -6 4 S trife 2 4 0 -4 4 S tru g g le (fo r th e g o s p e l) 71, 242. 243 S u b je c tio n 234 S u ffe rin g xliii, lv, h i, lxxii, 66, 72, 74—77, 149, 2 6 7 -7 0 S y n a g o g u e xxxvii S y n ty ch e xxxvii. xxxviii, 2 4 0 -4 2 , 254 T e r tu llia n xxix T h an k sg iv in g 17, 18, 21, 2 3 -2 4 , 246, 258, 259, 2 7 5 -7 7 T h e o d ic y lxxiii, 169 T h e o lo g y o f P h ilip p ia n s lx -lx iii, lxxii, 3 T h e o p h i lu s o f A n tio c h xx ix T h e s s a lo n ic a 2 3 ,2 7 0 T h y a tir a xxxvii T im o th v xxxvii, xxxviii, xlviii, Ixxvii, 4 - 5 , 1 5 2 -5 8 , 160, 161, 242, 281, 282 Tongue 129 T r a d it io n 1 3 ,2 4 5 ,2 5 2 - 5 3 T r o u b le . See A fflic tio n T r u th 34, 63, 145, 213, 219, 254, 283 U nity‫ ׳‬lvii, lxxii, 6, 20, 22, 7 0 -7 1 , 81, 8 6 -9 0 , 2 4 0 - 4 4 Via E gnatia xxxv V ic a rio u s 122, 253 V in d ic a tio n , v in d ic a to r 232 V irtu e 8 8 ,2 5 0 - 5 2

28, 49, 50, 149,

293

Index of Principal Topics

W e a lth 277 W in . See G a in “W ith C h rist. See C h r is t W itn e ss 2 8 ,4 9 W o m e n xxxviii W o rd o f t h e L o r d (G o d ) W o rk 2 4 -2 5 , 1 3 8 -4 2

39, 45

W o rk e rs c o -w o rk e rs w ith P au l 46, 1 5 6 ,1 5 8 , 163, 2 4 2 -4 4 evil w o rk e rs xlv, 172, 174 W o rry . A n x ie ty W o rs h ip 69, 89, 131, 164, 172, 1 7 5 -7 6 , 241, 272

W o rth , p r o v e n w o rth Y earn 29, 59, 230 Y okefellow 2 4 2 ,2 5 4 Z eal

30, 177, 186, 188

155, 201, 251

294

Index o f Biblical and O ther Ancient Sources The O ld Testament (* = S e p tu a g in t)

26:41

Genesis

Num bers

1 -3 1:14 1:16 1 :2 6 -2 7 1:30 1:31 2 :2 -3 3 :1 -5 3 -4 3 :4 -5 3:5 3:6 3 :1 6 -1 9 3:22 8:21 15:6 17 17:12 17:25 21:4 *2 4 :2 0 2 5 :2 6 3 0 :23 3 0 :24 3 5 :9 -1 9 3 5 :1 6 -1 8 4 3 :2 3

124 146 146 105, 111 lxxvii 25 24 111 8 105 lxxiv, 105, 111, 115, 132 105 105 105 272 194 174, 178 184 184 184 117 126 184 184 184 184 12

4 :16 6:14 6:26 12:7

12:8 1 4 -1 7 14:10 2 5 :1 -1 8 3 1 :14

175

18:28 19:10 19:14

9 145 246 5

2 K ings (4 Kingdoms)

111 143 111 186, 187 9

1:17 9 :3 6 11:18 12:11 13:14 16:13 20:1 2 2 :16

175 186 186

48 48 9 9 165 148 165 48

Deuteronomy 1 Chronicles *1:4 *6:13 *9:10 *10:12 10:16 * 10:20 2 1 :2 2 -2 3 * 2 3 :2 -4 23:31 2 7 :2 6 30:6 *32:5 33:12

186 175 186 175, 176 175 175 123 186 105 105 175 145 184

*13:2 2 3 :3 0

186 19

Ezra 4:1 4:17 7:12 9:5

185 12 3 19

N ehemiah 11:9

9

Joshua Esther *22:27

E xodus

175 *

3:5 14:3 1 5 -1 7 *1 5 :1 6 16:10 1 9 :5 -6 *23:25 2 4 :15 25:41 2 9 :18 2 9 :25 29:41 32:32 33:12 3 3:17

6 5 143 141 111 7 175 111 259 2 5 9 ,2 7 2 272 272 243 191 191

2:5 1:21 5:14 9 :4

185 185 99

1 Sam uel (1 Kingdom s) 9 :1 -2 *17:47 25:25

185 186 126

Job *3:24 5:19 *1 3 :1 6 18:14 *20:29

58 271 49 123 9

Psalms

15:21 2 2 :5 0

54 34

1 K ings (3 Kingdoms) 272 2 5 9 ,2 7 2 272 2 5 9 ,2 7 2 272 272 111 111 6 184 7 6

10 10 185

2 Sam uel (2 Kingdoms)

Leviticus * 1 :2 -1 3 1:9 * 1 :1 3 -1 7 1:13 * 2 :1 -1 0 * 2 :1 2 -1 3 9 :6 9:2 3 1 1 :4 4 -4 5 12:3 1 9 :2 -1 8 *19:2

1:10

* 2:2

Judges

2:27 *8:14 * 8:44 *8:55 12:21 13:2 13:5 13:9 13:17 13:32 *18:23

48 186 127 186 185 48 48 48 48 48 88

5:3 6 :10 1 4 :1 -3 *15:11 16 16:11 * 17:28 18:1 21 :1 3 * 2 1:23 22:1 22:5 *24:3 25:2 25:3 2 5 :20 *27:7

19 51 194 60 60 60 88 274 34 186 18 51 52 51 5 1 ,6 3 63 262

Index of Biblical and Other Ancient Sources

2 8 :1 -2 31:1 3 1 :17 3 2 :10 *33:19 * 3 4 :2 6 -2 7 3 5 :28 * 3 9 :1 5 -1 7 4 1 :13 *43:9 48:2 * 5 0 :1 8 -1 9 5 1 :17 5 3 :1 -3 53:5 * 5 4:14 *54:23 5 5 :1 7 *62:5 63:1 *68:7 6 8 :27 68:31 69:9 69:28 * 7 2 :2 3 -2 4 7 3 :2 3 -2 4 87 *96:9 *101:18 *104:3 106:30 106:31 110:1 * 1 1 2 :4 -6 113:9 *11 8 :6 7 * 1 18:80 *118:151 119:6 * 1 38:18 *13 9 :1 4 139:16 143:2 * 1 44:18

27 4 5 1 ,6 3 5 1 ,6 3 130 245 5 2 ,5 3 34 5 2 ,5 3 34 127 69 272 176 194 51 154 245 19 127 18 52 184 53 186 243 60 60 69 125 88 127 186 186 lxxiv, 123, 132, 134 88 27 4 88 52 245 63 60 60 243 194 245

Proverbs *1:4 *1:7 *1:22 *3:20 *5:2 *11:30 *21:18

31 31 31 31 31 3 3 ,3 4 75

Ecclesiastes 11:2

271

Isaiah *1:29

*

2:11

* 6 :1 -5 1 1 :1 -9 1 4 :1 2 -1 3 2 9 :13 35:4 4 1 :12 42 42:8 *42:19 44 :6 * 4 5:17 4 5 :2 2 4 5 :2 3 *45:23 48:2 4 8 :1 2 4 8 :1 3 *4 8 :2 0 *49:3 *49:4 *49:5 *49:8 * 4 9 :2 3 *50:7 5 2 -5 3 5 2 :1 3 -5 3 :1 2 5 2 :13 *53:11 5 3 :12 5 5 :1 0 -1 1 *57:15 58:5 6 0 :1 7 6 1 :1 0 6 4 :1 0 6 6 :18 * 6 6:20

88 6 12 115 176 232 27 4 119 27 4 119 25 52 127 lxix, lxxiv, 99 127 6 25 25 119 119 148 119 148 52 52 124 119 119 119 lxxiv, lxxvi, 119, 132, 134 48 88 264 11 194 6 129 69

Jerem iah 4:4 7:18 9 :2 3 -2 5 9 :2 3 -2 4 * 1 2:13 13:16 *14:2 *15:9 25:4 3 1 :3 4

175, 177 148 175 176 52 274 117 117 5 191

129 111 125 125 125 3, 12 19 120 7 243

Hosea 4:7 5:8 6:3 9 :4

liv 185 191 148

Joel 2:2 *2:16

25 186

Am os 1:3 1:6 1:9 1:11 1:13 3:2 3:7 5:20 *6:12 9 9 :1 1 -1 2

271 271 271 271 271 1 9 1 ,2 0 8 5 25 3 3 ,3 4 265 69

M icah 1:11 *2:5

Ezekiel * 1 7:24 20:41 44 :7 3 6 :2 5 -2 7 3 8 :17

3:7 3:19 *3:52 *3:54 * 3 :5 7 -5 8 4:1 6:10 7:13 7 :1 7 -2 7 12:1

295

liv 186

N ahum 3:5

liv

H a b a kku k 2:4 *2:16 *3:3

194 liv 249

Zjephaniah 88 2 5 9 ,2 7 2 175 176 5

3:11

52

Zechariah 1:6 14:8 -1 1

5 69

D aniel 52

3:4

129

Apocrypha and O T Pseudepigrapha 2 Baruch 78:2

3 Baruch 3, 12

5:5

1 Enoch 19

47:3 100:5

243 7

296

Index

of

4 Ezra 6:38 6:43

Biblical and O ther Ancient Sources 18:12

24 24

186

Odes o f Solomon 2 9 :1 ,1 1

52

50:1 * 5 0:10 5 1 :1 7

101 262 43

Testam ent o f Asher

J u d ith Prayer o f M anasseh *9:11

4:5

186

88 15

34

Testam ent o f D a n

74

5 5:2 12

1 Maccabees Psalms o f Solomon 1:51 2 :2 4 -2 9

9 186

2 Maccabees l :S - 5 8:8 9:1

17 43 58

3 Maccabees 4:6

22

4 Maccabees *2:15 *5:9 5 -6 *8:18 9 -1 5 *9:17

16:5 Sirach/Ecclesiasticus

87 87 75 87 75 10

*1:18 4:7 4:21 11:14 *11:22 2 0 :13 37:18 3 9 :10 4 1 :2 6 -4 43:7 43:31 45:23 46:1 4 8 :1 -2 48:48 49:8

7 254 7

Testam ent o f Levi 262 251 Iiv 54 262 251 54 34 56 146 53 186 101 101 101 101

1 8 :1 1 ,1 4

7

Tobit 1:13

1 1 0 ,1 1 4

W isdom o f Solomon *2:3 3:18 *4:4 9:1 5 13:2 *14:4 5 0 :15

88 83 262 233 146 87 148

The New Testament M atthew 1:25 2:10 2:18 3:14 4:2 4:3 4:6 5:6 5:8 5:12 5:1 4 5:32 5:48 6:8 6:9 6 :2 5 -3 4 6:26 6:30 6:32 7:13 8:3 8:4 9:38 10:20 1 0 :2 4 -2 5 1 0 :4 0 -4 2 11:29 12:1 12:13 12:27 12:49 14:20 15:2

197 261 222 45 266 111 1 1 1 ,2 1 2 265 7 75 146 69 2 1 1 ,2 1 5 24 6 1 3 ,2 7 5 245 3 2 ,4 5 8 2 ,2 1 2 155 223 209 174 174 51 78 272 244 266 209 82 209 26 6 142

1 5 :8 -9 1 5 :2 1 -2 8 15:36 1 6 :2 5 -2 6 16:26 17:17 18:4 18:10 2 1 :3 3 -4 6 23:5 23:12 23:15 2 3 :2 9 -3 7 24:12 24:15 2 4 :29 2 5 :3 1 -4 6 2 5 :3 1 -4 0 26:8 2 6 :37 2 7 :27 28:18

176 174 21 124, 131 188, 193 145 1 0 7 ,1 2 4 ,1 3 1 ,2 6 4 174 75 53 124, 131 172 75 26 7 267 33 272 74 21 xliii 126

M ark 1:1 1:2 1:15 1:24 1:44 3:4 3 :3 4 -3 5 5:4 7 :1 -1 6 7 :6 -7

23 25 23 7 174 140 43 27 224 176

8:1 7 8 :3 4 -3 8 8:3 6 1 0 :4 3 -4 4 10:45 11:22 12:44 13:9 13:11 13:19 14:4 14:33 15:16 1 6 :1 2 -2 0 16:12

282 227 193 6, 103 1 0 , 1 2 ,1 1 9 , 1 2 2 ,1 5 6 195 263 44 51 267 223 164 xliii 110 110

L uke 1:43 1:46 1:49 1:59 1:78 2:4 2:10 2:14 2:21 2:34 2:52 3:5 4:3 4:9 6:48 7:25 7:30

29 53 7 184 85 27 261 274 57, 184 46 120, 121 264 111 111 27 110 130

Index of Biblical an d Other Ancient Sources

8:37 8:45 9:25 10:20 11:2 1 1 :1 9 -2 0 1 2 :1 1 -1 2 12:12 1 2 :2 2 -3 2 14:11 1 6 :2 2 -2 6 18:4 18:5 18:14 18:21 19:10 19:11 19:38 19:43 2 2 :27 22:32 23:43 24:29 24:39 24:52

58 58 193 244 275 212 51 51 245 1 2 4 ,1 3 1 60 131 27 124 187 122 27 274 58 119 20 60 196 177 261

John 1 :1 -1 4 1:1 1:4 1:5 1:12 1:14 2:24 3:16 4 :2 3 -2 4 5:18 6:46 7:22 7:42 11:1 11:39 13 1 3 :1 -2 1 3 :3 -1 7 13:15 13:31 13:35 14:12 1 4 :1 6 -1 8 14:26 15:4 15:8 15:13 16:7 1 6 :1 2 -1 3 17:3 17:5 17:11 18:28 18:33 19:9 20:25 20:28 2 1 :17

110 146 146 206 145 120, 146, 177 27 223 176 125 2 0 5 ,2 6 3 26 3 205 165 184 119 103 12, 103, 124, 131 104 130 244 245 245 245 34 29 29 51 245 2 9 ,1 9 7 111 7 xliii xliii xliii 218 103 49

Acts 1 -1 0 1:10 2:16 2 :3 2 -3 3 2:3 6 2:43

126 57 52 126 127, 129, 133 145

3:16 4:2 4:9 4:13 4 :2 9 -3 1 5 :3 0 -3 1 5:3 4 5:41 6:1 8:3 8:8 8:39 8:40 9 9 :1 -8 9:1 9 :3 -5 9:4 9:5 9:1 3 9:15 9:3 7 10 10:22 10:33 10:34 10:41 10:46 10:47 11:26 1 3 -1 4 13:10 14:9 14:23 15:1 15:3 15:4 15:23 15:29 15:38 16 1 6 :1 -1 5 1 6 :1 -3 1 6 :6 -4 0 16:9 16:10 1 6 :1 2 -4 0 16:12 16:13 1 6 :1 4 -1 5 16:14 16:15 1 6 :1 6 -4 0 1 6 :1 6 -2 4 16:17 1 6 :1 9 -2 1 16:19 16:21 16:23 16:25 16:27 1 6 :3 0 -3 3 1 6 :3 2 -3 3 16:32 1 6 :3 3 -3 4 16:37 16:40 17 1 7 :1 -9 1 7 :1 -5 17:4 17:5 1 7 :1 0 -1 3

195 27 140 206 46 126 186 75 143, 185 186 261 115 xlix 187 lxi 186 2 0 1 ,2 7 2 187 189 7 76 165 xlix 251 267 20 6 242 53 242 44 269 145 140 10 213 261 9 3, 12 278 160 xxxviii, xliii, xliii, liii, 72, 138, 153, 163, 241 4 153 xxxvi xxxvii xxxvi, 153 lxix, lxxiii, lxxv, lxxvii, 119, 21 9 xxxv, xxxvi, 70, 78 xxxvii xxxviii 1 3 9 ,2 4 1 xxxviii 4 77 xxxviii x x x ix 5 1 ,5 2 xxxvi, 78 xxxviii 134 xxxviii xxxviii 139 xxxviii, 146 xxxviii x x x ix xxxviii, 241 xxxvi xxviii, 270 72 241 liii, 223 72

17:12 17:13 1 7 :2 2 -3 1 17:26 17:28 1 8 :1 -2 18:2 18:3 18:5 18:6 18:10 18:12 18:18 1 8 :2 4 -2 6 1 9 :8 -9 19:9 19:10 1 9 :1 1 -1 2 1 9 :2 1 -2 3 1 9 :2 1 -2 2 19:21 19:22 19:25 19:26 2 0 :1 -6 2 0 :1 -3 2 0 :3 -6 20:6 2 0 :1 8 -1 9 2 0 :2 0 -2 1 2 0 :28 2 0 :30 20:31 21 2 1 :8 -9 2 1 :16 2 1 :28 21:31 2 1 :36 2 1 :3 7 -2 6 :3 2 2 1 :40 22 22:1 22:2 22:3 2 2 :4 -5 22:5 22:6

22:22 2324 23 2 3 :1 -3 23:1 23:6 23:7 23:11 2 3 :1 2 -1 5 2 3 :1 6 -2 2 2 3 :24 2 3 :26 2 3 :30 2 3 :3 1 -3 2 23:35 2425 2 4 :1 -9 2 4 :16 24:23 2 4 :2 4 -2 7 2 4 :2 4 -2 6 2 4 :26 2 4 :27 2 5 :1 -2 6 :3 2 25:3 25:10 25:11

297 241 liii, 223 249 249 55, 108 xlvi xliv, 27 1 3 8 ,2 7 6 276 liii, 223 xlv xlv xliv, xlvi xliv xliii, xliii liii, 223 xliii, 166 xliii xxxviii 153 xlvii xliii, xliii xliii xliii xliii, 141, 158, 262, 281 xxxviii 102, 153 xxxviii xliii 252 1 0 ,1 1 145 1 6 0 ,2 2 2 44 xlix xlix 1 1 1 xlvii 185 187 28 185, 186 lxi, 185, 186 186 186 186

1 44 xliii 223 68 185, 186 52 xlv, xlvii 223 192 44 1 2 ,4 4 1,2 7 8 xlvii xliii, xlvi, 44 77 223 33 xlvi 44 xlvi 44 xlvi, xlvii, 44, 54 44 1 xliv 1

298 2 5 :1 4 2 5 :16 2 5 :2 4 2 6 -2 8 26 2 6 :4 -5 26:5 26:6 2 6 :9 -1 1 26:11 26:21 2 6 :28 2 6 :29 27:1 27 :4 27:9 2 7 :12 2 7 :23 2 7 :3 4 28 2 8 :7 -1 0 2 8 :1 6 -3 1 2 8 :1 6 2 8 :17 2 8 :1 9 2 8 :2 1 -2 8 28:21 2 8 :2 5 -2 9 2 8 :3 0 -3 1 2 8 :30 28:31

Index

of

43 28 1 xlviii 187 185 186 52 186 186 1 ,2 4 2 44 28 281 27 27 200 18 5 0 ,1 4 0 xlii, xliii 169 xlvii xli xli xlvii xlvii xlii 223 141, 161 xli, xlix, 77 xlii, 77

R om ans 1 1 :1 -7 1:1 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:11 1 :1 3 -1 5 1:13 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:20 1 :2 1 -2 3 1:21 1:28 1:29 2:4 2:7 2 :1 7 -2 9 2 :1 7 -2 0 2:18 2 :2 5 -2 9 2 :2 8 -2 9 2:29 3:8 3:10 3:2 0 3:25 3:2 6 4:5 4:9 4:18 5 -8 5 :1 -1 1 5:1 5:2 5:4 5:5

3 3 2, 12, 163 2 7 ,2 1 8 6, 7, 1 2 ,1 3 9 18, 19 1 8 ,1 9 ,2 0 , 2 8 2 0 ,2 0 0 159 xlvii 41 2 2 , 2 3 ,4 9 , 5 3 194 105 62 225 1 4 4 ,2 4 6 ,2 4 7 2 5 ,3 2 48 193 263 liii 82 31 225 175 249 227 187 174 73 73 202 57 51 118 149 2 0 4 ,2 4 6 52 155 3 0 ,5 2

Biblical and O ther Ancient Sources 5:7 5 :9 -1 0 5:9 5 :1 2 -2 1 5 :1 2 -1 8 5 :1 2 -1 4 5:12 5 :1 5 -1 7 5:15 5:1 6 5 :1 7 -1 8 5 :1 8 -1 9 5:1 9 5:21 6 :1 -1 4 6 :1 -1 2 6:2 6 :4 -1 1 6:4 6:5 6:6 6:8 6:10 6:11 6 :1 8 -2 2 6:21 7 7 :1 -6 7:5 7:6 8 :1 -1 1 8:1 8 :2 -1 1 8:3 8:5 8 :9 -1 1 8:9 8:14 8 :1 7 -1 8 8 :1 9 -2 5 8:19 8:20 8:21 8:22 8:23 8:24 8:25 8:28 8:32 8:3 4 8 :3 8 -3 9 8:38 9 -1 1 9 :1 -5 9 :1 -2 9:2 9:4 9:5 9 :2 2 -2 3 9:2 2 9 :2 4 -2 6 1 0 :1 -4 1 0 :1 -3 10:1 10:3 10:9 10:10 11:1 11:4 11:5 11:14 1 1 :2 3 -2 4 11:25 11:26 11:28

251 232 232 8 198 105 2 0 7 ,2 6 2 30, 122 7 21 200 111 62, 105 200 227 198 242 197, 198 60, 69, 198, 199 199 6 0 ,1 9 6 ,1 9 9 60, 198, 199 199 59, 199 5 224 187 5 177 84 51 147 55 118, 120, 198 57 245 51, 1 7 6 ,1 7 7 176 lxviii, 198 2 3 2 ,2 3 4 51, 177, 232 52 232 105 232 52 232 263 76, 165 126 56, 60, 200 54 145 1 4 5 ,2 2 2 liv 247 175, 184 Ixii 58 224 175 145, 189 194 20, 146, 185, 247 177 129, 189 4 9 ,1 8 9 1 8 4 ,1 8 5 127 263 200 145 41 145 liv

11:36 1 2 :1 -2 12:1 12:2 1 2 :3 -8 12:3 12:6 12:7 12:16 13 13:1 13:4 13:11 1 4 :7 -9 14:14 14:17 1 5 :1 -7 15:1 15:5 15:6 15:7 15:8 15:13 15:16 15:18 15:20 1 5 :2 3 -2 9 15:23 1 5 :2 4 -2 8 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:27 15:28 1 5 :3 0 -3 1 15:30 15:31 1 5 :3 3 -1 6 :1 15:33 16 1 6 :1 -2 16:1 16:2 1 6 :$ -4 16:3 16:4 16:9 1 6 :1 6 -1 9 1 6 :1 7 -2 0 16:17 16:18 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22 16:26 16:27

3 4 ,2 7 4 ,2 7 5 lvii, 164 53, 82, 85, 1 4 8 ,1 7 6 , 272 32 213 27 27 11 85 lxx 8 8 ,2 4 7 10, 146 49 55 153 246 106 212 85, 106, 273 13 167 10 3 0 , 3 1 ,2 4 6 76, 148, 164 57 xlvii xlvii xlvii, 141 xlii xlvii, 141 7 7 ,2 2 27 0 141 50 82 7 xxxii 2 5 4 ,2 7 3 xx x i, Hi, 3, 278, 279 11 10 7, 167 xliv, xlvi 163 259 163 xxxii lii 8 2 ,2 1 8 lii, liv, 224 73, 144 254 153 4 ,2 8 2 263 274

1 C orinthians 1:1 1:2 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:12 1:14 1:18 1:23 1:26

2, 4, 163 240 12 1 8 ,1 9 ,2 1 274 25 232 25 2 5 ,8 4 82 21 7 19 77, 223, 232 46, 123, 22 3 174

Index o f Biblical an d Other Ancient Sources

1 :3 0 -3 1 1:31 2 2:1 2:3 2:4 2 :6 -8 2:6 2:8 2:17 3:3 3:5 3 :1 0 -1 5 3:10 3:13 3:15 3:17 3:22 4 :1 -5 4:4 4:5 4:6 4 :8 -1 3 4:8 4:9 4 :1 1 -1 3 4:12 4:13 4 :1 4 -1 7 4 :1 6 -1 7 4:1 6 4 :1 7 -1 9 4:17 4:19 4:21 5:2 5:5 5:7 5:8 6 :1 -1 1 6:19 6:20 7:19 7:32 7:37 7:39 7:40 8 :1 -1 8 8 :1 -1 1 8 :1 -3 8:1 8 :5 -6 8:1 2 9 :1 -2 9 :5 9:1 0 9:11 9 :1 5 -1 8 9:1 6 9:18 9 :2 4 9:2 7 1 0 :1 -1 3 10:1 10:10 10:13 10:18 10:24 1 0 :3 1 -1 1 :1 10:32 10:33 11:1 11:7 11:16 11:22

7 176 172 20 141 84 119 211 197 32 69 10 33 27 25 232 78 54 147 203 249 57 259 1 3 3 ,2 1 6 128 266 259 75 156 217 82, 137, 217 152 4, 153, 155, 157, 160, 161 157 141 45 7 4 ,2 3 2 25 32 143 51 5 ,5 4 225 245 247 153 176 259 191 49 212 lxiii 187 163 163 5 1 ,5 2 8 2 ,2 1 2 ,2 7 0 23 62 2 9 ,2 5 9 207 142, 147, 200, 219 142 41 143 196 174 89 106 33, 181 89 1 0 6 ,1 3 7 ,2 1 6 , 2 1 7 ,2 5 3 110 181 181

11:23 1 2 :1 -1 0 12:3 12:12 12:13 12:23 1 2 :2 8 -2 9 12:28 13:2 13:5 13:8 1 3 :9 -1 0 13:12 13:13 14:3 14:4 14:6 14:12 14:16 14:22 14:30 14:33 1 5 :1 -1 0 1 5 :1 -3 15:1 1 5 :3 -5 15:3 1 5 :8 -1 0 15:8 15:9 15:12 15:15 15:18 1 5 :2 0 -2 8 15:20 15:22 1 5 :2 5 -2 8 15:25 15:26 15:28 15:32 1 5 :3 5 -5 5 15:41 1 5 :4 2 -5 7 1 5 :4 2 -4 4 15:42 15:43 1 5 :4 5 -4 9 1 5 :4 5 -4 7 15:45 15:47 15:48 15:49 15:53 15:58 16 1 6 :1 -3 16:1 16:3 16:7 16:10 16:13 16:15 16:17 1 6 :1 9 -2 0 16:19 16:20 16:21 16:22 16:23

129 213 58, 1 2 9 ,1 7 6 ,1 8 9 187 7 0 ,1 8 7 22 4 163 8 ,1 1 191 89 191 20 7 30, 190 52 83 83 191 30 2 7 5 ,2 8 2 146 213 254 156 22 58 253 lxii 208 163 1 8 1 ,1 8 6 134, 200, 216 51 61 134, 2 07, 210 211 8 ,1 9 8 126 133 166 130 xliii, xliv, 77, 184, 2 2 3 59 32 235 201 234 234 8 111 5 9 ,2 3 3 59 234 198 23 4 3 0 , 3 1 ,1 3 9 , 1 6 0 ,2 3 5 xlvii 259 7 ,2 6 1 3 2 ,7 0 153 153, 160 70 82 168 278 xliv 280 4 ,2 8 2 lxxvii, 245 273

2 Corinthians 1 1:1

153,

xlvii, 4 163, 181

1:2 1 :3 -8 1:3 1 :4 -6 1 :4 -5 1:4 1:5 1:6 1 :8 -1 1 1 :8 -1 0 1:8 1 :9 -1 1 1:19 1:20 1 :2 1 -2 2 1:23 1:24 2:3 2:4 2:9 2:11 2:12 2 :1 5 -1 6 3 3 :1 -1 8 3:3 3:5 3:9 3:12 3 :1 7 -1 8 3:17 3:18 4 :4 4:6 4 :7 -1 4 4 :7 -1 1 4 :8 -1 2 4:8 4 :1 0 -1 1 4:10 4 :1 1 -1 2 4:11 4:12 4:14 4:15 4 :1 6 -1 8 4:1 7 5 :1 -1 1 5 :1 -1 0 5 :1 -8 5 :1 -5 5 :2 -8 5:3 5:4 5:5 5 :6 -8 5:7 5:10 5 :1 4 -1 7 5:14 5:16 5:1 7 5:18 5:19 5:21 6 :4 -5 6 :8 -1 0 6:11 6 :1 4 -1 5 7 :1 -2 7 :9 -1 0 7:10 7:11 7:15 8 -9

299 12 265 1 3 ,8 1 ,8 5 75 30 1 4 7 ,2 6 8 83 5 0 ,5 7 77 xliii, xliv, 184, 200, 223, 228 2 5 ,2 6 8 50 4 2 7 5 ,2 8 2 51 28 2 0 5 ,2 6 3 2 1 ,5 7 222, 2 47, 26 8 29 24 7 163 74 lxx 186 176 2 0 5 ,2 6 3 30 5 2 ,5 3 245 233 191 111 191 228 198 266 62 200 54 223 184 75 60 30 225 5 1 ,2 6 8 60 61 200 59 60 193 6 2 ,2 6 2 51 61 69 147 198 58 197 55, 188 196 22 198 26 6 20 0 2 4 7 ,2 6 9 xxxii xx x ii 193 49 251 141 259

300 8 :1 -5 8 :1 -4 8 :1 -3 8 :1 -2 8 :2 -4 8:2 8:4 8:5 8 :6 -9 8:6 8:7 8:9 8:10 8 :1 6 -1 9 8:23 9:1 9 :7 9 :8 -1 1 9:8 9:1 2 9:1 3 9:15 1 0 -1 3 10:1 10:7 10:8 10:11 10:15 10:17 11 11:2 11:4 11:5 11:6 1 1 :7 -1 0 1 1 :7 -9 1 1 :8 -9 11:9 1 1 :1 3 -1 5 11:13 11:15 1 1 :1 6 -2 9 1 1 :2 1 -3 3 11:22 1 1 :2 3 -3 3 1 1 :2 3 -2 9 1 1 :2 3 -2 7 11:23 1 1 :2 8 -2 9 11:28 11:31 11:32 1 2 :1 -1 0 1 2 :2 -4 1 2 :7 -9 1 2 :9 -1 0 12:20 12:21 13:1 13:4 13:11 13:12 13:13

Index

of

Biblical and O ther A ncient Sources

xxviii, 259 260 xxxviii, 261 7 2 ,2 7 2 262 30, 148, 155, 274, 277 7, 22, 73 263 106 xlvii, 24 30 1 1 7 ,2 0 2 ,2 5 5 xlvii 152 163 7 247 271 30, 263, 2 64, 273 7 22 1 9 ,2 1 lxx, Ixxi, 47, 54, 143, 172, 184, 1 9 8 ,2 1 2 ,2 2 3 2 4 4 ,2 5 5 174 52 57 52 176 xliv 251 xliv, 46, 184, 223 163 218 259 23 2 5 9 ,2 6 0 xlv, 23 xliv, xlv, lv, 46, 184, 2 23, 226, 227 163 223 182 200 1 8 4 ,1 8 5 254 6 7 ,2 6 3 ,2 6 6 5 4 ,5 5 xliii 54 1 5 4 ,2 5 5 13 247 1 8 2 ,2 2 3 115 165 267 48 26 4 155 60 8 5 , 1 7 2 ,2 5 4 2 7 8 ,2 8 0 8 4 ,2 7 3

1:11 1:13 1:14 1 :1 5 -1 6 1 :1 8 -2 :1 1:23 2:2 2:4 2:8 2:9 2:10 2 :1 1 -3 :5 2:14 2 :1 5 -2 1 2:16 2 :1 9 -2 0 2:20 2:21 3:1 3:2 3:3 3:5 3:6 3:7 3:1 0 3:13 3:29 4:3 4:4 4:6 4 :8 -9 4:9 4:11 4:13 4:20 4:21 4:26 5:1 5 :1 -1 2 5:2 5:4 5:5 5:6 5:12 5 :1 3 -1 5 5:13 5:16 5:18 5 :2 0 -2 1 5:22 5:23 5:25 5:2 6 6:1 6:6 6:8 6:11 6:13 6 :1 4 -1 5 6:14 6:15 6:1 6 6:18 Ephesians

G alatians

1:1 1:2

1:2 1:3 1:5 1:6 -1 1 1 :6 -9 1 :6 -8 1 :6 -7

1:3 1 :5 -9 1 :7 -1 0 1:8 1:10 1:11 1:14

4 12 274 lv 46, 174 23 Hi

58 1 8 1 ,1 8 6 1 1 0 ,1 8 6 208 269 68, 186 147 129 142 27, 57, 73 68 lii 110 12 195 198 20, 55, 60, 195, 200 Hi lii, 1 7 1 ,2 6 9 68 2 4 ,8 4 51, 142 25 177 105 105, 123 177 119 120 51 5 1 1 9 ,1 9 1 ,2 0 8 147 165 261 171 231 70 225 175 lvi, 33 5 2 ,2 3 2 1 4 2 ,2 6 6 175 227 87 69, 84, 213 84 48 34 232 84, 142, 213, 214 87 212 45 224 4 ,2 8 2 1 7 6 ,2 2 4 177 176 225 1 7 5 ,2 1 3 2 7 3 ,2 8 2

2 12 13, 18 143 234 30 128, 129 263 25

1:16 1:17 1:18 1:19 1 :2 0 -2 1 1:21 1:22 1:23 2 :1 -1 0 2:2 2:5 2:8 2:18 2:19 2:20 3:2 3 :3 -5 3:3 3:5 3:10 3:13 3:14 3:18 3:21 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:4 4:10 4:11 5:1 5:2 5 :8 a 5:19 5:23 6:5 6 :1 0 -1 7 6:10 6 :1 3 -1 7 6:21 6:23 6:24

1 8 ,1 9 ,2 0 51 213 234 126 247 234 117 232 69, 142 199 7 6 ,2 3 2 70, 189 69, 231 164 27 4 263 164 128 73 127 7 7 ,2 0 6 274 82 77 7 1 ,8 4 70 117 8 217 272 146 101 229 141 163 267 70 10, 43 281 273

Philippians 1 :1 -3 :l a 1 :1 -2 6 1 :1-11 1 :1 -2 1:1

xxxi, xxxii 1 5 ,4 0 lix, lxiii, lxviii, 17 lviii, lix, 6, 17, 34 xxviii, xxxiv, xli, xlii, xliii, xlviii, xlix, lxiii, lxxviii, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12,18, 21, 153, 156, 161, 163, 194, 241, 248, 280 1:1ft xx ix 1:2 1x 11, 2 , 1 2 , 2 8 1 1 :3 -2 6 lviii 1:3 -1 1 lviii, lix, 15, 17, 18, 34, 260 1 :3 -8 34 1 :3 -6 1 7 ,2 5 ,2 6 , 2 8 1 :3 -5 2 6 ,2 5 8 ,2 6 1 1 :3 -4 20 1:3 x x x iii, lvii, lxii, lxv, lxxiii, 17,18, 19, 22, 258, 260, 274, 275, 279 1:4 6 ,1 9 ,2 0 ,2 8 ,2 9 ,5 0 ,6 3 , 238, 239, 244, 246 1 :5 -1 5 lxiii 1 :5 -7 267 1:5 1 9 ,2 1 ,2 2 ,2 3 ,2 4 ,2 7 ,7 8 , 83, 156, 238, 258, 260, 275 1:6 lxvi, lxxvii, 2, 6, 23, 24, 25, 26, 33, 78, 140, 157, 230 1 :7 -8 17 1:7 xli, xlvi, xlix, lvii, lxv, lxxiii. 6, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 52, 55, 67, 77,

301

Index of Biblical and Other Ancient Sources

1:8 1:9 -1 1 1:9 1:10 l:1 0 fr‫ ־‬l l 1:11 1 :1 2 -2 :3 0 1 :1 2 -2 :1 6 1 :1 2 -3 0 1 :1 2 -2 6 1 :1 2 -1 8 l :1 2 - 1 8 a 1 :1 2 -1 7 1 :1 2 -1 4 1 :1 2 -1 3 1:12

1 :1 3 -1 4 1:13 1 :1 4 -1 8 1 :1 4 -1 7 1:14 1 :1 5 -1 8 l :1 5 - 1 8 a 1 :1 5 -1 7 1:15 1 :1 6 -1 7 1:16 1 :1 7 -2 8 1 :1 7 -1 8 1:17 1 :1 8 -2 4 1 :1 8 -2 0 1:18 1 :1 8 a 1:1 8 6 -2 6 1:186-21 1 :1 9 -2 6 1:1 9 -2 1 1 :1 9 -2 0 l :1 9 - 2 0 a 1:19 1 :2 0 -2 3 1:2 0 -2 1 1:20 1 :2 0 a 1:206 1:20 b-c 1 :2 1 -2 6 1 :2 1 -2 4 1 :2 1 -2 3 1 :2 1 -2 2 1:21 1 :2 1 a 1:216 1 :2 2 -2 6 1 :2 2 -2 4 1:22 1:23 1:24—2 6 1 :2 4 -2 5 1:24 1 :2 5 -2 6 1:25 1:26

83, 84, 1 4 9 ,2 1 1 ,2 1 2 ,2 3 8 , 2 4 1 ,2 4 7 , 26 0 , 2 6 1 ,2 7 9 lxii, 6, 27, 28, 84, 85, 164, 238, 239, 279 1 7 , 3 1 ,3 4 , 2 7 4 1 7 , 2 0 , 2 9 , 3 1 ,4 2 , 2 4 6 ,2 6 0 , 2 6 5 lxxvi, lxxvii, 2, 25, 31, 32, 147, 204 32 lxii, lxxviii, 2, 33, 260 lix, 36 67 8 1 , 8 2 ,8 3 lvi, lviii, lix, 36, 67, 68 246 42 268 xliii, 39, 41 xxviii, xliii lviii, lxxi, 23, 42, 55, 63, 77, 78, 141, 143, 157, 162, 238, 239 lxv, 43 xli, xlii, xlv, xlvi, xlix, 2, 4 3 ,5 5 , 143, 281 xlix xli, xlii, li lx x i, 24, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46 xlvii, 43 39, 41, 45 x xxii, xliv, 11, 89, 157, 281 3, 23, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 67 4 5 ,4 6 ,1 7 1 xliii, xlvi, 23, 46, 48, 53, 55, 155, 238, 240 lxiii 46 xli, xlix , lxv, 3, 7, 47, 48, 55, 67, 87, 26 8 xxviii lvii li, Hi, 3, 20, 42, 48, 173, 239 4 5 , 4 6 ,4 8 4 0 ,4 1 4 2 ,4 8 40 xlix xli, xliv, 48 52 Ixx, 2, 20, 28, 48, 49, 52, 54, 57, 74, 140 138 lii, lxi xlix, 3, 42, 5 1 ,5 4 49 52, 53 40 40 54 5 1 ,1 4 9 ,1 5 7 lxv 3 ,4 0 ,5 4 ,5 6 ,5 7 ,6 1 ,1 8 2 54 54 42 40, 156 36, 54, 56, 57, 62, 238 3, 54, 55, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 165 xlvii xlix 5 4 ,6 2 ,1 7 7 4 0 ,5 0 xli, xlv, lviii, 6, 2 1 ,2 4 , 42, 54, 62, 77, 157, 238, 239 xlii, Ixxiii, 40, 56, 63, 141, 176, 265

1 :2 7 -4 :9 lviii 1 :2 7 -2 :3 0 78 1 :2 7 -2 :2 4 109 1 :2 7 -2 :1 8 lviii, lix, 69, 137, 138 1 :2 7 -2 :1 2 129 1 :2 7 -2 :5 137 1 :2 7 -3 0 lviii, lix, Ixxiii, 66, 67, 68, 81, 90 1 :2 7 -2 9 lii 1 :2 7 -2 8 6 7 ,2 3 0 1:27 lvii, lviii, lxix, Ixxiii, lxxv, lxxvii, lxxviii, 3, 23, 29, 40, 43, 55, 63, 66, 68, 72, 74, 75, 77, 7 8 , 8 1 ,8 3 , , 139, 230, 235, 238, 2 4 0 ,2 4 2 , 243 1 :2 7 a 2 3 ,7 5 1:276 23, 75, 139 1 :2 8 -2 :3 0 160 1:2 8 -3 1 68 1 :2 8 -3 0 li, lvi, lxi, lxv, 78, 119, 133, 138, 140, 143, 163, 169 1 :2 8 -2 9 lxxviii 1:28 lii, liv, lxxviii, 67, 7 1 ,7 2 , 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 140, 223, 245 1 :2 8 a 72 1:2 8 6 -2 9 77 1:286 74 1 :2 9 -3 0 lxv 1:29 Ixxiii, 3, 55, 68, 72, 74, 75, 76, 79 1:30 xlii, lxiii, Ixxiii, lxxvii, 55, 68, 72, 76, 139 2 155 2 :1 -4 :1 lviii, 62 2 :1 -3 :2 1 lviii 2 :1 -1 2 lxiii 2 :1 -1 1 lviii, 67, 104, 182 2 :1 -5 1 1 , 3 0 ,1 7 3 ,2 4 1 2 :1 -4 li, lix, lxv, lxvii, lxxii, Ixxiii, lxxiv, lxxv, lxxvi, lxxvii, lxxviii, , 67, 70, 7 8 , 8 1 ,8 3 , 85, 86, 106, 107, 132, 134, 137, 138, 143, 150, 152, 157, 247 2:1 3, 22, 71, 81, 82, 84, 85, 90, 212 2 :2 -4 lvii, 107 2:2 2 1 , 2 6 , 2 9 , 8 1 ,8 5 , 1 0 7 , 212. 238, 239, 261 2 :2 6 -4 81 2 :3 -1 5 146 2:3 -1 1 1 1 7 ,1 1 9 2 :3 -4 30, 8 1 ,8 7 . 90, 103, 159, 144 2:3 87, 107, 117, 122, 144, 241, 247 2:4 lxiii, lxxvi, 88, 89, 90, 107, 133, 139, !52. !57, 109, 134, 139, 2 1 2 , 2 1 3 , 214, 238, 241, 261, 280 2 :5 1 1 ‫־‬ li, lix, lxii, lxvii, 67, 9 0 , 9 1 ,9 9 , 105, 109, 134, 135 2:5 lxii, lxvii, lxxii, lxxiv, lxxvii, 25, 26, 66, 76, 104, 106, 107 :6-11 xxix, li, lv, lix, lxi, lxii, lxiv, lxvi, lxvi, lxvii, lxviii, lxix, lxx, lxxi, lxxii, Ixxiii, lxxiv, lxxvi, lxxvii, 1 , 3 , 5 , 12, 13, 14, 67, 76, 90, 99, 101, 102, 103, 104, 107, 109, 110, 113, 119, 121, 124, 125, 132, 134, 137, 139, 150, 152, 153, 1 6 6 ,2 1 7 , 226, 229, 253, 283 2 :6 -9 107 2 :6 -8 lxvii, lxxvi, 100, 123, 134, 199, 216, 245 2 :6 -7 xxix, 192 2 :6 -7 a 100, 101

86

2:6

2 :6 a 2:66 2 :7 -8 2:7

2:7