Lectionary Calendar
Saturday, July 19th, 2025
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
video advertismenet
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
For 10¢ a day you can enjoy StudyLight.org ads
free while helping to build churches and support pastors in Uganda.
Click here to learn more!
free while helping to build churches and support pastors in Uganda.
Click here to learn more!
Bible Commentaries
International Critical Commentary NT International Critical
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Driver, S.A., Plummer, A.A., Briggs, C.A. "Commentary on Philippians 2". International Critical Commentary NT. https://studylight.org/commentaries/eng/icc/philippians-2.html. 1896-1924.
Driver, S.A., Plummer, A.A., Briggs, C.A. "Commentary on Philippians 2". International Critical Commentary NT. https://studylight.org/
Whole Bible (53)New Testament (17)Individual Books (13)
Verses 1-99
2:1-4. EXHORTATION TO UNANIMITY, LOVE, AND HUMILITY
If therefore there is any power of exhortation in your experience as Christians; if your mutual love affords you any consolation; if you are in true fellowship with the Spirit of God; if there are any tender mercies and compassions in your heartsâI beseech you to complete my joy by your unanimity and your love to each other. Do not act from a spirit of faction or vainglory, but each of you account his brother as better than himself, and study his interests in preference to your own.
1. εἴ ÏÎ¹Ï Î¿á½Î½ ÏαÏάκληÏÎ¹Ï á¼Î½ ΧÏιÏÏá¿·: âif there be any exhortation in Christ.â
The particular connection of οá½Î½ is clearly with 1:27, á¼¥ÏÎ¹Ï â¦ á¼Î½ á¼Î¼Î¿Î¯ being a digression, though not parenthetical. The main element of ÏολιÏεÏεÏθε is brave standing for the gospel in a spirit of concord. It is this which is taken up and expanded in the opening of this chapter. âI have exhorted you to stand fast in one spirit; to strive with one mind for the faith of the gospel, unterrified by your adversaries. Therefore complete my joy by being of one accord and avoiding faction and vainglory.â Out of this appeal grows, logically, the exhortation to humility, without which such unanimity cannot be maintained. The exhortation opens in the form of an adjuration. The rapid succession and variety of the appeals and the repetition of εἴ ÏÎ¹Ï are peculiarly impressive. Says Chrys.: Ïá¿¶Ï Î»Î¹ÏαÏá¿¶Ï, ÏÏοδÏá¿¶Ï, μεÏá½° ÏÏ Î¼ÏÎ±Î¸ÎµÎ¯Î±Ï Ïολλá¿Ï! âHow earnestly, how vehemently, with how much sympathy!â
This earnestness was largely due to the fact that Paul was disturbed by reports of internal dissensions in the Philippian church. This is indicated not only by his words here, but by his moving appeal to the example of Christ; his admonition to do all things without murmurings and disputings (vs. 14); his entreaty of Euodia and Syntyche (4:2); his exhortation to moderation or forbearance (4:5); and his reference to the peace of God (4:7).
The appeal is upon four grounds. The first and third set forth objective principles of Christian life; the second and fourth, subjective principles. The appeal is not to what was demanded by the readersâ personal relations to Paul. So Chrys. âIf ye wish to give me any comfort in my trials, and encouragement in Christ; if you have sympathy with me in my sufferings,â etc. So the Gk. Fathers generally. It is the Christian experience of the Philippians that is appealed to. âI exhort you by those feelings of which, as Christians, you are conscious.â
ÏαÏάκληÏÎ¹Ï á¼Î½ ΧÏιÏÏá¿·: If the fact of your being in Christ has any power to exhort you to brotherly concord. (Comp. 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Ephesians 4:15, Ephesians 4:16.)
ΠαÏάκληÏÎ¹Ï from ÏαÏακαλεá¿Î½, âto call to oneâs sideâ for help, counsel, etc. Thus ÏαÏάκληÏοÏ, âan advocate,â is one who is called in to plead anotherâs cause. With this primary sense are associated the ideas of entreaty, exhortation, and consolation. In the sense of âentreaty,â the noun appears in N.T. only in 2 Corinthians 8:4, but the verb is common. (See Matthew 8:34, Matthew 8:14:36; Mark 1:40, etc.) As âconsolationâ or âcomfort,â the noun, Luke 2:25, Luke 2:6:24; 2 Corinthians 1:3, 2 Corinthians 1:7:4; the verb, 2 Corinthians 1:4, 2 Corinthians 1:6, 2 Corinthians 1:7:6. As âexhortationâ or âcounsel,â the noun, Acts 13:15; Romans 12:8; Hebrews 13:22; the verb, Acts 2:40, Acts 2:11:23; Romans 12:8; Titus 2:15. The last sense is the usual one in Paul.
ÏαÏαμÏθιον: âpersuasion.â Only here, but the earlier form ÏαÏÎ±Î¼Ï Î¸Î¯Î±, 1 Corinthians 14:3. Class. âaddress,â âexhortationâ (Plat. Leg. vi. 773 E, ix. 880 A); âassuagementâ or âabatementâ (Soph. Elec. 130; Plat. Euthyd. 272 B). Hence âconsolationâ (Plat. Repub. 329 E). See ÏαÏακαλεá¿Î½ and ÏαÏÎ±Î¼Ï Î¸Îµá¿Ïθαι together, 1 Thessalonians 2:11. Here, the form which ÏαÏάκληÏÎ¹Ï assumesâa friendly, mild persuasion, ânot pædagogic or judicialâ (Kl.). Paul means, therefore, âif love has any persuasive power to move you to concord.â
κοινÏνία ÏνεÏμαÏοÏ: âfellowship of the Spirit.â (Comp. Romans 15:30.) For κοινÏνία, see on 1:5. The exact phrase only here, and κοιν. with Ïν. only 2 Corinthians 13:13.
Πνεῦμα is the Holy Spirit. The meaning is âfellowship with the Holy Spirit,â not âfellowship of spirits among themselves.â The genitive is the genitive of that of which one partakes. So habitually by Paul (1 Corinthians 1:9, 1 Corinthians 1:10:16; 2 Corinthians 8:4, 2 Corinthians 8:13:13; Ephesians 3:9; Philippians 3:10). Not âthe fellowship which the Spirit imparts,â which would be grammatical, but contrary to N.T. usage. Hence Paul means, âif you are partakers of the Holy Spirit and his gifts and influences.â
εἴ ÏÎ¹Ï ÏÏλάγÏνα καὶ οἰκÏιÏμοί: âif any tender mercies and compassions.â
ÏÎ¹Ï ÏÏλαγÏνα with × ABCDFGKLP and nearly all the verss. is overwhelmingly supported agt. Ïινα in a few minusc., Clem., Chrys., Thdrt., Theoph. But the attested reading is a manifest solecism,âeither a transcriberâs error, or a hasty repetition of ÏιÏ.
For ÏÏλάγÏνα, see on 1:8, and comp. Philemon 1:7, Philemon 1:12, Philemon 1:20. The exact phrase ÏÏλ. καὶ οἰκ. only here, but see James 5:11; Colossians 3:12.
ΣÏλάγÏνα is the organ or seat of compassionate emotion: οἰκÏιÏμοί are the emotions themselves. (See Schmidt, Synon. 143, 4.)
2. ÏληÏÏÏαÏÎ Î¼Î¿Ï Ïὴν ÏαÏὰν: âfulfilâ or âfill ye up my joy.â
ΠληÏ., in its original sense, âto make fullâ; the joy regarded as a measure to be filled. (Comp. John 3:29, John 3:15:11, John 3:17:13; 2 Corinthians 10:6.)
ÎÎ¿Ï before Ïὴν ÏαÏὰν implies no special emphasis. (See Colossians 4:18; Philemon 1:20; and often elsewhere.) (Win. xxii.)
ἵνα: not âin order that,â but to be taken with âI bidâ or âexhort,â which is implied in the imperat. ÏληÏÏÏαÏε, and indicating the purport of the bidding. (See on 1:9.)
Mey. maintains the telic sense, and Lightf. renders âso as to,â but refers to 1:9, where he explains ἴνα as signifying purport.
Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ ÏÏονá¿Ïε: âbe of the same mind.â (Comp. Romans 12:16, Romans 12:15:5; 2 Corinthians 13:11; Philippians 4:2.) For ÏÏονá¿Ïε, see on 1:7. This more general expression is defined by the following two, not three, separate clauses.
Ïὴν αá½Ïὴν�Colossians 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 3:12; 2 Thessalonians 1:3; 1 John 4:12-16.)
ÏÏνÏÏ Ïοι Ïὸ á¼Î½ ÏÏονοῦνÏεÏ: âwith harmony of soul cherishing the one sentiment.â This second participial clause points back to Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ ÏÏονá¿Ïε, and is illustrated by ÏÏνÏÏ Ïοι, which marks the common disposition under the influence of which unanimity of sentiment is to be attained. So Mey., Alf., Ellic., Weiss, Beet.
Others, as WH., Kl., Lightf., De W., Lips., Weizs., take ÏÏνÏ. and Ïὸ á¼Î½ ÏÏον. as separate predicates. The attempted distinctions between Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ and Ïὸ á¼Î½ are hypercritical. Thus, Ïὸ á¼Î½, agreement of mind and will; Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ, agreement in doctrine (Calov., Am E., Rosenm.); Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ, unanimity in general; Ïὸ á¼Î½, the one concrete object of their striving (Weiss). The two are practically synonymous. Wetstein cites λÎγονÏÎµÏ á¼Î½ καὶ Ïαá½Ïὸ (Polyb. v. 441), and á¼Î½ καὶ Ïαá½Ïὸ ÏÏονοῦνÏÎµÏ (Aristid. Concord. Rhodior. 569). This is the only occurrence of ÏÏνÏÏ ÏÎ¿Ï in Bib. Gk. (Comp. á¼°ÏÏÏÏ ÏοÏ, vs. 20.)
For Ïο εν ÏÏον. ×* Act_17, Vulg., Goth., read Ïο Î±Ï Ïο ÏÏον., a mechanical conformation to Ïο Î±Ï Ïο ÏÏονηÏε.
The same exhortation to concord is now put negatively, showing what the requirement excludes.
3. μηδὲν καÏʼ á¼Ïιθίαν μηδὲ καÏá½° κενοδοξίαν: âbeing in nothing factiously or vaingloriously minded.â (Comp. Ign. Philad. i., viii.) Supply ÏÏονοῦνÏÎµÏ from vs. 2, which is better than ÏοιοῦνÏÎµÏ or ÏÏάÏÏονÏÎµÏ (A.V.; R.V.), since the thought is on the line of moral disposition rather than of doing. For the suppression of the verb, comp. Galatians 5:13; 2 Corinthians 9:6; Matthew 26:5.
á¼Ïιθίαν: see on 1:17.
καÏá½°: âby way ofâ; marking the rule or principle according to which something is done. (See John 2:6; Romans 2:2, Romans 2:11:21; Win. xlix.)
κενοδοξίαν: âvainglory.â Only here in N.T., but comp. LXX; Sap. 14:14; 4 Macc. 2:15, 8:18; and κενοδοξῶν (4 Macc. 5:9); also κενÏδοξοι (Galatians 5:26). Primarily, âvain opinion,â âerror,â as Ign. Magn. xi., á¼Î³ÎºÎ¹ÏÏÏα Ïá¿Ï κενοδοξίαÏ. (See on δÏξα, 1:11.) A vain conceit of possessing a rightful claim to honor. Suidas defines, âany vain thinking about oneâs self.â It implies a contrast with the state of mind which seeks the true glory of God, as ch. 1:26. Its object is vain and fleshlyâsomething which imparts only a superficial glitter in the eyes of the worldly-minded. In Galatians 5:26, κενÏδοξοι is further defined by�Romans 3:1, Romans 9:4). Against these the Philippians are warned in ch. 3. On the Gentile side the temptation would lie in the conceit of a profound gnosis, and in their self-esteem growing out of their call and the rejection of the Jews. Paul deals with this in Romans 11:20-25. They might also be tempted by the fancy of their own superior culture and breadth of view to despise the scruples of weak brethren. (See Rom_14.; 1Co_8.)
Ïá¿ ÏαÏεινοÏÏοÏÏνá¿: âin lowliness of mind.â In class. Gk. ÏαÏÎµÎ¹Î½á½¸Ï usually implies meanness of condition; lowness of rank; abjectness. At best the classical conception is only modesty, absence of assumption, an element of worldly wisdom, and in no sense opposed to self-righteousness. The word ÏαÏεινοÏÏοÏÏνη is an outgrowth of the gospel. It does not appear before the Christian era. The virtue itself is founded in a correct estimate of actual littleness conjoined with a sense of sinfulness. It regards man not only with reference to God, but also with reference to his fellowmen, as here. The article Ïá¿ probably denotes the virtue considered abstractly or generically. (Comp. Romans 12:10 ff.) It may, however, be used possessively, âyour lowlinessâ (Lightf.), or as indicating the due lowliness which should influence each (Ellic.).
á¼Î»Î»Î®Î»Î¿Ï Ï á¼¡Î³Î¿Ïμενοι á½ÏεÏÎÏονÏÎ±Ï á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν: âeach counting other better than himself.â (Comp. Romans 12:10.) Ἡγεá¿Ïθαι implies a more conscious, a surer judgment, resting on more careful weighing of the facts, than νομίζειν. (See Schmidt, Synon. 105, 4; 70, 1, 3, 7.)
á½ÏεÏÎÏειν with genit. not elsewhere in Paul. (Comp. iv. 7; Romans 13:1.)
B reads ÏÎ¿Ï Ï with Ï ÏεÏεÏονÏαÏ. DFG Ï ÏεÏεÏονÏεÏ.
4. á¼ÎºÎ±ÏÏοι ÏκοÏοῦνÏεÏâá¼ÎºÎ±ÏÏοι:
1st εκαÏÏοι, as ABFG 17, Vulg.; × CDKLP, Goth., Cop., Arm., Syr.utr, read εκαÏÏοÏ, WH. marg. 2d εκαÏÏοι, as × ABCvi Dgr P 17, 31, 47, Cop.; KL, Goth., Syr.utr, Arm., read εκαÏÏοÏ.
For ÏκοÏοῦνÏÎµÏ with a few Fath. reads ÏκοÏειÏε.
ÏκοÏοῦνÏεÏ: âlooking.â For this use of the participle instead of the imperative, comp. Romans 12:9; Hebrews 13:5. It forms an expansion of the previous words. ΣκοÏεá¿Î½ is âto look attentivelyâ; to fix the attention upon a thing with an interest in it. (See Romans 16:17; 2 Corinthians 4:18; Galatians 6:1; Philippians 3:17.) Hence, often, âto aim at.â (Comp. ÏκοÏὸν, 3:14.) Schmidt defines: âto direct oneâs attention upon a thing, either in order to obtain it, or because one has a peculiar interest in it, or a duty to fulfil towards it. Also to have an eye to with a view of forming a right judgmentâ (Synon. 11, 12).
á¼Î»Î»á½° καὶ: Îαὶ, âalso,â is inserted because Paul would not have it understood that one is to pay no attention to his own affairs.
×* Act_17 join 2d εκαÏÏοι with ÏÎ¿Ï Ï. ÏÏον. following. The previous sentence would therefore end with εÏεÏÏν.
Humility is urged because it is necessary to concord, as κενοδοξία is fatal to concord. For the supreme example and illustration of this virtue, the readers are now pointed to Jesus Christ. (Comp. Romans 15:3; 2 Corinthians 8:9; 1 Peter 2:21, and the striking parallel in Clem. ad Cor. xvi.)
5-8. Cherish the disposition which dwelt in Christ Jesus. For he, though he existed from eternity in a state of equality with God, did not regard that divine condition of being as one might regard a prize to be eagerly grasped, but laid it aside, and took the form of a bondservant, having been made in the likeness of men: and having been thus found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to God even so far as to suffer death, yea, the ignominious death of the cross.
On the whole passage, see note at the end of this chapter.
5. ÏοῦÏο ÏÏονεá¿Ïε á¼Î½ á½Î¼á¿Î½ ὠκαὶ á¼Î½ ΧÏιÏÏá¿· ἸηÏοῦ: âhave this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus.â
×c DFGKLP, Goth., Syr.P, insert Î³Î±Ï after ÏÎ¿Ï Ïο; ×*ABC 17, 37, Cop., Arm., Ãth., omit γαÏ; ÏÏονειÏε with × ABC* DFG 67**, Vulg., Syr.utr; C3 KLP, Cop., Arm., Goth., read ÏÏονειÏθÏ.
á¼Î½ á½Î¼á¿Î½: âin youâ; not âamong you,â which is precluded by the following á¼Î½ ΧἸ. (Comp. Matthew 3:9, Matthew 3:9:3, 21.) á¼Î½ á½Î¼á¿Î½ with the active ÏÏονεá¿Ïε presents no difficulty if it is remembered that ÏÏονεá¿Î½ signifies the general mental attitude or disposition. (See on 1:7.)
á¼Î½ ΧἸ: There was a slight difference of opinion as to whether that which is commended to imitation is Christâs ÏαÏεινοÏÏοÏÏνη (so the Gk. Fathers), or his self-denying zeal for the salvation of others (Aug. Ans.). It is both combined. They are represented respectively by á¼ÏαÏείνÏÏεν (vs. 8) and á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν (vs. 7). So Beng., âqui non sua quaesiverit sed se ipsum demiserit.â
6. á½Ï: Refers to Christ as the subject. It is the subject of both classes of statements which follow,âthose predicated of Christâs preincarnate state and of his human condition. The immediate context defines the specific reference in each case.
á¼Î½ μοÏÏῠθεοῦ: âin the form of God.â âFormâ is an inadequate rendering of μοÏÏá½´, but our language affords no better word. By âformâ is commonly understood âshape,â âsensible appearance.â So of Christâs human form (Mark 16:12). But the word in this sense cannot be applied to God. ÎοÏÏá½´ here means that expression of being which is identified with the essential nature and character of God, and which reveals it. This expression of God cannot be conceived by us, though it may be conceived and apprehended by pure spiritual intelligences.
á½ÏάÏÏÏν: âsubsistingâ or âthough he subsisted.â Originally âto begin,â âmake a beginningâ; thence âto come forthâ; âbe at handâ; âbe in existence.â It is sometimes claimed that á½ÏάÏÏειν, as distinguished from εἶναι, implies a reference to an antecedent condition. Thus R.V. marg. âbeing originally.â Suidas, = ÏÏοεá¿Î½Î±Î¹. That it does so in some cases is true. (See Thuc. iv. 18, vi. 86; Hdt. ii. 15; Dem. iii. 15, v. 13.) Comp. the meaning âto be taken for grantedâ (Plat. Symp. 198 D; Tim. 30 C). On the other hand, it sometimes denotes a present as related to a future condition. (See Hdt. vii. 144; Thuc. ii. 64; and the meaning âto be in storeâ [Ãs. Ag. 961].) The most that can be said is that the word is very often used with a relative meaning; while, at the same time, it often occurs simply as âto be.â (See Schmidt, Synon. 81, 7.)
οá½Ï á¼ÏÏαγμὸν ἡγήÏαÏο Ïὸ εἶναι á¼´Ïα θεῷ: âcounted it not a prize to be on an equality with God.â
á¼ÏÏαγμὸν is here equivalent to á¼ ÏÏαγμα, the more regular form for the object of the action,âthe thing seized,âwhile substantives in Î¼Î¿Ï have usually an active sense. There are, however, exceptions to this. Thus θεÏμÏÏ and ÏÏηÏμÏÏ are neither of them used actively. ΦÏαγμÏÏ, âa fencing in,â is also used like ÏÏάγμα, âa fence.â á¼Î³Î¹Î±ÏμÏÏ is both âthe act of consecrationâ and âsanctification.â (Comp. á½Î½ÎµÎ¹Î´Î¹ÏμÏÏ, ÏÏÏÏονιÏμÏÏ, and ἱλαÏμÏÏ.) There is only one example of á¼ÏÏαγμÏÏ in any class. author (Plut. Moral. p. 12A) where the meaning is apparently active. It occurs in two passages of Cyr. Alex., De Adorat. i. 25, and Cont. Jul. 6., both in a passive sense, and in Euseb. Comm. in Luc. 6., also passive. Max. Conf. Schol. in Lib. de divin. nom. 57 D, explains οá½Ï á¼ÏÏ. ἡγ. by οá½Îºï¿½
Ïὸ εἶναι á¼´Ïα θεῷ: Îἶναι, âto existâ; not as the abstract substantive verb âto be.â á¼¼Ïα is adverbial, âin a manner of equality.â (Comp. Thuc. iii. 14; Eurip. Orest. 882; and other examples in Win. xxvii.) (See LXX; Job 5:14; Sap. 7:3.) The phrase therefore does not mean âto be equal with God,â but âexistence in the way of equality with Godâ (Mey., Ellic., Weiss, De W., Kl.).
Others, as Lightf., take á¼´Ïα predicatively, and εἶναι as âto be.â
7.�Romans 4:14; 1 Corinthians 1:17, 1 Corinthians 1:9:15; 2 Corinthians 9:3; LXX; Jeremiah 14:2, Jeremiah 15:9. Not used or intended here in a metaphysical sense to define the limitations of Christâs incarnate state, but as a strong and graphic expression of the completeness of his self-renunciation. It includes all the details of humiliation which follow, and is defined by these. Further definition belongs to speculative theology. On Baurâs attempt to show traces of Gnostic teaching in these words, see Introd. vi.
μοÏÏὴν δοÏÎ»Î¿Ï Î»Î±Î²Ïν: âhaving taken the form of a bondservant.â Characterising á¼Î±Ï . á¼Îº. generally. The participle is explanatory, âby taking.â (Comp. Ephesians 1:9; and see Burt. 145, and Win. xlv.) ÎοÏÏὴν, as in vs. 6, an expression or manifestation essentially characteristic of the subject. Christ assumed that form of being which completely answered to and characteristically expressed the being of a bondservant. Only μοÏÏá½´ δοÏÎ»Î¿Ï must not be taken as implying a slave-condition, but a condition of service as contrasted with the condition of equality with God.
Some, as Mey., Ellic., supply θεοῦ, âservant of God.â But this limits the phrase unduly. He was not servant of God only, but of men also. (Comp. Matthew 20:27, Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:44, Mark 10:45; Luke 12:37; John 13:1-5, John 13:13-17.)
á¼Î½ á½Î¼Î¿Î¹ÏμαÏι�Romans 5:14, Romans 6:5, Romans 8:3.) âTo affirm likeness is at once to assert similarity and to deny samenessâ (Dickson, Baird Lect., 1883).
γενÏμενοÏ: Contrasted with á½ÏάÏÏÏν. He entered into a new state. (Comp. John 1:14; Galatians 4:4; 1 Timothy 3:16.) For the phrase γενÏÎ¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï á¼Î½, see Luke 22:44; Acts 22:17; Romans 16:7; 2 Corinthians 3:7.
καὶ ÏÏήμαÏι εá½ÏÎµÎ¸Îµá½¶Ï á½¡Ï á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏοÏ: âand being found in fashion as a man.â ΣÏá¿Î¼Î± is the outward fashion which appeals to the senses. The âform of a bondservantâ expresses the fact that the manifestation as a servant corresponded to the real fact that Christ came as a servant of men. In á¼Î½ á½Î¼. á¼Î½Î¸. the thought is still linked with that of his essential nature, which rendered an absolute identity with men impossible. In ÏÏá¿Î¼. εá½Ï. the thought is confined to the outward guise as it appealed to human observation. ΣÏá¿Î¼Î± denotes something changeable as well as external. It is an accident of being. (See 1 Corinthians 7:31.) The compounds of μοÏÏá½´ and ÏÏá¿Î¼Î± bring out the difference between the inward and the outward. Thus ÏÏ Î¼Î¼ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï Ï, Romans 8:29; ÏÏ Î¼Î¼Î¿ÏÏιζÏμενοÏ,Philippians 3:10; Philippians 3:10; μεÏαμοÏÏοÏμεθα (οῦÏθε), 2 Corinthians 3:18; Romans 12:2; μοÏÏÏθá¿, Galatians 4:19; âall of an inner, spiritual process, while ÏÏ ÏÏημαÏίζεÏθαι (Romans 12:2; 1 Peter 1:14) marks a process affecting that which is outward. See the two together in Philippians 3:21. See Lightf.âs note on the synonyms μοÏÏá½´ and ÏÏá¿Î¼Î± (Comm. p. 127).
Mey. and De W. take καὶ ÏÏ. ⦠á¼Î½Î¸. with the preceding clause: âbecoming in the likeness of men and (so) found in fashion,â etc. This is plausible, but it makes the next sentence very abrupt, and breaks the progression. Îá½ÏÎµÎ¸Îµá½¶Ï introduces a new portion of the history. The laying aside of the form of Godâthe selfâemptyingâconsisted in his taking the form of a servant and becoming in the likeness of men. In this condition he is found. In this new guise he first becomes apprehensible to human perception; and on this stage, where he is seen by men, other acts of humiliation follow. (Comp. Isaiah 53:2.)
Îá½ÏÎµÎ¸Îµá½¶Ï is not a Hebraism, nor does it stand for εἶναι. Îἶναι expresses the quality of a person or thing in itself; εá½Ï. the quality as it is discovered and recognised. (Comp. Matthew 1:18; Luke 17:18; Acts 5:39; Romans 7:10; 2 Corinthians 11:12; and see Win. lxv.)
ὡÏ: not what he was recognised to be, which would have been expressed by á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï alone; but as, keeping up the idea of semblance expressed in á½Î¼Î¿Î¹ÏμαÏι.
8. á¼ÏαÏείνÏÏεν á¼Î±Ï Ïὸν: âhe humbled himself.â The emphasis is on the act, not on the subject. Not synonymous with á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν. (Comp. 2 Corinthians 11:7; Philippians 4:12.)
The more general á¼ÏαÏείνÏÏεν is now specifically defined. γενÏÎ¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï á½ÏήκοοÏ: âbecoming obedient or subject.â He became as a man; in that condition he humbled himself; his humiliation appeared in his subjection. ÎενÏμ., with an explanatory force, âby becoming.â Understand θεῷ. (Comp. Matthew 26:39; Romans 5:19; Hebrews 5:8.)
μÎÏÏι θανάÏÎ¿Ï : âeven unto death.â To the extent of death. (Comp. Hebrews 12:4; 2 Timothy 2:9.)
θανάÏÎ¿Ï Î´á½² ÏÏÎ±Ï Ïοῦ: âyea, death of the cross.â
Îá½² introduces another and more striking detail of the humiliation, and leads on to a climax: âdeath, yea, the most ignominious of deaths.â For this force of δὲ, comp. Romans 3:22, Romans 9:20.
ÏÏÎ±Ï Ïοῦ: × adds ÏÎ¿Ï . The close of the description leaves the reader at the very lowest point of Christâs humiliation, death as a malefactor; the mode of death to which a curse was attached in the Mosaic law. (See Deuteronomy 21:23; Galatians 3:13; Hebrews 12:2.) Paul, as a Roman citizen, was exempt from this disgrace.
The result of this humiliation was the highest exaltation.
9-11. On this account God exalted him above all creatures, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus all beings in heaven, earth, and hades, should bow the knee and acknowledge him as Lord, and by this confession glorify God the Father.
9. διὸ καὶ á½ Î¸Îµá½¸Ï Î±á½Ïὸν á½ÏεÏÏÏÏÏεν: âwherefore also God highly exalted him.â
διὸ: âin consequence of which.â (Comp. Hebrews 2:9, Hebrews 12:2.) The idea of Christâs receiving his exaltation as a reward was repugnant to the Reformed theologians. Calvin attempts to evade it by explaining διὸ as quo facto, which is utterly untenable. At the same time, it is not necessary to insist on the idea of recompense, since διὸ may express simply consequence; and exaltation is the logical result of humility in the N.T. economy (Matthew 23:12; Luke 14:11, Luke 18:14). As Mey. remarks, âChristâs saying in Matthew 23:12 was gloriously fulfilled in his own case.â âDie Erniedrigung ist nur die noch nicht eingetretene Herrlichkeit,â says Schmidt (Art. âStand, doppelter Christi,â Herz. Rl. Enc.). For διὸ καὶ introducing a result, see Luke 1:35; Acts 10:29. The consequence corresponding to the humiliation is expressed by καὶ.
Different explanations of καὶ are given, however. Lightf. and Kl.; maintain the sense of reciprocation,ââGod, on his partâ; Ellic., contrast of the exaltation with the previous humiliation.
á½ÏεÏÏÏÏÏεν: Only here in N.T. In LXX; Psa_97 (96):9; Daniel 4:34. Not in class. Gk. Paul is fond of á½Ïá½²Ï in compounds, and the compounds with á½Ïá½²Ï are nearly all in his writings. (See Ellic. on Ephesians 3:20.) Its force here is not âmore than before,â nor âabove his previous state of humiliation,â but âin superlative measure.â This exaltation took place through Christâs ascension (Romans 1:3, Romans 1:4, Romans 1:8:34; Ephesians 4:9, Ephesians 4:10; Colossians 3:1). But the exaltation is viewed, not in respect of its mode, but as a state of transcendent glory, including his sitting at Godâs right hand (Romans 8:34; Colossians 3:1); his lordship over the living and the dead (Romans 14:9); and his reign in glory (1 Corinthians 15:25).
καὶ á¼ÏαÏίÏαÏο αá½Ïá¿· Ïὸ á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î± Ïὸ á½Ïá½²Ï Ïᾶν á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î±: âand gave unto him the name which is above every name.â
á¼ÏαÏίÏαÏο: See on 1:29. Christ obtained as a gift what he renounced as a prize. (See Ephesians 1:21; Hebrews 1:4.)
Ïὸ á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î±: Possibly with a reference to the practice of giving a new name to persons at important crises in their lives. (See Genesis 17:5, 32:28; Revelation 2:17, Revelation 3:12.) The name conferred is JESUS CHRIST, combining the human name, which points to the conquest won in the flesh, and the Messianic name, âthe Anointed of God.â The two factors of the name are successively taken up in vs. 10, 11.
There is a great variety of explanations on this point: ÎÏÏÎ¹Î¿Ï (Kl., Lips., Weiss), ἸηÏÎ¿á¿¦Ï (Ellic., Ead.), ἸηÏÎ¿á¿¦Ï Î§ÏιÏÏá½¸Ï (De W., Mey.), Î¥á¼±á½¸Ï (Thdrt., Pelag., Aug.), ÎÎµá½¸Ï (Theoph., Åc.). Lightf. holds that á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î± means âtitleâ or âdignity,â and must be taken in the same sense in both verses. (See on next vs.)
The reading Ïο ονομα is acc. to × ABC 17. Ïο is omitted by DFGKLP.
10. ἵνα: Denotes the purpose of the exaltation.
á¼Î½ Ïá¿· á½Î½ÏμαÏι ἸηÏοῦ: âIn the name of Jesusâ; not âat the name.â á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î± with Ïοῦ ÎºÏ Ï. ἡμ. ἸΧ, or Ï. ÎºÏ Ï. Î., or ÎºÏ Ï. Ἰ., or αá½Ïοῦ (Cht.), occurs ten times in Paul. In none of these cases is the word a mere title of address. Paul follows the Hebrew usage, in which the name is used for everything which the name covers, so that the name is equivalent to the person himself. (So Matthew 6:9, Matthew 10:41.) To baptize into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is to put the subject of baptism symbolically into connection and communion with all that those names represent. He who believes on the name of the Lord believes on the Lord himself. Hence, to bow the knee in the name of Jesus is to pay adoration in that sphere of authority, grace, and glory for which the name stands; as being consciously within the kingdom of which he is Lord, as recognising the rightfulness of the titles âJesus,â âSaviour,â âLord,â and as loyally accepting the obligations which those titles imply.
Ïᾶν γÏÎ½Ï ÎºÎ¬Î¼Ïá¿: Comp. Isaiah 45:23; Romans 14:11. The meaning can only be that Christ is presented as the object of worship; his claim to that honor being fixed by the previous declarations. Before his incarnation he was on an equality with God. After his incarnation he was exalted to Godâs right hand as Messianic sovereign.
á¼ÏÎ¿Ï ÏανίÏν καὶ á¼ÏιγείÏν καὶ καÏαÏθονίÏν: The whole body of created intelligent beings in all departments of the universe. (See Romans 8:21; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Ephesians 1:20-22; Hebrews 2:8; Revelation 5:13; and comp. Ign. Trall. 9.; Polyc. Phil. ii.) á¼ÏÎ¿Ï Ïάνιοι are heavenly beings, angels, archangels, etc. (Ephesians 1:21, Ephesians 1:3:10; Hebrews 1:4-6; Heb_1 Pet. 3:23); á¼Ïίγειοι, beings on earth (1 Corinthians 15:40).
καÏαÏθονίÏν: Only here in Bib. and Apocr. In class. of the infernal gods. Chr., Åc., Theoph., and the mediæval expositors explain of the demons, citing Luke 4:34; James 2:19. These, however, are not regarded by Paul as in Hades. (See Ephesians 2:2, Ephesians 6:12.) Rather the departed in Hades. Nothing definite as to Christâs descent into Hades can be inferred from this.
Lightf. regards all the genitives as neuter, urging that the whole creation is intended, and that the limitation to intelligent beings detracts from the universality of the homage. This, however, seems to be over-subtilising.
11. á¼Î¾Î¿Î¼Î¿Î»Î¿Î³Î®ÏηÏαι: âshould confess.â The LXX, Isaiah 45:23, has á½Î¼Îµá¿Ïαι, âshall swear,â for which the seventh-century correctors of × read á¼Î¾Î¿Î¼Î¿Î»Î¿Î³Î®ÏεÏαι.
WH., Treg., R.T., Weiss. (Txtk. Unt.), read εξομολογηÏηÏαι with × B; Tisch. εξομολογηÏεÏαι, with ACDFGKLP. It is possible that εÏαι may have been altered to ηÏαι by transcribers in order to conform it to κάμÏá¿.
Lightf. renders âconfess with thanksgiving.â He says that the secondary sense of á¼Î¾Î¿Î¼Î¿Î»., âto offer thanks,â has almost entirely supplanted its primary meaning, âto declare openly.â But out of eleven instances in the N.T., four are used of confessing sins, one of Christâs confession of his servants before the Father, and one of Judasâ âagreeingâ or âengagingâ with the chief priests. He says, further, that âconfess with thanksgivingâ is the meaning in Isaiah 45:23. But the reading there is á½Î¼Îµá¿Ïαι.
ÎÏÏÎ¹Î¿Ï does not necessarily imply divinity. It is used in LXX of Abraham (Genesis 18:12; comp. 1 Peter 3:6); of Joseph (Genesis 42:10, Genesis 42:33); of Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:8). In the Pauline writings the master of slaves is styled both δεÏÏÏÏÎ·Ï (1 Timothy 6:1, 1 Timothy 6:2; Titus 2:9), and κÏÏÎ¹Î¿Ï (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1). Often in N.T. in the general sense of âmaster,â or in address, âsir.â Of God, Matthew 1:20, Matthew 1:22, Matthew 1:24, Matthew 1:2:15; Acts 11:16. ὠκÏÏÎ¹Î¿Ï is used by Mt. of Christ only once (21:3) until after the resurrection (28:16). In the other gospels much oftener. In the progress of Christian thought in the N.T. the meaning develops towards a specific designation of the divine Saviour, as may be seen in the expressions âJesus Christ our Lord,â âJesus our Lord,â etc. Von Soden remarks: âGod gave him the name Jesus Christ. It was necessary that his human, Messianic character should be developed before men would confess that Jesus is Lord. What God as Jehovah in the old Covenant has determined and prepared, Christ shall now carry out.â
Îµá¼°Ï Î´Ïξαν θεοῦ ÏαÏÏÏÏ: âto the glory of God the Father.â (Comp. John 12:28, John 12:13:31, John 12:32, John 12:14:13, John 12:17:1.) The words are dependent upon á¼Î¾Î¿Î¼Î¿Î»., not on á½ Ïι. It is the confession that is to be to the glory of God the Father, not the fact that Christ is Lord. (See Romans 15:7-9; Ephesians 1:6, Ephesians 1:11, Ephesians 1:12; 2 Corinthians 1:20.) âEverywhere where the Son is glorified the Father is glorified. Where the Son is dishonored the Father is dishonoredâ (Chr.). (See Luke 10:16; John 5:23.)
Some practical exhortations are now drawn from the divine example just portrayed, especially from the spirit of subjection exhibited by the incarnate Lord.
12-18. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, even as you have always manifested a spirit of obedience, so now, not as though I were present, but much more in my absence, carry out your own salvation with conscientious caution and self-distrust, because you are appointed to carry out Godâs good pleasure; and it is for this that God energises your will and stimulates you to work. That you may thus carry the divine will into effect, perform all its dictates without murmuring or criticising, that so you may show yourselves blameless and guileless, true children of God in the midst of an ungodly society, in which you are to appear, holding forth the gospel as luminaries in a dark world. Thus I shall have good reason to boast when Christ shall appear, that my labors for you have not been in vain. Yes, even if, along with the offering of your faith to God, my own blood is to be poured out like a libation at a sacrifice, I rejoice in this, because my death will only promote the working out of your salvation; and this will be a cause of joy to you no less than to me.
12. á½¥ÏÏε: âso thatâ; âso then.â The point of connection through á½¥ÏÏε with the preceding passage is á½ÏÎ®ÎºÎ¿Î¿Ï in vs. 8. As Christ obtained exaltation and heavenly glory through perfect obedience to God, therefore do you, with like subjection to him, carry out your own salvation. The spirit of obedience is to be shown in their godly fear, in the avoidance of murmuring and skeptical criticism, and in their holy lives and their bold proclamation of the gospel in the midst of ungodly men. For a similar use of á½¥ÏÏε, comp. iv. 1; Romans 7:12; 1 Corinthians 14:39, 1 Corinthians 15:58.
á½ÏηκοÏÏαÏε: Î¥ÌÏακοÏειν is, properly, to obey as the result of listening or hearkening �Acts 5:29, Acts 5:32, Acts 5:27:21; Titus 3:1) The question whether θεῷ or μοὶ is to be supplied is quite superfluous, since á½Ïηκ. is used absolutely. Ye have always shown a spirit of obedience, whether to God or to me as his apostle.
μὴ á½¡Ï á¼Î½ Ïá¿ ÏαÏÎ¿Ï Ïίᾳ Î¼Î¿Ï Î¼Ïνον: ânot as in my presence only.â Connect with καÏεÏγάζεÏθε, not with ÏάνÏ. á½Ïηκ., which would require οὠinstead of μὴ (see Win. lv, and Burt. 479), and would imply that the readers, left to themselves, had been more obedient than when Paul was with them.
ὡÏ: Introduced because Paul could not give an admonition for the time when he would be present. It points to an inward motive by which the readers are not to suffer themselves to be influenced. (Comp. Romans 9:32; 2 Corinthians 2:17; Philemon 1:14.) They are not to work out their salvation as if they were doing it in Paulâs presence merely, neglecting it in his absence.
ÏÏ omitted by Lat. Vet., Vulg., Syr.P, Cop., Arm., Ãth., B, 17. WH. bracket.
μÏνον: with á¼Î½ Ïá¿ ÏαÏ. Î¼Î¿Ï , on which the emphasis lies. For its position after the emphatic word, comp. Romans 4:16, Romans 4:23; 1 Thessalonians 1:5.
νῦν: Now that you are deprived of my personal presence.
á¼ÏÎ¿Ï Ïίᾳ: Only here in Gk. Bib., and not common anywhere.
μεÏá½° ÏÏÎ²Î¿Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ ÏÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï Ïὴν á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν ÏÏÏηÏίαν καÏεÏγάζεÏθε: âcarry out your own salvation with fear and trembling.â (Comp. Hebrews 12:28.)
ΦÏÎ²Î¿Ï and ÏÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï often occur together in LXX. (See Genesis 9:2; Exodus 15:16; Isaiah 19:16.) In N.T. see 1 Corinthians 2:3; 2 Corinthians 7:15; Ephesians 6:5. ΦÏÎ²Î¿Ï is godly fear, growing out of recognition of weakness and of the power of temptation; filial dread of offending God. (See Acts 9:31; Romans 3:18; 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 1:17, 1 Peter 3:15.) Chr. justly observes that καὶ ÏÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï only strengthens the μεÏ. ÏÏβ. Paul would say: âThe work is great. Failure is possible. Do not be over confident.â âIt is necessary to fear and tremble in each oneâs working out of his own salvation, lest he be tripped up (á½ÏοÏκελιÏθεá¿Ï) and fail of thisâ (Åc.).
Ïὴν á¼Î±Ï Ï. ÏÏÏ. καÏεÏγ.: ÎαÏεÏγάζεÏθαι is âto accomplishâ; âachieveâ; âcarry out or through.â So Beng., âusque ad metamâ; Calov., âad finem perducereâ; Grot., âperagere.â (See Romans 4:15, Romans 4:5:3; 2 Corinthians 5:5; James 1:3; Ephesians 6:13; and comp. especially 2 Corinthians 7:10.) There is no contradiction implied of the truth that salvation is the gift of Godâs grace (Ephesians 2:8). That grace itself engenders moral faculties and stimulates moral exertions. Because grace is given, man must work. The gift of grace is exhibited in making man a co-worker with God (1 Corinthians 3:9); the salvation bestowed by grace is to be carried out by man with the aid of grace (Romans 6:8-19; 2 Corinthians 6:1). What this carrying out includes and requires is seen in Philippians 3:10, Philippians 3:4:Philippians 3:1-7; Ephesians 4:13-16, Ephesians 4:22 ff.; Colossians 2:6, Colossians 2:7. For these things the believer is constantly strengthened by the Spirit. The possibility of success appears in Paulâs prayer (Ephesians 3:16-20). (See a good passage in Pfleiderer, Paulinismus, p. 234.)
á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν: âyour ownâ; not =�Matthew 16:7, Matthew 16:21:38; Ephesians 4:32.) á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν is emphatic as related to the following θεὸÏ. God is working in you; do your part as co-workers with God.
13. Î¸Îµá½¸Ï Î³Î¬Ï á¼ÏÏιν á½ á¼Î½ÎµÏγῶν á¼Î½ á½Î¼á¿Î½ καὶ Ïὸ θÎλειν καὶ Ïὸ á¼Î½ÎµÏγεá¿Î½ á½Ïá½²Ï Ïá¿Ï εá½Î´Î¿ÎºÎ¯Î±Ï: âfor it is God that worketh in you both the willing and the working for his good pleasure.â The reason for the exhortation καÏεÏγ. is that it is Godâs own work which they have to do. It is Godâs good pleasure which they are to fulfil, as did their great example, Jesus Christ; and it is God who, to that end, is energising their will and their working. (See 2 Corinthians 5:18.) This is a serious task, to be performed in no self-reliant spirit, but with reverent caution and dependence on God.
ÎÎ¬Ï does not introduce the reason for the fear and trembling especially, but only as these are attached to καÏεÏγ. It gives the reason for the entire clause, καÏεÏγ. ⦠ÏÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï .
á½ á¼Î½ÎµÏγῶν: á¼Î½ÎµÏγεá¿Î½ is âto put forth powerâ; and the kindred á¼Î½ÎÏγεια (always in N.T. of superhuman power) is âpower in exercise.â Paul invariably uses the active, á¼Î½ÎµÏγεá¿Î½, of the working of God or of Satan, and the middle, á¼Î½ÎµÏγεá¿Ïθαι, in other cases, as Romans 7:5; Galatians 5:6. Never the passive. The verb carries the idea of effectual working, as here; and the result is often specified. (See Romans 7:5; Galatians 2:8, Galatians 2:3:5; Ephesians 1:11 ff.) On the different words for âpowerâ in N.T., see W. St. on John 1:12.
á¼Î½ á½Î¼á¿Î½: âin you,â as 1 Corinthians 12:6; 2 Corinthians 4:12; Ephesians 2:2; Colossians 1:29. Not âamong you.â
Ïὸ θÎλειν: As between θÎλειν and βοÏλεÏθαι, the general distinction is that θÎλ. expresses a determination or definite resolution of the will; while βοÏλ. expresses an inclination, disposition, or wish. The two words are, however, often interchanged in N.T. when no distinction is emphasised. (Comp. Mark 15:15 and Luke 23:20; Acts 27:43 and Matthew 27:17; John 18:39 and Matthew 14:5; Mark 6:48 and Acts 19:30.) (See W. St. on Matthew 1:19.) Here θÎλειν, of a definite purpose or determination.
Ïὸ á¼Î½ÎµÏγεá¿Î½: The inward working in the soul, producing the determination which is directed at the καÏεÏγ. (Comp. 1 Corinthians 12:6; Galatians 3:5; Ephesians 3:20.) The two substantive-infinitives are used rather than nouns because active energy is emphasised; and the two καὶâs point to the fact that bothâthe willing and the working alikeâare of God. God so works upon the moral nature that it not only intellectually and theoretically approves what is good (Romans 7:14-23), but appropriates Godâs will as its own. The willing wrought by God unfolds into all the positive and determinate movements of the human will to carry Godâs will into effect.
á½Ïá½²Ï Ïá¿Ï εá½Î´Î¿ÎºÎ¯Î±Ï: âfor the sake of his good pleasure.â Different connections have been proposed for this clause. That with the succeeding verse, âfor good willâs sake do all things,â etc., may be summarily dismissed. The majority of interpreters rightly connect it with á½ á¼Î½ÎµÏγῶν: âit is God who works in you the willing and the working in order that he may carry out his good pleasure.â Paulâs thought is this: Carry out your own salvation with holy fear, and especially for the reason that it is Godâs good pleasure that you should achieve that result; and therefore he energises your will and your activity in order that you may fulfil his good pleasure in your completed salvation.
εá½Î´Î¿ÎºÎ¯Î±Ï: See on 1:15. Not mere arbitrary preference, as if Paul meant that God thus works because it suits him to do so. Nor, as Weiss, the pleasure which he has in working. Rather that his good pleasure is bound up with his fatherly love and benevolence which find their satisfaction in his childrenâs accomplished salvation. Hence á½Ïá½²Ï is not=καÏá½°, as if εá½Î´Î¿ÎºÎ¯Î± were the norm or standard of Godâs working (however true that may be abstractly), but expresses âthe interested cause of the actionâ (Ellic.), as John 11:4; Romans 15:8.
Certain elements of the ÏÏÏ. καÏεÏγ.
14. ÏάνÏα Ïοιεá¿Ïε ÏÏÏá½¶Ï Î³Î¿Î³Î³Ï Ïμῶν καὶ διαλογιÏμῶν: âdo all things without murmurings and questionings.â
ÏάνÏα: Everything that may fall to them to do. (Comp. 1 Corinthians 10:31.)
Î³Î¿Î³Î³Ï Ïμῶν: Not elsewhere in Paul. (See John 5:12; Acts 6:1; 1 Peter 4:9; LXX; Exodus 16:7, Exodus 16:8, Exodus 16:9, Exodus 16:12; Numbers 17:5, Numbers 17:10.) Murmuring against the dictates of Godâs will is meant. (See 1 Corinthians 10:10.)
διαλογιÏμῶν: Skeptical questionings or criticisms. (Comp. 1 Timothy 2:8.) Usually by Paul in the sense of âdisputatious reasoning.â (See Romans 1:21, Romans 1:14:1; 1 Corinthians 3:20.) So LXX; Psalms 56:5 (6), 94(93):11; Isaiah 59:7. The verb διαλογίζεÏθαι, always to âreasonâ or âdiscuss,â either with another or in oneâs own mind.
Mey., De W., Lips., Ellic., Ead., render âdoubtings.â Åc., Theoph., Ans., âhesitationâ whether to perform Godâs commands. So De W. and Mey. Weiss, âhesitationâ with reference to things which are to be done or suffered for the sake of salvation. Others, âdoubtsâ about future reward, or the divine promises.
15. ἵνα γÎνηÏθε á¼Î¼ÎµÎ¼ÏÏοι καὶ�
á¼ÎºÎÏαιοι: lit. âunmixed,â âunadulterated,â describing the inward condition. (Comp. Matthew 10:16; Romans 16:9.)
ÏÎκνα θεοῦ á¼Î¼Ïμα: âchildren of God without blemish.â
Both ÏÎκνον and Ï á¼±ÏÏ signify a relation based upon parentage. It is usually said that ÏÎκνον emphasises the natural relationship, while Ï á¼±ÏÏ marks the legal or ethical status (Thay. Lex. sub ÏÎκνον, and Sanday on Romans 8:14. Comp. Westcott, Eps. of John, p. 121); but this distinction must not be too closely pressed. In LXX both ÏÎκνα and Ï á¼±ÏÏ are applied ethically to the people of Israel as Godâs peculiarly beloved people; so ÏÎκνα (Isaiah 30:1; Sap. 16:21); or so by implication as inhabitants of his favored seat (Joel 2:23; Zechariah 9:13, comp. Matthew 23:37); Ï á¼±ÏÏ (Isaiah 43:6: Deuteronomy 14:1; Sap. 9:7, 12:19, etc.). In the ethical sense, in which the distinctive character is indicated by its source, we find ÏÎκνα�Hosea 10:9), ÏοÏÎ¯Î±Ï (Matthew 11:19), á½Ïακοá¿Ï (1 Peter 1:14), ÏÏÏá½¸Ï (Ephesians 5:8), á½Ïγá¿Ï (Ephesians 2:3). Similarly Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶, according to the Hebrew use of ×Ö¼Öµ×, ×Ö¼Ö°× Öµ× to mark characteristic quality as conditioned by origin. Thus Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ Ïῶν�Numbers 23:19; indicating people accursed, 1 Samuel 26:19; Ï á¼±. Ïοῦ Î±á¼°á¿¶Î½Î¿Ï ÏοÏÏÎ¿Ï , ÏÏÏὸÏ, Lk. 26:8;�Ephesians 2:2; διαβÏÎ»Î¿Ï , Acts 13:10; γεÎννηÏ, Matthew 13:15. It is true that John never uses Ï á¼±ÏÏ to describe the relation of Christians to God (Revelation 21:7 is a quotation); but both the ethical relation and the relation of conferred privilege, as well as that of birth, attach to ÏÎκνα. See John 1:12, where believers receive á¼Î¾Î¿Ï Ïία or conferred right to become ÏÎκνα θεοῦ, on the ground of faith. Believers are ÏÎκνα in virtue of the gift of divine love (1 John 3:1). The ÏÎκνα θεοῦ are manifest as such by their righteous deeds and their brotherly love (1 John 3:10). On the other hand, those who have the true filial disposition are described as âbegottenâ or âbornâ of God (γεγεννημÎνοι), John 1:13, John 1:3:3, John 1:7; 1 John 3:9, 1 John 3:4:7, 1 John 3:5:1, 1 John 3:4, 1 John 3:18. It is also true that Paul often regards the Christian relation, from the legal point of view, as adoption. He alone uses Ï á¼±Î¿Î¸ÎµÏία (Romans 8:15, Romans 8:23; Galatians 4:5; Ephesians 1:5). But in Romans 8:14, Romans 8:17, we have both Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶ and ÏÎκνα. They who are led by the Spirit are Ï á¼±Î¿á½¶; the Spirit witnesses that they are ÏÎκνα. Both these are ethical. In vs. 21 the legal aspect appears in Ïὴν á¼Î»ÎµÏ θεÏίαν ⦠Ï. ÏÎκ. Ï. θε. (Comp. Ephesians 5:1; Romans 9:8.)
á¼Î¼Ïμα: âwithout blemish.â
αμÏμα as × ABC, 17. DFGKLP read αμÏμηÏα.
αμÏμηÏÎ¿Ï never in LXX. The citn. is from Deuteronomy 32:5, and αμÏμηÏα is probably due to μÏμηÏα there.
For á¼Î¼Ïμα comp. Ephesians 1:4, Ephesians 1:5:27; Colossians 1:22;�2 Peter 3:14.
μÎÏον Î³ÎµÎ½Îµá¾¶Ï ÏÎºÎ¿Î»Î¹á¾¶Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ διεÏÏÏαμμÎνηÏ: âin the midst of a crooked and perverse generation.â (See Deuteronomy 32:5, and comp. Matthew 12:39, Matthew 17:17.)
ÎÎÏον (TR á¼Î½ μÎÏῳ) is adverbial, with the force of a preposition (Win. liv.).
ÏκολίαÏ: âindocile,â âforward.â Only here in Paul. (See Acts 2:40; 1 Peter 2:18; LXX; Psa_78[77]:8; 2:15, etc.)
διεÏÏÏαμμÎνηÏ: âtwistedâ or âdistorted.â Only here in Paul. It denotes an abnormal moral condition. Î£ÎºÎ¿Î»Î¹á½¸Ï is the result of διαÏÏÏÎÏειν. Comp. ÏÏÏεβλοῦν (2 Peter 3:16), âto twist or dislocate on the rack.â
á¼Î½ Î¿á¼·Ï ÏαίνεÏθε á½¡Ï ÏÏÏÏá¿ÏÎµÏ á¼Î½ κÏÏμῳ: âamong whom ye are seen (appear) as luminaries in the world.â
οἷÏ: For the plural after Î³ÎµÎ½Îµá¾¶Ï comp. Acts 15:36; 2 Peter 3:1; Galatians 4:19; and see Blass, Gramm. p. 163.
ÏαίνεÏθε: Not âshineâ, which would be ÏαίνεÏε. (Comp. Matthew 2:7, 24:27; James 4:14.) The word is indicative, not imperative. For the thought, comp. Matthew 5:14, Matthew 5:16; Ephesians 5:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:5.
ÏÏÏÏá¿ÏεÏ: Only here and Revelation 21:11. In LXX of the heavenly bodies, as Genesis 1:14, Genesis 1:16.
á¼Î½ κÏÏμῳ: With ÏÏÏÏá¿ÏεÏ: luminaries in a dark world (Ellic., Mey., Kl., Lips.).
Lightf., De W., and Weiss connect with ÏαίνεÏθε. Lightf.âs interpretation turns on his explanation of κÏÏμοÏ, which, he says, has in the N.T. a sense so dominantly ethical that it cannot well be used here of the physical as distinguished from the moral world. An examination of the number of instances in which κÏÏÎ¼Î¿Ï occurs in a physical sense will show that this view is groundless. If taken with ÏαίνεÏθε, á¼Î½ κÏÏμῳ would be merely an unmeaning expansion of á¼Î½ οἷÏ; while with ÏÏÏÏá¿ÏÎµÏ we have a definite image. For the omission of the article with κÏÏμῳ see Win. xix. 1 a.
16. λÏγον ζÏá¿Ï á¼ÏÎÏονÏεÏ: âholding forth the word of life.â
λÏγον ζÏá¿Ï: the gospel: a word which has life in itself, and which leads to life. The phrase not elsewhere in Paul. (Comp. John 6:68; Acts 5:20; 1 John 1:1.) By ζÏá½´ is not to be understood Christ himself, nor the eternal life, but the life which the Christian possesses through faith in Christ, and leads in fellowship with Christ (Romans 6:13, Romans 6:8:6, Romans 6:10). The genitive is the genitive of contents: not, âthe word concerning life,â but the word âwhich has in itself a principle as well as a message of lifeâ; or, as Mey., âthe divinely efficacious vehicle of the spirit of life.â (Comp. John 6:68.) Life and light appear in correlation in John 1:4; Ephesians 2:1; and especially since heathenism is regarded as a state alike of death and of darkness (Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13). ÎÏá½´ is the correlative of salvation. With quickening from the death of sin the believer enters upon ânewness of lifeâ (Romans 6:4, Romans 6:11). This life, as to its quality, is that which shall be lived with the exalted Christ. Now it is hidden with Christ, because the exalted Christ is still hidden (Colossians 3:3; comp. Colossians 1:5). But it will be manifested in glory when Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested (Colossians 3:4). Then will come the change into âthe likeness of the body of his gloryâ (Philippians 3:21), and âmortalityâ will be âswallowed up of lifeâ (2 Corinthians 5:4).
á¼ÏÎÏονÏεÏ: âholding forth.â In Paul only here and 1 Timothy 4:16. In LXX only in the sense of âapply,â as Job 18:2, 30:26; or âforbearâ; ârefrain,â as 1 K. 22:6, 15. Lit. âto hold uponâ or âapply.â So âto fix the attentionâ (Luke 14:7; Acts 3:5, Acts 19:22). In the sense of âto hold outâ or âpresentâ it occurs only in class.
âHolding forth,â as Ellic., Alf., Ead., Lightf.; âholding fastâ (Luth., Beng., De W.); âhaving in possessionâ (Kl., Lips., Mey., Weiss). Lightf. regards á¼Î½ Î¿á¼·Ï â¦ ÎºÏÏμῳ as parenthetical, and connects λÏγ. ζÏ. á¼ÏÎÏ. with ἵνα γÎν ⦠διεÏÏÏαμ. (vs. 15). He finds an incongruity in the images Ïαίν. and á¼ÏεÏ. Surely this is hypercritical. âYe appear holding forth the word as a light.â It is common to personify a luminary as a light-bearer. Paul was not always so consistent in his metaphors as this criticism would imply. See for inst. 2 Corinthians 3:2, 2 Corinthians 3:3, and Lightf. on 1 Thessalonians 5:4, Notes on Eps. of St. P. from unpublished Commentaries. (See Mey.âs citn. from Test. 12. Patr.)
Îµá¼°Ï ÎºÎ±ÏÏημα á¼Î¼Î¿á½¶: âfor a matter of glorying unto me.â For καÏÏημα see on 1:26. Their success in working out their own salvation and proclaiming the gospel to others will be a cause of boasting to Paul. (Comp. 2 Corinthians 1:14; 1 Thessalonians 2:19.) Îá¼°Ï ÎºÎ±ÏÏ. á¼Î¼. belongs to the whole passage ἵνα γεν ⦠á¼ÏÎÏ.; not merely to λÏγ. ζÏ. á¼ÏÎÏ.
Îµá¼°Ï á¼¡Î¼ÎÏαν ΧÏιÏÏοῦ: âagainst the day of Christ.â (See on 1:10, and comp. Galatians 3:23; Ephesians 4:30.) The day is the point with reference to which the boasting is reserved. Not âuntil the day,â etc. The glorying is put in relation to the decisions and awards of the parousia, as 2 Corinthians 1:14.
á½Ïι may be taken as explicative either of the nature of the glorying (âthatâ), or of its ground (âbecauseâ).
Îµá¼°Ï ÎºÎµÎ½á½¸Î½: âin vainâ; âto no purpose.â See for the phrase, 2 Corinthians 6:1; Galatians 2:2; 1 Thessalonians 3:5. LXX, Îµá¼°Ï ÎºÎµÎ½á½¸Î½, Ïὸ κεν., κενὰ, Leviticus 26:20; Job 2:9, 20:18, 39:16; Isaiah 29:8; Jeremiah 6:29. âIn vainâ is the dominant thought here, as is shown by the repetition.
á¼Î´Ïαμον: Metaphor of the stadium, as Galatians 2:2. (Comp. Acts 20:24; 1 Corinthians 9:24; 2 Timothy 4:7.) The aorist is used from the point of view of the day of Christ.
á¼ÎºÎ¿ÏίαÏα: ÎοÏιᾷν, lit. âto labor to wearinessâ; κÏÏοÏ, âexhausting toil.â (See 1 Corinthians 15:10; Galatians 4:11; Colossians 1:29; 1 Thessalonians 2:9, 1 Thessalonians 3:5.)
Lightf. thinks that á¼ÎºÎ¿ÏίαÏα is a continuation of the metaphor in á¼Î´Ïαμον, â âlabor such as is bestowed in training for the race.â In his note on Ign. Polyc. vi. he says that κοÏιᾷν is used especially of such training, and cites 1 Corinthians 9:24-27; Colossians 1:29; 1 Timothy 4:10. I do not find any evidence of this special sense of the verb either in classical or N.T. Greek. Certainly in the athletic contests the wearisome labor was not confined to the preparation.
Paul does not shrink from these labors. He will rejoice even in his martyrdom, since he believes that it will promote the work of salvation among his Philippian brethren. The assumption that vs. 16 implies his conviction that he will be alive at the parousia, and that vs. 17 is an admission of the contrary possibility, is entirely gratuitous.
17.�
Î¸Ï Ïίᾳ: Not the act of sacrificing, but the thing sacrificed. So always in N.T. (See Luke 13:1; Acts 7:41; Romans 12:1; 1 Corinthians 10:18; Ephesians 5:2.)
λειÏÎ¿Ï Ïγίᾳ: âministryâ or âservice.â (See Luke 1:23; 2 Corinthians 9:12; Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 9:21.) From an old adjective λεá¿ÏÎ¿Ï or λÎÏÏοÏ, found only in this compound, âbelonging to the people,â and á¼Ïγον, âwork.â Hence, originally, âservice of the state in a public office.â In LXX the verb λειÏÎ¿Ï Ïγεá¿Î½, of the performance of priestly functions (Nehemiah 10:36); λειÏÎ¿Ï Ïγεá¿Î½ and λειÏÎ¿Ï ÏγὸÏ, of service rendered to men (1 K. 1:4, 19:21; 2 K. 4:43, 6:15). In N.T., of sacerdotal ministry (Acts 13:2; Hebrews 10:11; Luke 1:23; Hebrews 9:21; Romans 13:6, 15:16; Hebrews 8:2). Also of human, non-official ministry (Romans 15:27; 2 Corinthians 9:12; Philippians 2:25, Philippians 2:30). In the general sense of âservants of Godâ (λειÏÎ¿Ï ÏÎ³Î¿á½ºÏ Î±á½Ïοῦ), Hebrews 1:7. Here metaphorically in the priestly sense. ÎÏ Ï. and λειÏ. have the article in common, and form one conception (not a hendiadys), a sacrifice ministered.
Ïá¿Ï ÏίÏÏεÏÏ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½: The objective genitive common to Î¸Ï Ï. and λειÏ.; a sacrifice which consists of your faith; a ministry which offers faith as a sacrifice.
According to Paulâs metaphor, therefore, the Philippians as priests offer their faith to God in the midst of an ungodly generation who had already shed Paulâs blood at Philippi, had imprisoned him at Rome, and would probably put him to death. If they should do this, Paulâs blood would be the libation which would be added to the Philippiansâ offering.
This explanation, in which Lightf. stands almost alone among modern expositors, is preferable because it accords better with the course of thought from vs. 12, in which the Philippians are the agents, and distinctly corresponds with Romans 12:2, where the Romans are exhorted to present their bodies as a sacrifice (Î¸Ï Ïίαν), which is further described as λαÏÏεία, âa service rendered to God.â See note on λαÏÏεÏονÏÎµÏ (3:3). In 4:8, the gift of the Philippians is described as a sacrifice to God. The other and favorite interpretation makes Paul the priest, the Philippiansâ faith the sacrifice, and Paulâs apostolic activity the ministry offering the sacrifice. Then the blood of the priest is poured out upon the sacrifice which he is offering. This explanation is urged principally upon the ground of Romans 15:16, Romans 15:17, where Paul represents himself as λειÏÎ¿Ï ÏγὸÏ, ministering the gospel in sacrifice, and presenting the Gentiles as an offering to God. But in that passage Paul is specially exhibiting his apostolic office as a priestly service of offering ordained by Christ, who was himself made a minister that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy (vs. 8). That is the only instance of the figure, and in view of the great variety of Paulâs metaphors cannot be regarded as decisive.
The fact that Paul is writing from Rome and to a Gentile church seems to indicate that the metaphor is cast in the mould of heathen rather than of Jewish sacrificial usage. Comp. 2 Corinthians 2:14, where the picture of a Roman triumph is suggested, with the clouds of incense rising from the altars.
ÏαίÏÏ ÎºÎ±á½¶ ÏÏ Î½ÏαίÏÏ Ïá¾¶Ïιν á½Î¼á¿Î½: âI joy and rejoice with you all.â Comp. μενῶ καὶ ÏαÏαμενῶ (1:25). The natural connection is with εἰ καὶ ÏÏÎνδομαι as the subject of congratulation, not in itself, but as a means of promoting their salvationâthat cause of boasting which he desires to have in them. Thus his joy will be fulfilled in them (vs. 2).
ÏÏ Î½ÏαίÏÏ: âI rejoice with.â This is the natural and appropriate meaning in every N.T. passage in which the word occurs. The rendering âcongratulateâ (Lightf., Mey.) is admissible in Luke 1:58, Luke 1:15:6, Luke 1:9, but the other is equally good. âCongratulateâ does not suit vs. 18.
âRejoice withâ is the rendering of the Gk. Fathers, Luth., Calv., De W., Wies., Weiss, Weizs., Lips., von Sod. Mey.âs objection, repeated by Lightf., that the apostle would thus summon his readers to a joy which, according to vs. 17, they already possessed, requires no notice beyond a reminder of the informal and familiar style of the epistle.
Paul therefore says: Even if I should be poured out as a libation in addition to the sacrifice of faith which you are offering to God, I rejoice, and rejoice with you, because such a result will promote your salvation, and that will be a cause of joy to us both alike. (Comp. Ephesians 3:13.)
18. Ïὸ δὲ αá½Ïὸ καὶ á½Î¼Îµá¿Ï ÏαίÏεÏε καὶ ÏÏ Î½ÏαίÏεÏΠμοι: âfor the same reason do ye also joy and rejoice with me.â
Ïὸ δὲ αá½Ïὸ: âfor the same reasonâ; to wit, the advancement of the work of your salvation. For the grammatical construction, see Win. xxxii. 4 a; and comp. Romans 6:10. The verbs ÏαίÏ. and ÏÏ Î½ÏαίÏ. acquire a quasi-transitive force.
Rill., Weiss, Lightf., Weizs., R.V., render âin the same manner.â
ÏαίÏεÏε καὶ ÏÏ Î½ÏαίÏεÏΠμοι: Comp. the striking figure of the Romans forming a chorus and singing a sacrificial hymn round the martyr Ignatius. (Ign. Rom. ii.; see also Trall. i.)
He hopes soon to send Timothy to them.
19-24. But, though the worst may come to the worst, yet I hope for such a favorable issue in my case as will enable me to dispense with the services of Timothy here and to send him to you, in order that I may be comforted by hearing of your condition. For besides him I have no one likeminded with myself who will care for you with the same fatherly care. For they all are occupied with their own interests, not with the things of Jesus Christ. But Timothy you yourselves have proved; for you know with what filial devotion he served me in the work of promoting the gospel. I hope therefore to send him shortly, as soon as I shall have learned something definite about my own case, but I trust in the Lord that I shall soon be with you in person.
19. á¼Î»ÏÎ¯Î¶Ï Î´á½²: The δὲ, âbut,â offsets the possibility at which he has hinted in ÏÏÎνδομαι, and which he knows is disturbing the minds of his faithful friends at Philippi. Mey.âs statement that there is an immediate change from a presentiment of death to a confidence of being preserved in life and liberated, is too strong. The εἰ καὶ ÏÏÎνδομαι, etc., on its face, at least, merely contemplates a possibility. The words rather revert to 1:25.
Lightf. and Lips. connect with vs. 12: âI urged you to work out your salvation in my absence, but I do not mean to leave you without personal superintendence, and therefore I propose to send Timothy. The connection, however, seems too remote and labored. According to Weiss the δὲ offsets the joy to which he has exhorted them with the means which he proposes to employ to obtain joyful news from them.
á¼Î½ ÎºÏ Ïίῳ ἸηÏοῦ: The sphere or element in which his hope moves. (Comp. 1:8, 14, 3:1; Romans 9:1, Romans 9:14:14; 1 Corinthians 1:31, 1 Corinthians 7:39, etc.)
ἵνα κá¼Î³á½¼ εá½ÏÏ Ïá¿¶: âthat I also may be of good heart.â
κá¼Î³á½¼: âI also,â by the tidings which I shall hear from you, as you by the accounts of me.
εá½ÏÏ Ïá¿¶: Not elsewhere in Bib. Gk. Îá½ÏÏ ÏοÏ, -ÏÏ, -ία, in LXX; 1 Macc. 9:14; 2 Macc. 7:20, 14:18.
20. οá½Î´Îνα Î³á½°Ï á¼ÏÏ á¼°ÏÏÏÏ Ïον: âfor I have no one likeminded.â
γὰÏ: reason for sending Timothy.
á¼°ÏÏÏÏ Ïον: Only here in N.T. (See LXX, Psa_55[54]:13[14].) Supply μοὶ, not ΤιμοθÎῳ. Timothy was to be sent to minister to them in Paulâs stead. Moreover, the quality of Timothyâs care for them is just that which marks Paulâs careâγνηÏίÏÏ, ânaturally,â âby birth-relation,â and therefore âtrulyâ or âgenuinelyâ; with such a care as springs from a natural, parental relation. In other words, there is no one who will care for them in a fatherly way as Paul does. (See 1 Corinthians 4:15; 1 Thessalonians 2:11; Philemon 1:10; 1 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4.) Timothy would have such a feeling for the Philippian Christians, since he was associated with Paul in founding their church. For γνήÏιοÏ, see 4:3; 2 Corinthians 8:8; 1 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4.
Lightf., Lips., Weiss, and others refer á¼°ÏÏÏÏ Ïον to Timothy.
21. οἱ ÏάνÏÎµÏ Î³á½°Ï Ïá½° á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν ζηÏοῦÏιν, οὠÏá½° ΧÏιÏÏοῦ ἸηÏοῦ: âfor they all seek their own, not the things of Christ Jesus.â
οἱ ÏάνÏεÏ: Collective; the whole number in a body. (See Acts 19:7; Romans 11:32; 1 Corinthians 10:17; Ephesians 4:13.) The statement is very sweeping, especially in view of the high commendation of Epaphroditus which follows. The common explanations are that all who were likeminded with himself, as Luke, were absent at the time of his writing; or that those about him were interested in promoting party interests, Gentile or Jewish-Christian. The Fathers attempted various explanations,âas that no one was willing to sacrifice his own quiet and security by undertaking the journey to Macedonia; that they were unwilling to sacrifice their own honor and profit to the welfare of the church; or that the words were used only in comparison with Timothyâs exceptional zeal and fidelity. None of these help the case. Augustine and Anselm held to the full severity of the charge, maintaining that all the apostleâs companions were mercenary. Without more information a satisfactory explanation seems impossible.
22. Ïὴν δοκιμὴν: âthe proofâ or âapprovedness.â Used only by Paul, and meaning both âthe process of trialâ (2 Corinthians 8:2) and âthe result of trial,â as here, Romans 5:4; 2 Corinthians 2:9, 2 Corinthians 9:13. You know that he has approved himself to you.
γινÏÏκεÏε: Not imperat., for they had known Timothy in Philippi (Acts 16., Acts 16:17.).
á½¡Ï ÏαÏÏá½¶ ÏÎκνον Ïὺν á¼Î¼Î¿á½¶ á¼Î´Î¿ÏÎ»ÎµÏ Ïεν: âas a child a father so he served with me.â Paul began the sentence as if he were going to write, âTimothy served me as a child serves a fatherâ; but he was checked by the thought that both himself and Timothy were alike servants of Jesus Christ (1:1), and also by that of his intimate and affectionate relations with Timothy. Accordingly he wrote âwith meâ instead of âme.â
Îµá¼°Ï Ïὸ εá½Î±Î³Î³Îλιον: As 1:5.
23. οá½Î½: Resuming vs. 19; he being thus qualified.
á½¡Ï á¼Î½ï¿½
24. ÏÎÏοιθα δὲ á¼Î½ ÎºÏ Ïίῳ: See on 1:14; and with Paulâs language here comp. 1 Corinthians 4:17, 1 Corinthians 4:19.
á½ Ïι καὶ αá½Ïá½¸Ï ÏαÏÎÏÏ á¼Î»ÎµÏÏομαι: Expectation of speedy release. (Comp. 1:25.)
× * ACP with several minusc. add ÏÏÎ¿Ï Ï Î¼Î±Ï to ÎµÎ»ÎµÏ Ïομαι.
How soon Timothy or Paul himself may be able to visit them is uncertain, but he is sending them a messenger at once.
25-30. Meanwhile, whether Timothy and I come to you or not, I send you a messenger at onceâmy brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier Epaphroditus, who came as the bearer of your gift to me. I thought it necessary to send him because he was really homesick, longing to see you, since he feared that you would be distressed by the report of his sickness. And very sick he was, so much so that it seemed as though he would die. But God was merciful to both him and me, and restored him and spared me the additional sorrow of his death. I send him therefore in order that his return to you may restore your cheerfulness, and that the sorrow of my captivity may be mitigated by your joy. Joyfully receive him therefore in the Lord. Such as he are to be honored; for he wellnigh died through his zeal for the work of Christ, hazarding his life in order that he might render to me that sacrificial service of love which, if it had been possible, you would gladly have performed in your own persons.
25.�2 Corinthians 9:5. Emphatic as contrasted with the possible visits of Timothy and of himself. I hope to send Timothy and to come in person, but I think it necessary to send Epaphroditus at once.
ἡγηÏάμην: See on vs. 6. If this is the epistolary aorist, as is probable, it points to Epaphroditus as the bearer of the letter. (See Introd. v.)
á¼ÏαÏÏÏδιÏον: Mentioned only in this letter. Examples of the name are common in both Greek and Latin inscriptions. (See Wetst.) It is not probable that á¼ÏαÏÏá¾¶Ï. (Colossians 1:7, Colossians 4:12) is a contraction of á¼ÏαÏÏÏδιÏοÏ. (See Thay. Lex. sub á¼ÏαÏÏá¾¶Ï.) Win. xvi. says âprobableâ; Schmiedel, Rev. of Win. xvi. 9, âpossible.â (See Lightf. Introd. and Comm. ad loc.) Even if the names can be shown to be the same, it is unlikely that the persons were the same. Eadie justly remarks that it is scarcely supposable that the Asiatic Epaphras, a pastor at Colossæ and a native of that city, could be Epaphroditus, a messenger delegated to Paul with a special gift from the distant European church of Philippi, and by him sent back to it with lofty eulogy, and as having a special interest in its affairs and members. From two allusions in Suetonius (Nero, 49; Domitian, 14), a tradition arose that Epaphroditus was Neroâs secretary.
á¼Î´ÎµÎ»Ïὸν, ÏÏ Î½ÎµÏγὸν, ÏÏ Î½ÏÏÏαÏιÏÏην: âa brother,â as a Christian; âa fellow-worker,â in the cause of the gospel; âa fellow-soldier,â in the conflict with the adversaries of the faith. (Comp. Romans 16:3, Romans 16:9; Philemon 1:2; Philippians 1:28, Philippians 1:30; 2 Timothy 2:3.)
á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ δὲ�
á¼ÏÏÏÏολον: Not in the official sense, but a messenger sent on a special commission. So 2 Corinthians 8:23.
λειÏÎ¿Ï Ïγὸν: See on vs. 17, and comp. vs. 30. The explanation âsacrificial ministerâ (Mey., Lightf.), regarding the gift of the Philippians as an offering to God, is favored by 4:18. Westcott, on Hebrews 1:7, observes that the word seems always to retain something of its original force, as expressing a public, social service. (See Romans 15:27; 2 Corinthians 9:12.)
26. á¼Ïειδὴ á¼ÏιÏοθῶν ἦν ÏάνÏÎ±Ï á½Î¼á¾¶Ï: âSince he was longing after you all.â Giving the reason for vs. 25. The participle with the substantive verb indicates a continued state. For á¼ÏιÏοθεá¿Î½, see on 1:8.
×* ACD add ιδειν after á½Î¼Î±Ï. WH. bracket ιδειν.
á¼Î´Î·Î¼Î¿Î½á¿¶Î½: Also with ἦν. Only here in Paul. (See Matthew 26:37; Mark 14:33.) In LXX only in second-century revisions (Symm. Ecclesiastes 7:17; Psalms 116:11 [115:2], 61:2 [60:3]; Aq. Job 18:20). The etymology is uncertain. Commonly from�
27. καὶ Î³á½°Ï á¼ ÏθÎνηÏεν: âand (you were correctly informed about him) for he was sick.â
ÏαÏαÏλήÏιον θανάÏῳ: ΠαÏαÏ. not elsewhere in Bib. The adv. ÏαÏαÏληÏίÏÏ, Hebrews 2:14. Here adverbially. Not precisely ânigh unto death,â but âin a way nearly resembling death.â
×* ACDFGKL read θαναÏÏ; so Tisch., R.T., Weiss, Txtk. Unt. ×cBP, 31, 80, θαναÏÎ¿Ï ; so WH.
λÏÏην á¼Ïá½¶ λÏÏην: âsorrow upon sorrow,â or âafterâ sorrow, as we say âwave upon wave,â á¼Ïá½¶ having a sense of motion. (See LXX; Ezekiel 7:26; Isaiah 28:10, Isaiah 28:13; Psa_69[68]:27.) Not the sorrow for Epaphroditusâ death following upon the sorrow for his sickness, but the sorrow for Epaphroditusâ death following that of Paulâs imprisonment.
Weiss prefers the former explanation, for the singular reason that 1:12-24, 2:16-18, do not indicate sorrow on Paulâs part for his captivity. (See Meyâs ingenious note.)
28. ÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´Î±Î¹Î¿ÏÎÏÏÏ: âwith the greater despatch.â (Comp.Luke 7:4; Luke 7:4; Titus 3:13.) More hastily than I would have done otherwise. For the comparative without statement of the standard of comparison, see on μᾶλλον (1:12).
The older commentators render âstudiosius,â âsollicitius.â So A.V., âcarefullyâ; R.V., âdiligentlyâ; Lightf., âwith increased eagernessâ; Ellic., âmore diligently.â Our rendering as Thay. Lex., Ead., Lips., Hack., Weiss, Weizs., Mey., v. Sod.
á¼ÏεμÏα: âI send.â Epistolary aorist.
ἵνα ἰδÏνÏÎµÏ Î±á½Ïὸν Ïάλιν ÏαÏá¿Ïε: âthat when ye see him ye may rejoice again.â Construe Ïάλιν with ÏαÏá¿Ïε, not with ἰδÏνÏÎµÏ (as R.V.). Paulâs habit is to place Ïάλιν before the verb which it qualifies. The Philippiansâ joy had been clouded by Epaphroditusâ sickness. They would rejoice again when he should arrive.
á¼Î»Ï ÏÏÏεÏοÏ: âthe less sorrowful.â The sorrow of captivity still remains. The word only here.
29. οá½Î½: Since I sent him that you might rejoice, âthereforeâ receive him with joy.
ÏαÏá¿Ï ÏαÏá¾¶Ï: Every kind of joy. (Comp. 1:20; Ephesians 6:18; 1 Peter 2:1.)
ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ ÏοιοÏÏÎ¿Ï Ï: The article marks Epaphroditus as belonging to the class designated by ÏοιοÏÏ. (Comp. Mark 9:37; Romans 16:18; 2 Corinthians 11:13, 2 Corinthians 11:12:3; Galatians 5:23, Galatians 5:6:1; and see Win. xviii. 4.)
á¼Î½ÏÎ¯Î¼Î¿Ï Ï á¼ÏεÏε: The only occurrence of the phrase in N.T. In class. usually á¼Î½ÏίμÏÏ á¼Ï.
30. á¼Ïγον ΧÏιÏÏοῦ: All his exertions in forwarding Paulâs work in Rome, and the risk and hardship of the journey thither.
ΧÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï , BFG, 80, Tisch., Weiss.
ÏÎ¿Ï Î§ÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï , DEKL, Vulg., Goth., Syr.sch, four Lat. verss. (d, e, f, g).
For ΧÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï , × AP, 17, 31, 47, Cop., Syr.P, Arm., Ãth., WH., read ÎºÏ ÏÎ¹Î¿Ï . Ïο εÏγον without addn. C.
Lightf. reads διὰ Ïὸ á¼Ïγον on the sole authority of C, and says it must be the correct reading. He cites Acts 15:38; Ign. Eph. xiv., Rom. iii., and the analogy of ἡ á½Î´ÏÏ, Ïὸ θÎλημα, and Ïὸ á½Î½Î¿Î¼Î± for the absolute use of Ïὸ á¼Ïγον. But while Ïὸ á¼Ïγον is used absolutely in these cases, it is too much to assert, in the face of such strong MS. authority, that ΧÏοῦ, Ïοῦ ΧÏοῦ, or ÎºÏ ÏÎ¯Î¿Ï are mere âinsertions to explain Ïὸ á¼Ïγον.â ÎÏ ÏÎ¯Î¿Ï might be substituted for ΧÏοῦ in order to assimilate to 1 Corinthians 15:58, 1 Corinthians 15:16:10; and ΧΥ or ÎÎ¥ might easily be overlooked and omitted in transcription, as by C.
μÎÏÏι θανάÏÎ¿Ï á¼¤Î³Î³Î¹Ïεν: âhe came nigh unto death.â (Comp. LXX; Psa_107[106]:18], 88:3 [87:4]; Job 33:22.)
ÏαÏÎ±Î²Î¿Î»ÎµÏ ÏάμενοÏ: Only here. A gamblerâs word, from ÏαÏάβολοÏ, âventuresome,â âreckless.â He gambled with his life; recklessly hazarded it. (Comp. Romans 16:4.) A most generous and appreciative recognition of Epaphroditusâ services. The voluntary visitors of the sick, who, in the ancient church, formed a kind of brotherhood under the supervision of the bishop, were styled âParabolani.â The graphic description of these in Kingsleyâs Hypatia is familiar. The word might have been suggested to Paul by seeing the soldiers throwing dice. Comp. ÎºÏ Î²Î¯Î±, âdicingâ (Ephesians 4:14).
TR with CKLP and several Fath. reads ÏαÏÎ±Î²Î¿Ï Î»ÎµÏ ÏαμενοÏ, âhaving consulted amiss.â
ἵνα�1 Corinthians 16:17; 2 Corinthians 9:12.)
á¼Î½Î±ÏληÏÏÏá¿: Not synonymous with the simple verb ÏληÏοῦν, âto fill up a total vacancy,â but denoting the making up of what is lacking to perfect fulness; the filling up of a partial void. So Erasm.: âAccessione implere quod plenitudini perfectae deerat.â For double compounds of the verb, see 2 Corinthians 9:12, 2 Corinthians 9:11:9; Colossians 1:24.
á½Î¼á¿¶Î½: Genitive of the subject, with á½ÏÏÎÏημα, not with λειÏÎ¿Ï ÏγίαÏ: âthe lack which was yours.â
λειÏÎ¿Ï ÏγίαÏ: See on vs. 17. It describes the service as the act of the Philippian community, and as a sacrificial act. So far from implying a censure in Ïὸ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ á½ÏÏÎÏημα, that clause is a most delicate, courteous, and sympathetic tribute to both Epaphroditus and the Philippians. The gift to Paul was the gift of the church as a body. It was a sacrificial offering of love. What was lacking, and what would have been grateful to Paul and to the church alike, was the churchâs presentation of this offering in person. This was impossible, and Paul represents Epaphroditus as supplying this lack by his affectionate and zealous ministry. He thus, in this single sentence, recognises the devotion of Epaphroditus and the good-will of the Philippians, and expresses the pleasure which he himself would have had in their personal presence and ministry. Withal there is a touch of tender sympathy for Epaphroditus. It would have been a great thing if you could, as a body, have offered this sacrifice of love here in my prison; and poor Epaphroditus made himself sick unto death in his efforts to supply this want.
ÏÏÏÏ Î¼Îµ: Î ÏÏÏ combines with the sense of direction that of relation with, intercourse. (Comp. Matthew 13:56; Mark 9:16; John 1:1; Acts 3:25, 28:25; 1 Thessalonians 4:12; Colossians 4:5; Hebrews 9:20.) Their gift to Paul was a sacrificial offering to God, in which the spirits of Paul and of the Philippians communed.
EXCURSUS ON VS. 6-11
Much of the difficulty which appears to attach to this passage arises from the assumption that in it Paul is aiming to formulate a statement of the character of Christâs mode of existence before and during his incarnation. This is inconsistent with the informal and familiar tone of the letter, and with the obviously practical character of this passage, the principal object of which is to enforce the duty of humility. As the supreme illustration of this virtue, the apostle adduces the example of Jesus Christ in his voluntary renunciation of his preincarnate majesty, and his identification with the conditions of humanity. The points of the illustration are thrown out in rapid succession, merely stated and not elaborated, and are all brought to bear upon the exhortation, âLook not every one at his own things, but every one also on the things of others.â Paul does, indeed, rise here above the level of epistolary colloquialism; but the impulse to the higher flight is emotional rather than philosophical.
I think that Lightfoot has fallen into the error just mentioned in his excursus on the synonyms ÏÏá¿Î¼Î± and μοÏÏá½´ (Commentary, p. 127 ff.). Prior to the philosophical period of Greek literature, the predominant sense of μοÏÏá½´ was âshapeâ or âfigure.â Schmidt (Synon. 182, 4) says it is distinguished from Îµá¼¶Î´Î¿Ï and ἰδÎα as the outward appearance of a thing considered in and for itself, and partially contrasted with the inner and spiritual being. It includes the coloring and the whole outward appearanceâthe body itself with no reference to other than outward peculiarities. This sense is retained to some extent in philosophical usage. Both Plato and Aristotle employ μοÏÏá½´ with this meaning (Plat. Repub. ii. 381 C; Phaedr. 271 A; Arist. Hist. An. i. 1, 7, ii. 10, 1, 2).
But the word has also a far wider meaning in Plato and Aristotle. Both apply it to immaterial things, and it is especially from Aristotleâs usage that Lightfoot draws the meaning specific character for μοÏÏá½´. That Aristotle uses it in this sense may be granted, though there are three things to be said on that point without entering into discussion: (1) That Aristotle, as has been said already, uses the word in the external and earlier sense also. (2) That his more abstract conception of μοÏÏá½´ is not uniform throughout, being more purely intellectual in his logic than in his physics. And (3) that even in his most abstract and immaterial conception of âformâ the abstract is brought into concrete realisation. His doctrine is familiar that sensible objects consist of matter and form; matter being simply the potentiality of becoming, while form makes this potentiality actual, so that matter is not intelligible without form, though the form is not necessarily external or material.
I do not, however, believe that Paulâs use of the term was derived from this source, or applied in the sense of âspecific character.â The starting-point of his conception lay nearer to the anthropomorphic than to the philosophic: not necessarily that he definitely conceived God as invested with a human form, but that he conceived of the essential personality of God as externalising itself and expressing itself in some mode apprehensible by pure spiritual intelligences if not apprehensible by the human mind. But it seems probable that Paulâs mind touched the conception of âthe form of Godâ very slightly and incidentally, and only on its outskirts, and that the application of the term μοÏÏá½´ to God was principally a reflection of its application to a bondservant. Christâs humiliation was the dominant thought in Paulâs mind, and the μοÏÏá½´ of a bondservant therefore came first in the order of thought. The idea of some embodiment of the divine personality was not altogether absent from his mind, but μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ was chiefly a rhetorical antithesis to μοÏÏá½´ δοÏÎ»Î¿Ï .
Still, there is evidence that Paul uses μοÏÏá½´ with a recognition of a peculiar relation of the word to the essential and permanent nature of that which is expressed or embodied, so that μοÏÏá½´ is purposely selected instead of ÏÏá¿Î¼Î±, which signifies merely the outward and transient configuration without regard to that which is behind it. This has been clearly shown by Lightfoot in his examination of the compounds into which the two words severally enter. (See Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 3:18, 2 Corinthians 3:11:2 Corinthians 3:13-15; Philippians 3:21.) It is possible that in illustrating this legitimate distinction, Lightfoot, in one or two instances, may have refined too much. His remarks on μεÏαμοÏÏοῦÏθαι in Matthew 17:2; Mark 9:2, are just, since a compound of ÏÏá¿Î¼Î±, denoting merely a change in the outward aspect of Christâs person and garments, would not have expressed the fact that this change acquired its real character and meaning from the divineness which was essential in Christâs personality. A foreshadowing or prophecy of his real âformââthe proper expression of his essential beingâcomes out in the transfiguration. He passes for the moment into the form prophetic of his revelation in the glory which he had with the Father before the world was.
The case is more doubtful in Mark 16:12, where it is said that Jesus, after his resurrection, appeared á¼Î½ á¼ÏÎÏá¾³ μοÏÏá¿. It is possible that μοÏÏá½´ may have been selected with conscious recognition of the fact that, though the accidents of figure, face, and pierced hands and feet were the same as before, yet the indefinable change which had passed upon Jesus prefigured his transition to the conditions of his heavenly life; but it is quite as probable that the writer used μοÏÏá½´ in its earlier sense of âshape.â
However that may be, I cannot accept Lightfootâs explanation of μÏÏÏÏÏÎ¹Ï in Romans 2:20 as signifying an aiming after or affecting the true μοÏÏá½´ of knowledge and truth. There was actually a truthful embodiment of knowledge and truth in the law. The law was âholy and just and good,â and Paul habitually recognised in it the impress of the divine character and will. It was this fact which aggravated the culpability of the Jew, to whom had been committed the oracles of God (Romans 3:2).
Thus it is quite legitimate to define μοÏÏá½´ in this passage as that âform,â whatever it be, which carries in itself and expresses or embodies the essential nature of the being to whom it belongs. (See note on vs. 6.)
ÎοÏÏá½´, however, applied to God, is not to be identified with δÏξα, as by Weiss (Bib. Theol. § 103 c, d, Clarksâ Trans.). Weiss reaches this conclusion by a very circuitous and inconclusive process. He says: âThe identification of the μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ with the δÏξα depends on this; that here also the δÏξα, which the perfected attain to and which belongs to the glorified body of Christ (Philippians 3:21), belongs originally to God, who is called (Ephesians 1:17) the ÏαÏá½´Ï Ïá¿Ï δÏξηÏ, and therefore, on that account, it belongs to the Son of his love in his original heavenly existence.â ÎÏξα is the manifestation, the âunfolded fulness,â of the divine attributes and perfections, while μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ is the immediate, proper, and personal investiture of the divine essence. ÎÏξα attaches to Deity; μοÏÏá½´ is identified with the inmost being of Deity. ÎÏξα is and must be included in μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ, but δÏξα is not μοÏÏá½´. Indeed, the difference may be roughly represented by the English words âgloryâ and âform.â Glory may belong to one in virtue of birth, natural endowment, achievement, and the possession of great qualities; but it does not belong to him in the immediate and intimate sense that his form does.
A study of the usage, both in the Old and in the New Testament, will confirm this distinction. In the Old Testament ×Ö¼Ö¸××Ö¹× applied to God occurs often in connection with theophanies, where, if anywhere, we might expect the peculiar sense of μοÏÏá½´ to appear.1 The passage which seems most to favor this view is Exodus 33:18-23, Exodus 34:5-7. But it will be observed that in answer to Mosesâ prayer that God will show him his glory, God promises to reveal his goodness, and to proclaim his name, with the reservation, however, which is put anthropomorphically, that Moses cannot bear that revelation in its fulness, and that therefore it will be tempered for him. In the sequel the Lord descends and proclaims âthe Lord God, merciful, gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth.â This was what Moses desired, not, like Semele, to behold Deity clothed in outward splendor, but to behold the true glory of God as revealed in his moral attributes.
The phrase âglory of the Lordâ (×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¹× ××××) is used of the voice and fire on Sinai (Exodus 24:17; Deuteronomy 5:24); of the splendor which, on different occasions, filled the tabernacle and the temple (Exodus 40:34; Numbers 14:10, Numbers 14:15:19, Numbers 14:42, Numbers 14:20:6; 2 Chronicles 5:14, 2 Chronicles 5:7:1, 2 Chronicles 5:2, 2 Chronicles 5:3; Ezekiel 10:4, Ezekiel 43:4, Ezekiel 10:5, Ezekiel 44:4). It appears as a bow in the cloud (Ezekiel 1:28); as the glory which the prophet saw by Chebar (Ezekiel 3:23; comp. 1:4-28); in the fire which consumes the sacrifice on the altar (Leviticus 9:23). In the last three instances the mode or form of the revelation of divine glory is distinctly specified. It appears over the cherubim (Ezekiel 10:19, Ezekiel 11:22); on the threshold of the house and on the mountain (Ezekiel 10:4, Ezekiel 11:23). The earth shined with it (Ezekiel 43:2). None of these exhibitions answer to the definition of μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ. They are mostly symbolical. Again, the glory of the Lord will be revealed in a march through the wilderness to the Holy Land (Isaiah 40:5); it will be the ârearwardâ of Israel (Isaiah 58:8); the resting-place of the Messiah will be glory (Isaiah 11:10). The impossibility of identifying such expressions with μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ will be seen if we attempt to substitute this for δÏξα. Shall we say âthe heavens declare the form of Godâ (Psalms 19:1); âthe form of God shall dwell in the landâ (Psalms 85:9); âthe rest of the Messiah shall be the form of Godâ (Isaiah 11:10)? These instances are fairly representative; and the Old Testament furnishes no others which, any more than these, warrant the identification of μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ with δÏξα.
In the New Testament the following may be specially noted: John 17:5, John 17:22, John 17:24. In vs. 5, 24, Jesus speaks of his preincarnate glory which he laid aside in his incarnation. In vs. 22 he speaks of a glory which he had not relinquished, but had retained in his incarnation, and had imparted to his disciples. The two conceptions cannot be identical. The μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ was laid aside, and could not be imparted (John 1:14). ÎÏξα was something which Jesus possessed in the flesh, and which the disciples beheld. It could not be identical with μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ (2 Corinthians 3:18). Îἰκὼν approximates more closely to μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ than perhaps any other word in the New Testament. But δÏξα here is not the same as εἰκὼν. The image of the Lord is attained by a process, through successive stages or grades of glory. (See Heinrici, Comm. ad loc.; 1 Corinthians 11:7.) Man is the image (εἰκὼν) and glory of God. The preincarnate Son of God was the effulgence of Godâs glory, and the very impress (ÏαÏακÏá½´Ï) of his substance (Hebrews 1:3).
In short, it is apparent that δÏξα is used with too large a range and variety of meaning to warrant its identification with an expression which is unique in the New Testament, and entirely wanting in the Old Testament, and which, if the definition given be correct, is strictly limited in its meaning.
A common error of the Greek Fathers, adopted by Calvin, Beza, and others, was the identification of μοÏÏá½´ with οá½Ïία, âessence,â and ÏÏÏιÏ, ânature.â ÎοÏÏá½´ is identified with οá½Ïία, not identical with it. It is the perfect expression of the essence, proceeding from the inmost depths of the perfect being, and into which that being spontaneously and perfectly unfolds, as light from fire. If the two were identical, the parting with the μοÏÏá½´ in the incarnation would have involved parting with the οá½Ïία. But Jesus did not surrender the divine essence in his incarnation, nor did he surrender the divine nature, which is the οá½Ïία clothed with its appropriate attributes. ÎοÏÏá½´ expresses both οá½Ïία and ÏÏ ÏιÏ, but neither is surrendered in the surrender of the μοÏÏá½´.
The Greek Fathers and Augustine, followed by the Catholic and most of the Reformed expositors, held that vs. 6 referred to Jesus in his preincarnate state; while vs. 7 and 8 referred to the incarnate Saviour. According to this view, Christ exchanged the divine mode of existence for the human, not insisting for the time on holding fast to his divine majesty. The form of God was voluntarily exchanged for the form of a bondservant.
The majority of the Lutheran and rationalistic expositors, on the other hand, explained vs. 6 of the incarnate Son. According to this view, the form of God was retained by him in his incarnate state, and was displayed in his miracles and words of power. He retained the μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ as his right, not regarding it an act of robbery when he claimed equality with God. Thus the statement was used to vindicate the divinity of our Lord in the flesh. This view shaped the rendering of King Jamesâ Bible.
But this is contrary to the entire structure and drift of the passage, the main point of which is Christâs example of humility in renouncing his divine dignity and becoming man. The emphasis is upon the humanity, not upon the deity, of our Lord. The prominent thought is âthought it not a thing to be grasped.â Moreover, this interpretation utterly destroys the manifest antithesis of οá½Ï á¼ÏÏαγμὸν ἡγήÏαÏο, etc., and á¼Î±Ï Ïὸν á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν, which is indicated by�
The doctrine of the preincarnate existence of Christ I assume. Statements like those of 1 Corinthians 1:24, 1 Corinthians 1:8:6, 1 Corinthians 1:11:3, 1 Corinthians 1:10:3, 1 Corinthians 1:4; 2 Corinthians 8:9, show that Paul held a real and not a merely ideal preëxistence of the Son of God,âa unique position of the preincarnate Christ with God. The truth is well stated by Professor Bruce (St. Paulâs Conception of Christianity, p. 330): âTo make the conception of Christâs earthly experience as a humiliation complete, is it not necessary to view it as a whole, and regard it as resulting from a foregoing resolve on the part of Christ to enter into such a state? If so, then the necessary presupposition of the Pauline doctrine of redemption is the preëxistence of Christ, not merely in the foreknowledge of God, as the Jews conceived all important persons and things to preëxist, or in the form of an ideal in heaven answering to an imperfect earthly reality, in accordance with the Greek way of thinking, but as a moral personality capable of forming a conscious purpose.â Similarly Weizsäcker (Ap. Zeit. p. 122), to whom Professor Bruce refers: âHe had a personal existence before his human birth, and his earlier life was divine, and absolutely opposed to the dependent life of man upon earth ⦠Christ becomes man by a personal act ⦠Precisely because of this the conception is perfectly consistent with the notion of âthe second manâ who comes from heaven. For the heavenly descent is equivalent to the thought that he was in the form of God, and Paul can therefore say without hesitation, that it was Jesus, the Christ, who first existed in the divine form and then humbled himself, just as he says of him that he was rich and voluntarily submitted to poverty. Had he not given his doctrine of Christ this backward extension, the human life of Christ would have become for him a sort of impersonal event, and Jesus a mere instrument. His doctrine of the preëxistence accordingly enables him to look upon Christâs work as a personal act, and to preserve the bond between him and humanity.â
The phrase á¼Î½ μοÏÏῠθεοῦ á½ÏάÏÏÏν is then to be understood of Christâs preincarnate state. To say that he was á¼Î½ μοÏÏῠθεοῦ is to say that he existed before his incarnation as essentially one with God, and that objectively, and not merely in Godâs self-consciousness as the not yet incarnate Sonâthe ideal man. (See Beyschlag, Die Christologie des neuen Testaments, and Neutestamentliche Theologie, 2 Aufl. vol. ii. p. 77 ff.; Pfleiderer, Paulinismus, 2 Aufl. p. 126; Bruceâs discussion of Beyschlagâs view, Humiliation of Christ, p. 431.)
Do á¼Î½ μοÏÏῠθεοῦ á½ÏάÏÏÏν and Ïὸ εἶναι á¼´Ïα signify the same thing?ââNo,â it is said. Equality with God did not inhere in Christâs preincarnate being. He received it first at his exaltation and as a reward for his perfect obedience. Thus Dorner (Christliche Glaubenslehre, ii. p. 286 f.) says: âHis manhood is raised to a full share in the divine majesty as a reward of its maintaining true obedience. He could not have been exalted if he had not exhibited a faultless development in a true human existence and obedience.â
Along with this view goes an assumed antithesis between Christ and Adam. Dorner says: âWhile the first Adam grasped at equality with God, the second obtained exaltation to the divine majesty, since not only would he not assume the divine dignity, but, though himself elevated in dignity, humbled himself and became obedient even unto death.â The parallel is developed by Ernesti (Stud. u. Krit. Hft. 4, p. 858, 1848). Adam would be God; Christ renounces his godlikeness. Adam suffered death as a doom; Christ voluntarily. Adam incurred the divine curse; Christ won the approval of God, and the reward of exaltation to equality with God.
The same view is held by my friend and colleague Dr. Briggs (Messiah of the Apostles, p. 180). He says: âIt was indeed involved in his existing in the form of God that he should be equal in rank with God. From that point of view it might be said that he would not grasp after his own rank to which he was entitled as the Son of God; but it is probable that the apostle had in mind the antithesis between the first and the second Adam which is so characteristic of his theology. He is thinking of the sinful grasping of the first Adam after equality with God under the instigation of the serpent. As the second Adam, he will not grasp after equality with God, even though it is his birthright. He will receive it from the hands of God as a gift of love, after he has earned it by obedience, just as the first Adam ought to have done.â Similarly Beyschlag, N. T. Theol. 2 Aufl. Bd. ii. p. 88.
Setting aside for the moment the question of the two Adams, I do not quite see the consistency of Dr. Briggsâ first statementâthat equality in rank with God was involved in Christâs existence in the form of God, and his last statement, that equality with God was something which Christ earned, and received as a recompense for his obedience. The inconsistency is not reconciled by the antithesis between the two Adams. But passing this, these statements can mean only that the status of the preincarnate Christ was inferior to that in which he was after his incarnation; that the being whom Paul describes as existing in the form of God was something less than the being whom God highly exalted. This is clearly stated by Beyschlag (N. T. Theol. ii. p. 86): âThe subject of this passage is not Son of God as in the so-called Athanasian symbol, but one sharply distinguished from God. The μοÏÏá½´ θεοῦ in which he preëxisted is not a μοÏÏá½´ Ïοῦ θεοῦ, and the á¼´Ïα θεῷ εἶναι is not an á¼´Ïα Ïá¿· θεῷ εἶναι. There remains between him and the one God who is the Father (vs. 11) so decided a difference that the incomparable glory which Christ won through his self-emptying and obedience unto death does not belong to him as his eternal, natural possession, but is given to him by Godâs free grace, and must redound only to the honor of the Father. Hence á¼Î±Ï Ïὸν á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν cannot signify a laying aside of his divine being, but only the laying aside of his mode of manifestation.â
Such statements cannot be reconciled with passages like Colossians 1:15-17. Speaking of the Epistle to the Colossians, Dr. Briggs justly says: âIt unfolds the doctrine of the preëxistent Messiah beyond anything that we could be prepared to expect from our study of the other epistles. To the doctrine of the form of God in the Epistle to the Philippians, we have added the doctrine that the preëxistent Son of God was the mediator between God and the creature, in creation, in providence, and in redemptionâ (Messiah of the Apostles, p. 215). Add to this John 1:1, John 1:2, John 1:5:21, John 1:6., John 1:10:18, and especially Hebrews 1:2, Hebrews 1:3. In this last passage we have a more technical and formal statement, after the manner of the Alexandrian school, and according to this statement the preëxistent Christ was the very impress of Godâs substance.
Beyschlag, as Philo (De Somn. i. 39, 41), insists on the distinction between ὠθεÏÏ and θεÏÏ, claiming that this distinction is observed in John 1:1. But in that passage, θεÏÏ, predicated of the λÏγοÏ, is used attributively, with a notion of kind, and is thus necessarily anarthrous. It excludes identity of person, but emphasises unity of essence and nature. Accordingly, what John says is, that the λÏÎ³Î¿Ï was with God, and that with no lower nature than God himself. Philo, on the contrary, claims that the anarthrous θεÏÏ describes the λÏÎ³Î¿Ï as of subordinate natureââ δεÏÏεÏÎ¿Ï Î¸ÎµÏÏ.â
Dorner cites Romans 1:4 to show that Christ was constituted the Son of God with power, only after his resurrection. âTherefore, before this, he was not âthe Son of God with power,â though he was already the Son (Chr. Glaubensl. ii. p. 284). But this inference rests on a misinterpretation. á¼Î½ Î´Ï Î½Î¬Î¼ÎµÎ¹ does not belong with Ï á¼±Î¿á¿¦ θεοῦ, but is adverbial and qualifies á½ÏιÏθÎνÏοÏ. Paulâs statement is that Christ was designated as Son of God in a powerful, impressive, efficient manner, by his resurrection from the dead as a work of divine power. So Sanday, Mey., Godet, Alf., Moule, Gifford. (Comp. 2 Corinthians 13:4 and Ephesians 1:19.)
Besides all this, how can equality with God be conferred or superinduced? The words are Ïὸ εἶναι á¼´Ïα. It is a matter of essential being. Equality with God can belong only to essence. Equality of power or of rank can be conferred, but not equality of being.
As to the antithesis of the two Adams. It seems forced at the best, but is there any real antithesis? According to the narrative in Gen. 3., Satan declared that the eating of the fruit would confer a knowledge which would make the eaters as gods, knowing good and evil; and the woman saw that the tree was to be desired to make one wise. Nothing is said of a desire to be equal with God in the absolute and general sense. The temptation and the desire turned on forbidden knowledge. The words âas godsâ are defined and limited by the words âknowing good and evilâ; and it is nowhere asserted or hinted in Scripture that Adam desired equality with God in the comprehensive sense of that expression. Moreover, if Adam had proved obedient, his reward would not have been equality with God.
Yet something was obtained by Christ as the result of his incarnation and of his perfect obedience therein, which he did not possess before his incarnation, and which he could not have possessed without it. Equality with God he had as his birthright, but his Messianic lordship was something which could come only through his incarnation and its attendant humiliation; and it was this, and not equality with God, that he received in his exaltation. The διὸ of vs. 9 is not to be taken as if God bestowed exaltation as a reward for perfect obedience, but rather, as Meyer correctly says, as âthe accession of the corresponding consequence.â The sequence is logical rather than ethical. Out of the human life, death, and resurrection of Christ comes a type of sovereignty which could pertain to him only through his triumph over human sin (Hebrews 1:3), through his identification with men as their brother. Messianic lordship could not pertain to his preincarnate state. As Messianic lord he could be inaugurated only after his human experience (Acts 2:36). Messianic lordship is a matter of function, not of inherent power and majesty. The phrase âseated at the right hand of Godâ is Messianic, and expresses Christâs Messianic triumph, but not to the detriment of any essential dignity possessed before his incarnation. But the incarnation places him, in a new sense, in actual, kingly relation to the collective life of the universe. There cannot be the bowing of every knee and the confession of every tongue so long as Christ merely remains being in the form of God,âuntil he has made purification of sins, redeemed creation, and been manifested to earth, heaven, and hades as the Saviour of men.
Thus new elements enter into the life and sovereignty of the exalted Christ. He exists no less as Son of God, but now also as Son of Man, which he could be only through being born of woman and made in the likeness of men. The glory of God shines through the bodily form which he carried into heaven with him (Colossians 2:9), yet in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead. He is what he was not before his incarnation, the Great High Priest. Having begun the high-priestly work in his death and sacrifice, he now carries it on in the heavenly places by his work of intervention (á¼Î½ÏÏ Î³Ïάνειν, Hebrews 7:25) in the lives of those who believe in him. He is the minister of the resurrection-life to his redeemed, ever bringing to bear on them through the Spirit the divine forces which cause them to âwalk in newness of life.â Thus lordship won by conquest in incarnation is distinguished from inherent lordship. This is the lordship which Jesus preferred to that which was merely inherent in him as the equal of God,âlordship through self-renunciation, mastery through service.
And in this fact lies the answer to the much-discussed question, What is the name which God gave him at his exaltation? As the lordship is Messianic, as the Messianic lordship comes only through the human experience and victory, the name will unite the human experience and the Messianic dominion,ââJesusâ the human name, âChristâ the Messianic name. Not âLord,â for lordship was his inherent right and his prerogative before incarnation. Not Jesus alone, for that represents only the human experience of humiliation; but JESUS CHRISTâChrist the Messiah only as he was Jesus. Accordingly âLordâ in vs. 11 is defined by âJesus Christ.â
This whole statement in Phil. is, in a broad sense, parallel with the words in Hebrews 1:3, and the two passages should be studied together. In both the preincarnate Sonâs conditions of being are set forth. To these Heb. adds a statement of the preincarnate activity of the Son. ΦÎÏÏν is âbearing onward,â not simply âupholdingâ or âsustainingâ; for, as Westcott remarks, âthe Son is not an Atlas sustaining the dead weight of the world.â (See Comm. on Heb. ad loc. and the striking parallels cited.) The Son was persistently carrying on from eternal ages the universe of God towards its consummation. Incarnation and atonement were not a break in the history of humanity, nor in the eternal activity of God in Christ. They were in the line of the eternal purpose of God. The Lamb was âslain from the foundation of the world.â In pursuance of this purpose the Divine Son assumed our humanity, purged our sins, and then âsat down on the right hand of the majesty on high.â
In Phil. the parallel to this is found in the statement and detail of Christâs humiliation. In his human nature, in the form of a servant, in the likeness of men, in humbling himself and enduring the death of the cross, he is still bearing on all things, restoring humanity to the divine archetype by making purification of sins and inaugurating the High-Priestly function developed in Heb. In Phil. the mediatorial aspect is not treated, but both passages depict the exaltation which followed the humiliation.
Whether á¼ÏÏαγμὸν is active or passive is treated in the note. If taken actively,ââan act of robbery,â âa seizing,ââit expresses Christâs assertion of equality with God; that is to say, he did not think being equal with God an act of robbery, but claimed it as his right in his incarnate state. The awkwardness of regarding a state of being as an act of robbery needs no comment. If taken passively,ââa prize, a thing to be snatched or clutched,â â it expresses the surrender of the preincarnate state of majesty. He did not think equality with God a prize to be eagerly grasped (and held fast), but surrendered it, though it was his right.
Lightfootâs citations from the Greek Fathers show that they conceived the passage as carrying the idea of a surrender of preincarnate glory, and a condescension from a higher estate. (Note on âDifferent Interpretations of οá½Ï á¼ÏÏαγμὸν ἡγήÏαÏο,â Comm. p. 133.)
I am not convinced that Lightfootâs interpretation is wrong by the strictures of Mr. Beet in his Commentary, ad loc., and in the Expositor, 3d ser. vol. 5, p. 115, especially when I find him adopting Meyerâs explanation. See below.
It may be observed that Lightfoot does not bring out the full force of his first quotation, from the Letter of the Gallican church (Euseb. H. E. v. 2), which lies in the exhibition of the martyrsâ humility as shown in their refusal to accept the title of âwitnesses,â which they had earned by their sufferings. Thus, in refusing to insist upon their rightful claim, they imitated Christ, who refused to grasp at the majesty which was rightfully his. Also it should be observed that in Origen on Romans (Lat. v. § 2), rapinam, which is given for á¼ÏÏαγμὸν, occurs in both the active and the passive sense, the latter in late Latin.
Meyerâs explanation should be noticed. He paraphrases: âJesus Christ, when he found himself in the heavenly mode of existence of divine glory, did not permit himself the thought of using his equality with God for the purpose of seizing possessions and honor for himself on earth.â
He translates âNicht als ein Rauben betrachtete er das gottgleiche Seinâ (Not as a robbing did he regard the being equal with God), and then explains that he did not put being equal with God under the point of view of gaining booty, as if it (being equal with God) was, with respect to its expression in action, to consist in seizing what did not belong to him.
According to this, Ïὸ εἶναι á¼´Ïα is not the object but the subject of the seizing. Christ did not regard equality with God as a means of grasping. This interpretation is adopted by Beet. It is an illustration of the excessive literalism which sometimes mars Meyerâs splendid exegetical qualities. The interpretation turns on the endeavor to preserve the active force of á¼ÏÏαγμὸÏ, which, in the very ragged condition of the evidence concerning that word, seems desperate. If this had been Paulâs meaning, I can conceive of no mode of expression which he would have been less likely to choose. Moreover, the explanation misses Paulâs point, which is to show the magnitude of the renunciation from the preincarnate and heavenly point of view, and not from the earthly and incarnate side. According to Meyer, Christâs self-renunciation consisted in his refusal to grasp at earthly possessions and honors by means of his equality with God. According to Paul, it consisted in his relinquishment of heavenly glory and majesty.
As regards á¼Î±Ï Ïὸν á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν, any attempt to commit Paul to a precise theological statement of the limitations of Christâs humanity involves the reader in a hopeless maze. The word á¼ÎºÎνÏÏεν was evidently selected as a peculiarly strong expression of the entireness of Jesusâ self-renunciation, and in order to throw the preincarnate glory and the incarnate humiliation into sharp contrast: to show that Christ utterly renounced and laid aside the majesty which he possessed in his original state. Its most satisfactory definition is found in the succeeding details which describe the incidents of Christâs humanity, and with these exegesis is compelled to stop. The word does not indicate a surrender of deity, nor a paralysis of deity, nor a change of personality, nor a break in the continuity of self-consciousness. Christâs consciousness of deity was not suspended during his earthly life. He knew that he came from God and went to God; that he had glory with the Father before the world was, and would receive it back. But he was made in all things like unto his brethren. âHe took to himself all that belongs to the perfection of manâs being. He lived according to the conditions of manâs life, and died under the circumstances of manâs mortalityâ (Westcott).
Comp. Compare.
Class. Classics or Classical.
A Cod. Alexandrinus: 5th century. British Museum. Contains both epistles entire.
Soph. Sophocles.
B Cod. Vaticanus: 4th century. Vatican Library. Contains both epistles entire. Correctors: B2, nearly the same date; B3, 10th or 11th century.
Kl. Klöpper.
×Ô Cod. Sinaiticus: 4th century. Discovered by Tischendorf in the convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai, in 1859. Now at St. Petersburg. Contains both epistles complete. Correctors: ×a, nearly contemporary; ×b, 6th century; ×c, beginning of 7th century, treated by two correctors,â×ca ×cb.
C Cod. Ephraem: 5th century. Palimpsest. National Library, Paris. Very defective. Wanting from ÏοῦÏο οá½Î½ (Ephesians 4:17) to καὶ Ïί αἱÏήÏομαι (Philippians 1:22), and from μειν (Îενιαμειν) (Philippians 3:5) to the end. Correctors: C2, 6th century; C3, 9th century.
D Cod. Claromontanus: 6th century. Græco-Latin. National Library, Paris. Contains both epistles entire. Corrector: Db, close of 6th century.
F Cod. Augiensis: 9th century. Græco-Latin. Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. Philippians entire; Philemon wanting in the Greek from ÏεÏÎ¿Î¹Î¸á½¼Ï (vs. 21) to the end.
G
Cod. Boernerianus: 9th century. Græco-Latin. Dresden. Wanting Greek and Latin, Philemon 1:21-25.
An asterisk added to the title of a MS., as D*, signifies a correction made by the original scribe.
K Cod. Mosquensis: 9th century. Moscow. Contains both epistles entire.
L Cod. Angelicus: 9th century. Angelican Library of Augustinian monks at Rome. Wanting from á¼Î¾Î¿Ï Ïίαν (Hebrews 13:10) to the end of Philemon.
P Cod. Porphyrianus: beginning of 9th century. Palimpsest. St. Petersburg. Both epistles entire, but many words illegible.
Thdrt. Theodoret.
Theoph. Theophylact.
Win. Winer: Grammar of N. T. Greek. 8th ed. of Eng. Transl. by Moulton. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, 8 Aufl., von P. W. Schmiedel. 1 Theil, 1894.
Mey. Meyer.
Lightf. Lightfoot.
Alf. Alford.
Ellic. Ellicott.
Weiss Der Philipperbrief ausgesetzt und die Geschichte seiner Auslegung kritisch dargestellt. 1859. A most thorough piece of work. It leaves no point untouched, and treats every point with ample learning, conscientious pains taking, independence, and positiveness. It is valuable in studying the history of the exegesis.
WH. Westcott and Hort: The New Testament in the Original Greek.
De W. De Wette.
Lips. Lipsius.
Weizs. Weizsäcker.
Calov. Calovius.
Rosenm. Rosenmüller.
Polyb. Polybius.
Aristid. Aristides.
Bib. Gk. Biblical Greek.
17 National Library, Paris: 9th or 10th century. Both epistles entire.
Vulg. Vulgate.
Goth. Gothic.
Ign. Ignatius.
A.V. Authorized Version.
R.V. Revised Version of 1881.
LXX Septuagint Version.
Sap. Wisdom of Solomon.
Cop. Coptic, Memphitic, or Bohairic.
Arm. Armenian.
Syr. Peshitto and Harclean versions.
31 British Museum: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
47 Bodleian Library: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
Syr. Harclean.
37 Library of Town Council of Leicester: 15th century. Both epistles entire. See Millerâs Scrivener, vol. i. 202.
Ãth. Ethiopic.
67 Vienna: 11th century. Both epistles entire.
Aug. Augustine.
Ans. Anselm.
Beng. Bengel.
= Equivalent to.
Thuc. Thucydides.
Hdt. Herodotus.
Dem. Demosthenes.
Plut. Plutarch.
Cyr. Alex. Cyril of Alexandria.
Euseb. Eusebius.
Burt. Burton: N. T. Moods and Tenses.
Art. Article.
Herz. Herzog: Real-Encyclopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche.
Ead. Eadie.
Åc. Åcumenius.
Polyc. Polycarp.
Bib. Bible.
Apocr. Apocrypha.
Chr. Chrysostom.
Tisch. Tischendorf: Novum Testamentum Graece. Editio Octava Critica Major.
Lat. Vet. Vetus Latina.
Grot. Grotius.
W. St. Vincent: Word Studies in the N. T.
Thay. Thayer: Greek-English Lexicon of the N. T.
TR Textus Receptus.
Luth. Luther.
Calv. Calvin.
Wies. Wiesinger.
Wetst. Wetstein.
Symm. Symmachus.
Aq. Aquila.
80 Vatican: 11th century. Philippians entire; Philemon mutilated.
Hack. Hackett.
v. Sod. von Soden.
Syr. Schaafâs ed. of Peshitto.
Erasm. Erasmus.
1 I am under obligation to my colleague, Dr. Briggs, for kindly furnishing me with a proof of the article ×Ö¼Ö¸××ֹר from the new Hebrew Lexicon.
Stud. u. Krit. Studien und Kritiken.