Text -- Philippians 2:6 (NET)

2:6 who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped,

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Phi 2:6

Being ( huparchōn ).

Rather, "existing,"present active participle of huparchō . In the form of God (en morphēi theou ). Morphē means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ.

Robertson: Phi 2:6

A prize ( harpagmon ).

Predicate accusative with hēgēsato . Originally words in ̇mos signified the act, not the result (̇ma ). The few examples of harpagmos (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to harpagma , like baptismos and baptisma . That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won ("robbery").

Robertson: Phi 2:6

To be on an equality with God ( to einai isa theoi ).

Accusative articular infinitive object of hēgēsato , "the being equal with God"(associative instrumental case theōi after isa ). Isa is adverbial use of neuter plural with einai as in Rev 21:16.

Robertson: Phi 2:6

Emptied himself ( heauton ekenōse ).

First aorist active indicative of kenoō , old verb from kenos , empty. Of what did Christ empty himself? Not of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There has arisen a great controversy on this word, a Kenosis doctrine. Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on earth retaining more of these than any mere man. It is here that men should show restraint and modesty, though it is hard to believe that Jesus limited himself by error of knowledge and certainly not by error of conduct. He was without sin, though tempted as we are. "He stripped himself of the insignia of majesty"(Lightfoot).

Vincent: Phi 2:6

Being in the form of God ( ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων )

Being . Not the simple είναι to be , but stronger, denoting being which is from the beginning. See on Jam 2:15. It has a backward look into an antecedent condition, which has been protracted into the present. Here appropriate to the preincarnate being of Christ, to which the sentence refers. In itself it does not imply eternal , but only prior existence. Form (μορφή ). We must here dismiss from our minds the idea of shape . The word is used in its philosophic sense, to denote that expression of being which carries in itself the distinctive nature and character of the being to whom it pertains, and is thus permanently identified with that nature and character. Thus it is distinguished from σχῆμα fashion , comprising that which appeals to the senses and which is changeable. Μορφή form is identified with the essence of a person or thing: σχῆμα fashion is an accident which may change without affecting the form . For the manner in which this difference is developed in the kindred verbs, see on Mat 17:2.

As applied here to God, the word is intended to describe that mode in which the essential being of God expresses itself. We have no word which can convey this meaning, nor is it possible for us to formulate the reality. Form inevitably carries with it to us the idea of shape . It is conceivable that the essential personality of God may express itself in a mode apprehensible by the perception of pure spiritual intelligences; but the mode itself is neither apprehensible nor conceivable by human minds.

This mode of expression, this setting of the divine essence, is not identical with the essence itself, but is identified with it , as its natural and appropriate expression, answering to it in every particular. It is the perfect expression of a perfect essence. It is not something imposed from without, but something which proceeds from the very depth of the perfect being, and into which that being perfectly unfolds, as light from fire. To say, then, that Christ was in the form of God , is to say that He existed as essentially one with God. The expression of deity through human nature (Phi 2:7) thus has its background in the expression of deity as deity in the eternal ages of God's being. Whatever the mode of this expression, it marked the being of Christ in the eternity before creation. As the form of God was identified with the being of God, so Christ, being in the form of God, was identified with the being, nature, and personality of God.

This form , not being identical with the divine essence, but dependent upon it, and necessarily implying it, can be parted with or laid aside. Since Christ is one with God, and therefore pure being, absolute existence, He can exist without the form. This form of God Christ laid aside in His incarnation.

Vincent: Phi 2:6

Thought it not robbery to be equal with God ( οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ )

Robbery is explained in three ways. 1. A robbing , the act. 2. The thing robbed , a piece of plunder. 3. A prize , a thing to be grasped. Here in the last sense.

Paul does not then say, as A.V., that Christ did not think it robbery to be equal with God : for, 1, that fact goes without. saying in the previous expression, being in the form of God . 2. On this explanation the statement is very awkward. Christ, being in the form of God, did not think it robbery to be equal with God; but , after which we should naturally expect, on the other hand , claimed and asserted equality: whereas the statement is: Christ was in the form of God and did not think it robbery to be equal with God , but (instead) emptied Himself . Christ held fast His assertion of divine dignity, but relinquished it. The antithesis is thus entirely destroyed.

Taking the word ἁρπαγμὸν (A.V., robbery ) to mean a highly prized possession , we understand Paul to say that Christ, being, before His incarnation, in the form of God, did not regard His divine equality as a prize which was to be grasped at and retained at all hazards, but, on the contrary, laid aside the form of God, and took upon Himself the nature of man. The emphasis in the passage is upon Christ's humiliation . The fact of His equality with God is stated as a background, in order to throw the circumstances of His incarnation into stronger relief. Hence the peculiar form of Paul's statement Christ's great object was to identify Himself with humanity; not to appear to men as divine but as human . Had He come into the world emphasizing His equality with God, the world would have been amazed, but not saved He did not grasp at this. The rather He counted humanity His prize, and so laid aside the conditions of His preexistent state, and became man.

Wesley: Phi 2:6

The incommunicable nature.

Wesley: Phi 2:6

From eternity, as he was afterward in the form of man; real God, as real man.

Wesley: Phi 2:6

That is the precise meaning of the words, - no invasion of another's prerogative, but his own strict and unquestionable right.

Wesley: Phi 2:6

the word here translated equal, occurs in the adjective form five or six times in the New Testament, Mat 20:12; Luk 6:34; Joh 5:18; Act 11:17; Re 21:16. In all which places it expresses not a bare resemblance, but a real and proper equalitg. It here implies both the fulness and the supreme height of the Godhead; to which are opposed, he emptied and he humbled himself.

JFB: Phi 2:6

Translate, "Who subsisting (or existing, namely, originally: the Greek is not the simple substantive verb, 'to be') in the form of God (the divine essence is not meant: but the external self-manifesting characteristics of God, the form shining forth from His glorious essence). The divine nature had infinite BEAUTY in itself, even without any creature contemplating that beauty: that beauty was 'the form of God'; as 'the form of a servant' (Phi 2:7), which is in contrasted opposition to it, takes for granted the existence of His human nature, so 'the form of God' takes for granted His divine nature [BENGEL], Compare Joh 5:37; Joh 17:5; Col 1:15, 'Who is the IMAGE of the invisible God' at a time before 'every creature,' 2Co 4:4, esteemed (the same Greek verb as in Phi 2:3) His being on an equality with God no (act of) robbery" or self-arrogation; claiming to one's self what does not belong to him. ELLICOTT, WAHL, and others have translated, "A thing to be grasped at," which would require the Greek to be harpagma, whereas harpagmos means the act of seizing. So harpagmos means in the only other passage where it occurs, PLUTARCH [On the Education of Children, 120]. The same insuperable objection lies against ALFORD'S translation, "He regarded not as self-enrichment (that is, an opportunity for self-exaltation) His equality with God." His argument is that the antithesis (Phi 2:7) requires it, "He used His equality with God as an opportunity, not for self-exaltation, but for self-abasement, or emptying Himself." But the antithesis is not between His being on an equality with God, and His emptying Himself; for He never emptied Himself of the fulness of His Godhead, or His "BEING on an equality with God"; but between His being "in the FORM (that is, the outward glorious self-manifestation) of God," and His "taking on Him the form of a servant," whereby He in a great measure emptied Himself of His precedent "form," or outward self-manifesting glory as God. Not "looking on His own things" (Phi 2:4), He, though existing in the form of God, He esteemed it no robbery to be on an equality with God, yet made Himself of no reputation. "Being on an equality with God, is not identical with subsisting in the form of God"; the latter expresses the external characteristics, majesty, and beauty of the Deity, which "He emptied Himself of," to assume "the form of a servant"; the former, "HIS BEING," or NATURE, His already existing STATE OF EQUALITY with God, both the Father and the Son having the same ESSENCE. A glimpse of Him "in the form of God," previous to His incarnation, was given to Moses (Exo 24:10-11), Aaron, &c.

Clarke: Phi 2:6

Who, being in the form of God - This verse has been the subject of much criticism, and some controversy. Dr. Whitby has, perhaps, on the whole, spoken best on this point; but his arguments are too diffuse to be admitted here. Dr. Macknight has abridged the words of Dr. Whitby, and properly observes that, "As the apostle is speaking of what Christ was before he took the form of a servant, the form of God, of which he divested himself when he became man, cannot be any thing which he possessed during his incarnation or in his divested state; consequently neither the opinion of Erasmus, that the form of God consisted in those sparks of divinity by which Christ, during his incarnation, manifested his Godhead, nor the opinion of the Socinians, that it consisted in the power of working miracles, is well founded; for Christ did not divest himself either of one or the other, but possessed both all the time of his public ministry. In like manner, the opinion of those who, by the form of God understand the Divine nature and the government of the world, cannot be admitted; since Christ, when he became man, could not divest himself of the nature of God; and with respect to the government of the world, we are led, by what the apostle tells, Heb 1:3, to believe that he did not part with even that; but, in his divested state, still continued to uphold all things by the word of his power. By the form of God we are rather to understand that visible, glorious light in which the Deity is said to dwell, 1Ti 6:16, and by which he manifested himself to the patriarchs of old, Deu 5:22, Deu 5:24; which was commonly accompanied with a numerous retinue of angels, Psa 68:17, and which in Scripture is called The Similitude, Num 12:8; The Face, Psa 31:16 : The Presence, Exo 33:15; and The Shape of God, Joh 5:37. This interpretation is supported by the term μορφη, form, here used, which signifies a person’ s external shape or appearance, and not his nature or essence. Thus we are told, Mar 16:12, that Jesus appeared to his disciples in another μορφη, shape, or form. And, Mat 17:2, μετεμορφωθη, he was transfigured before them - his outward appearance or form was changed. Farther this interpretation agrees with the fact: the form of God, that is, his visible glory, and the attendance of angels, as above described, the Son of God enjoyed with his Father before the world was, Joh 17:5; and on that as on other accounts he is the brightness of the Father’ s glory, Heb 1:3. Of this he divested himself when he became flesh; but, having resumed it after his ascension, he will come with it in the human nature to judge the world; so he told his disciples, Mat 16:27 : The Son of man will come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, etc,. Lastly, this sense of μορφη Θεου, is confirmed by the meaning of μορθη δουλου, Phi 2:7; which evidently denotes the appearance and behavior of a servant or bondman, and not the essence of such a person."See Whitby and Macknight

Clarke: Phi 2:6

Thought it not robbery to be equal with God - If we take these words as they stand here, their meaning is, that, as he was from the beginning in the same infinite glory with the Father, to appear in time - during his humiliation, as God and equal with the Father, was no encroachment on the Divine prerogative; for, as he had an equality of nature, he had an equality of rights

But the word ἁρπαγμον, which we translate robbery, has been supposed to imply a thing eagerly to be seized, coveted, or desired; and on this interpretation the passage has been translated: Who, being in the form of God, did not think it a matter to be earnestly desired to appear equal to God; but made himself of no reputation, etc. However the word be translated, it does not affect the eternal Deity of our Lord. Though he was from eternity in the form of God - possessed of the same glory, yet he thought it right to veil this glory, and not to appear with it among the children of men; and therefore he was made in the likeness of men, and took upon him the form or appearance of a servant: and, had he retained the appearance of this ineffable glory, it would, in many respects, have prevented him from accomplishing the work which God gave him to do; and his humiliation, as necessary to the salvation of men, could not have been complete. On this account I prefer this sense of the word ἁρπαγμον before that given in our text, which does not agree so well with the other expressions in the context. In this sense the word is used by Heliodorus, in his Ethiopics, lib. vii. cap. 19, etc., which passage Whitby has produced, and on which he has given a considerable paraphrase. The reader who wishes to examine this subject more particularly, may have recourse to Heliodorus as above, or to the notes of Dr. Whitby on the passage.

Calvin: Phi 2:6

6.Inasmuch as he was in the form of God This is not a comparison between things similar, but in the way of greater and less. Christ’s humility consisted in his abasing himself from the highest pinnacle of glory to the lowest ignominy: our humility consists in refraining from exalting ourselves by a false estimation. He gave up his right: all that is required of us is, that we do not assume to ourselves more than we ought. Hence he sets out with this — that, inasmuch as he was in the form of God, he reckoned it not an unlawful thing for him to shew himself in that form; yet he emptied himself. Since, then, the Son of God descended from so great a height, how unreasonable that we, who are nothing, should be lifted up with pride!

The === form of God means here his majesty. For as a man is known by the appearance of his form, so the majesty, which shines forth in God, is his figure. ¹⁰³ Or if you would prefer a more apt similitude, the form of a king is his equipage and magnificence, shewing him to be a king — his scepter, his crown, his mantle, ¹⁰⁴ his attendants, ¹⁰⁵ his judgment-throne, and other emblems of royalty; the form of a consul was — his long robe, bordered with purple, his ivory seat, his lictors with rods and hatchets. Christ, then, before the creation of the world, was in the form of God, because from the beginning he had his glory with the Father, as he says in Joh 17:5. For in the wisdom of God, prior to his assuming our flesh, there was nothing mean or contemptible, but on the contrary a magnificence worth of God. Being such as he was, he could, without doing wrong to any one, shew himself equal with God; but he did not manifest himself to be what he really was, nor did he openly assume in the view of men what belonged to him by right.

===Thought it not robbery There would have been no wrong done though he had shewn himself to be equal with God. For when he says, he would not have thought, it is as though he had said, “He knew, indeed, that this was lawful and right for him,” that we might know that his abasement was voluntary, not of necessity. Hitherto it has been rendered in the indicative — he thought, but the connection requires the subjunctive. It is also quite a customary thing for Paul to employ the past indicative in the place of the subjunctive, by leaving the potential particle ἄν, as it is called, to be supplied — as, for example, in Rom 9:3, ηὐχόμην, for I would have wished; and in 1Co 2:8; εἰ γὰρ ἔγνωσαν, if they had known. Every one, however, must perceive that Paul treats hitherto of Christ’s glory, which tends to enhance his abasement. Accordingly he mentions, not what Christ did, but what it was allowable for him to do.

Farther, that man is utterly blind who does not perceive that his eternal divinity is clearly set forth in these words. Nor does Erasmus act with sufficient modesty in attempting, by his cavils, to explain away this passage, as well as other similar passages. ¹⁰⁶ He acknowledges, indeed, everywhere that Christ is God; but what am I the better for his orthodox confession, if my faith is not supported by any Scripture authority? I acknowledge, certainly, that Paul does not make mention here of Christ’s divine essence; but it does not follow from this, that the passage is not sufficient for repelling the impiety of the Arians, who pretended that Christ was a created God, and inferior to the Father, and denied that he was consubstantial. ¹⁰⁷ For where can there be equality with God without robbery, excepting only where there is the essence of God; for God always remains the same, who cries by Isaiah, I live; I will not give my glory to another. (Isa 48:11.) Form means figure or appearance, as they commonly speak. This, too, I readily grant; but will there be found, apart from God, such a form, so as to be neither false nor forged? As, then, God is known by means of his excellences, and his works are evidences of his eternal Godhead, (Rom 1:20,) so Christ’s divine essence is rightly proved from Christ’s majesty, which he possessed equally with the Father before he humbled himself. As to myself, at least, not even all devils would wrest this passage from me — inasmuch as there is in God a most solid argument, from his glory to his essence, which are two things that are inseparable.

Defender: Phi 2:6

Jesus Christ was God from eternity (Joh 1:1-3), the Creator of all things.

Defender: Phi 2:6

He was not fearful of losing His deity when He exchanged the outward form of God for the outward form of man; that is, He did not have to cling to His deity as a robber would his plunder. He could not cease being God. The word for robbery is used only this one time in the New Testament."

TSK: Phi 2:6

in : Isa 7:14, Isa 8:8, Isa 9:6; Jer 23:6; Mic 5:2; Mat 1:23; Joh 1:1, Joh 1:2, Joh 1:18, Joh 17:5; Rom 9:5; 2Co 4:4; Col 1:15, Col 1:16; 1Ti 1:17, 1Ti 3:16; Tit 2:13; Heb 1:3, Heb 1:6, Heb 1:8; Heb 13:8

thought : Gen 32:24-30, Gen 48:15, Gen 48:16; Eze 8:2-6; Jos 5:13-15; Hos 12:3-5; Zec 13:7; Joh 5:18, Joh 5:23, Joh 8:58, Joh 8:59, Joh 10:30,Joh 10:33, Joh 10:38, Joh 14:9, Joh 20:28; Rev 1:17, Rev 1:18, Rev 21:6

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Phi 2:6

Who, being in the form of God - There is scarcely any passage in the New Testament which has given rise to more discussion than this. The importance of the passage on the question of the divinity of the Saviour will be perceived at once, and no small part of the point of the appeal by the apostle depends, as will be seen, in the fact that Paul regarded the Redeemer as equal with God. If he was truly divine, then his consenting to become a man was the most remarkable of all possible acts of humiliation. The word rendered "form"- μορφή morphē - occurs only in three places in the New Testament, and in each place is rendered "form."Mar 16:12; Phi 2:6-7. In Mark it is applied to the form which Jesus assumed after his resurrection, and in which he appeared to two of his disciples on his way to Emmaus. "After that he appeared in another form unto two of them."This "form"was so unlike his usual appearance, that they did not know him. The word properly means, form, shape, bodily shape, especially a beautiful form, a beautiful bodily appearance - Passow. In Phi 2:7, it is applied to the appearance of a servant - and took upon him the form of a servant;"that is, he was in the condition of a servant - or of the lowest condition. The word "form"is often applied to the gods by the classic writers, denoting their aspect or appearance when they became visible to people; see Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 2; Ovid, Meta. i. 37; Silius, xiii. 643; Xeno. Memora. iv; Aeneid, iv. 556, and other places cited by Wetstein, in loc. Hesychius explains it by ἰδέα εῖδος idea eidos . The word occurs often in the Septuagint:

(1)\caps1     a\caps0 s the translation of the word ציי - Ziv - "splendour,"Dan 4:33; Dan 5:6, Dan 5:9-10; Dan 7:28;

(2)\caps1     a\caps0 s the translation of the word תּבנית tabniyth , structure, model, pattern - as in building, Isa 44:13;

(3)\caps1     a\caps0 s the translation of תּמונה t^e muwnah , appearance, form, shape, image, likeness, Job 4:16; see also Wisdom Job 18:1.

The word can have here only one or two meanings, either:

(1)\caps1     s\caps0 plendor, majesty, glory - referring to the honor which the Redeemer had, his power to work miracles, etc. - or.

(2)\caps1     n\caps0 ature, or essence - meaning the same as φύσις phusis , "nature,"or ουσία ousia , "being."

The first is the opinion adopted by Crellius, Grotius, and others, and substantially by Calvin. Calvin says, "The form of God here denotes majesty. For as a man is known from the appearance of his form, so the majesty which shines in God, is his figure. Or to use a more appropriate similitude, the form of a king consists of the external marks which indicate a king - as his scepter, diadem, coat of mail, attendants, throne, and other insignia of royalty; the form of a counsul is the toga, ivory chair, attending lictors, etc. Therefore Christ before the foundation of the world was in the form of God, because he had glory with the Father before the world was; Joh 17:5. For in the wisdom of God, before he put on our nature, there was nothing humble or abject, but there was magnificence worthy of God."Commentary in loc. The second opinion is, that the word is equivalent to nature, or being; that is, that he was in the nature of God, or his mode of existence was that of God, or was divine. This is the opinion adopted by Schleusner (Lexicon); Prof. Stuart (Letters to Dr. Channing, p. 40); Doddridge, and by orthodox expositors in general, and seems to me to be the correct interpretation. In support of this interpretation, and in opposition to that which refers it to his power of working miracles, or his divine appearance when on earth, we may adduce the following considerations:

(1) The "form"here referred to must have been something before he became a man, or before he took upon him the form of a servant. It was something from which he humbled himself by making "himself of no reputation;"by taking upon himself "the form of a servant;"and by being made "in the likeness of men."Of course, it must have been something which existed when he had not the likeness of people; that is, before he became incarnate. He must therefore have had an existence before he appeared on earth as a man, and in that previous state of existence there must have been something which rendered it proper to say that he was "in the form of God."

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat it does not refer to any moral qualities, or to his power of working miracles on earth, is apparent from the fact that these were not laid aside. When did he divest himself of these in order that he might humble himself? There was something which he possessed which made it proper to say of him that he was "in the form of God,"which he laid aside when he appeared in the form of a servant and in the likeness of human beings. But assuredly that could not have been his moral qualities, nor is there any conceivable sense in which it can be said that he divested himself of the power of working miracles in order that he might take upon himself the "form of a servant."All the miracles which he ever did were performed when he sustained the form of a servant, in his lowly and humble condition. These considerations make it certain that the apostle refers to a period before the incarnation. It may be added:

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hat the phrase "form of God"is one that naturally conveys the idea that he was God. When it is said that he was "in the form of a servant,"the idea is, that he was actually in a humble and depressed condition, and not merely that he appeared to be. Still it may be asked, what was the "form"which he had before his incarnation? What is meant by his having been then "in the form of God?"To these questions perhaps no satisfactory answer can be given. He himself speaks Joh 17:5 of "the glory which he had with the Father before the world was;"and the language naturally conveys the idea that there was then a manifestation of the divine nature through him, which in some measure ceased when he became incarnate; that there was some visible splendor and majesty which was then laid aside. What manifestation of his glory God may make in the heavenly world, of course, we cannot now fully understand. Nothing forbids us, however, to suppose that there is some such visible manifestation; some splendor and magnificence of God in the view of the angelic beings such as becomes the Great Sovereign of the universe - for he "dwells in light which no map can approach unto;"1Ti 6:16. That glory, visible manifestation, or splendor, indicating the nature of God, it is here said that the Lord Jesus possessed before his incarnation.

Thought it not robbery to be equal with God - This passage, also, has given occasion to much discussion. Prof. Stuart renders it: "did not regard his equality with God as an object of solicitous desire;"that is, that though he was of a divine nature or condition, be did not eagerly seek to retain his equality with God, but took on him an humble condition - even that of a servant. Letters to Channing, pp. 88-92. That this is the correct rendering of the passage is apparent from the following considerations:

(1) It accords with the scope and design of the apostle’ s reasoning. His object is not to show, as our common translation would seem to imply, that he aspired to be equal with God, or that he did not regard it as an improper invasion of the prerogatives of God to be equal with him, but that he did not regard it, in the circumstances of the case, as an object to greatly desired or eagerly sought to retain his equality with God. Instead of retaining this by an earnest effort, or by a grasp which he was unwilling to relinquish, he chose to forego the dignity, and to assume the humble condition of a man.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t accords better with the Greek than the common version. The word rendered "robbery"- ἁρπαγμος harpagmos - is found nowhere else in the New Testament, though the verb from which it is derived frequently occurs; Mat 11:12; Mat 13:19; Joh 6:15; Joh 10:12, Joh 10:28-29; Act 8:29; Act 23:10; 2Co 12:2, 2Co 12:4; 1Th 4:17; Jud 1:23; Rev 12:5. The notion of violence, or seizing, or carrying away, enters into the meaning of the word in all these places. The word used here does not properly mean an act of robbery, but the thing robbed - the plunder - das Rauben (Passow), and hence something to be eagerly seized and appropriated. Schleusner; compare Storr, Opuscul. Acade. i. 322, 323. According to this, the meaning of the word here is, something to be seized and eagerly sought, and the sense is, that his being equal with God was not a thing to be anxiously retained. The phrase "thought it not,"means "did not consider;"it was not judged to be a matter of such importance that it could not be dispensed with. The sense is, "he did not eagerly seize and tenaciously hold"as one does who seizes prey or spoil. So Rosenmuller, Schleusner, Bloomfield, Stuart, and others understand it.

To be equal with God - τὸ εἶναι ἶσα Θεῷ to einai isa Theō . That is, the being equal with God he did not consider a thing to be tenaciously retained. The plural neuter form of the word "equal"in Greek - ἶσα isa - is used in accordance with a known rule of the language, thus stated by Buttman: "When an adjective as predicate is separated from its substantive, it often stands in the neuter where the substantive is a masculine or feminine, and in the singular where the substantive is in the plural. That which the predicate expresses is, in this case, considered in general as a thing." Greek Grammar , section 129, 6. The phrase "equal with God,"or "equal with the gods,"is of frequent occurrence in the Greek Classics; see Wetstein in loc. The very phrase here used occurs in the Odyssey :

Τον νῦν ἴσα Θεῷ Ἰθακήσιοι εἰσορόωσι Ton nun isa Theō Ithakēsioi eisoroōsi

Compare Joh 5:18. "Made himself equal with God."The phrase means one who sustains the same rank, dignity, nature. Now it could not be said of an angel that he was in any sense equal with God; much less could this be said of a mere man. The natural and obvious meaning of the language is, that there was an equality of nature and of rank with God, from which he humbled himself when he became a man. The meaning of the whole verse, according to the interpretation suggested above, is, that Christ, before he became a man, was invested with honor, majesty, and glory, such as was appropriate to God himself; that there was some manifestation or splendor in his existence and mode of being then, which showed that he was equal with God; that he did not consider that that honor, indicating equality with God, was to be retained at all events, and so as to do violence, as it were, to other interests, and to rob the universe of the glory of redemption; and that he was willing, therefore, to forget that, or lay it by for a time, in order that he might redeem the world. There were a glory and majesty which were appropriate to God, and which indicated equality with God - such as none but God could assume. For how could an angel have such glory, or such external splendor in heaven, as to make it proper to say that he was "equal with God?"With what glory could he be invested which would be such as became God only? The "fair"interpretation of this passage, therefore, is, that Christ before his incarnation was equal with God.

Poole: Phi 2:6

Who i.e. relative to Christ Jesus, the eternal Son of God by nature, very God extant with his Father before the beginning, Joh 1:1 Gal 4:4 1Ti 3:16 6:14-16 Tit 2:13 ; the express image and character of his Father’ s person, which implies a peculiar subsistence distinct from the subsistence of his Father, Joh 8:42 2Co 4:4 Col 1:15 Heb 1:3 ; concerning whom, every word that follows, by reason of the Socinians, and some Lutherans, is to be well weighed.

Being i.e. subsisting, in opposition to taking or assuming, Phi 2:7 ; and therefore doth firmly prove Christ pro-existing in another nature to his so doing, namely, his actual existing of himself in the same essence and glory he had from eternity with the Father, Joh 1:1,2 17:5 2Co 8:9 Rev 1:4,8,11 .

In the form of God to understand which clearly:

1. The word

form though it may sometimes note somewhat outward, and so infer the glory of Christ’ s miracles, yet we do not find it any where so used in Scripture: it is true it is once used there for the outward visage, Mar 16:12 , which had excelling splendour and beauty, giving occasion to conceive majesty in the person, Mat 27:2 2Pe 1:16 , (however, his resplendent garments could not be accounted the form of God, ) yet being, Luke saith, Luk 24:16 , the eyes of the persons which saw were holden, that for a time they could not acknowledge him, it argues that the appearance Mark speaks of noted only an accidental form.

2. Whereas the

being or subsisting Paul here speaks of, respects (what the best philosophers in their most usual way of speaking do) the essential form, with the glory of it, since the verbs, in other scriptures of the same origin, signify somewhat inward and not conspicuous, Rom 12:2 2Co 3:18 Gal 4:19 ; especially when there is a cogent reason for it here, considering the form of God, in opposition to the form of a servant afterward, and in conjunction with equality to God, which implies the same essence and nature, Isa 40:25 46:5 , it being impossible there should be any proportion or equality between infinite and finite, eternal and temporal, uncreate and create, by nature God and by nature not God, Gal 4:4,8 , unto which the only living and true God will not suffer his glory to be given. Neither indeed can he deny himself who is one, and besides whom there is no other true God, or God by nature, Deu 4:35 6:4 2Ti 2:13 ; who only doeth wondrous things, Psa 72:18 : for to all Divine operations a Divine power is requisite, which is inseparable from the most simple essence and its properties.

Being or subsisting,

in the form of God imports not Christ’ s appearance in exerting of God’ s power, but his real and actual existence in the Divine essence, not in accidents, wherein nothing doth subsist: neither the vulgar nor learned do use to say any one doth subsist, but appear, in an outward habit; why then should any conceit the apostle means so? The Gentiles might speak of their gods appearing; but then, even they thought the Deity was one thing, and the habit or figure under which, or in which, it appeared was another Act 14:11 : so that subsisting in the form intimates in the nature and essence of God, not barely, but as it were clothed with properties and glory. For the apostle here treats of Christ’ s condescension, proceeding from his actual existence, as the term wherein he is co-eternal and co-equal to God the Father, before he abated himself with respect unto us. For he says not the form of God was in Christ, (however that might be truly said), that the adversaries might not have occasion to say only there was somewhat in Christ like unto God; but he speaks of that wherein Christ was, viz. in the form of God, and so that form is predicated of God, as his essence and nature, and can be no other thing. None can rationally imagine that God was an external figure, wherein Christ was subsisting. For subsistence implies some peculiarity relating to the substance of a certain thing, whence we may conclude the Son to be of the same (not only of like) substance with the Father, considering what significantly follows. He

thought it not esteemed, counted, held (so the word is used, Phi 2:3 3:7,8 1Th 5:13 2Th 3:15 1Ti 1:12 1Ti 6:1 Heb 10:29 11:26 ), it not

robbery it being his right by eternal generation; i.e. he did not judge it any wrong or usurpation, on that account of his being in the form of God, to be equal to his Father, being a subsistent in the same nature and essence with him. From openly showing equal majesty with whom he did not for a time abstain, in that he could reckon this robbery, as if such majesty were that which did not agree to his nature, ever presupposing this inherent right, to his great condescension, or abasing himself, which follows as the term to which: or, he resolved for a time not to show himself in that glory which was his own right, but freely condescended to the veiling of it. He did not really forego (neither was it possible he should) any thing of his Divine glory, being the Son of God still, without any robbery or rapine, equal to his Father in power and glory, Joh 10:33 1Jo 5:7,20 .

Thought it not robbery Paul doth not say, (as the Arians of old would pervert his sense), he robbed not, or snatched not, held not fast equality with God; or, (as the Socinians since), Christ thought not to do this robbery to God, or commit this rape upon God, so as that he should be equal to him, but acknowledged he had it of the free gift of God, chopping in the adversative particle, but, where it really is not: whereas we read not in the sacred text, he thought not to do this robbery, but, he thought it not robbery to be equal to God; which two are vastly different, even as much as to have the Godhead by usurpation, and to have it by nature. In the former it is, q.d. Christ did not rob or snatch away the equality; in the latter, the equality which Christ had with God, he thought it no robbery; he reputed not the empire he might have always continued in the exercise of, equal with the Father, as a thing usurped, or taken by force (as one doth hold that he hath taken by spoil, making show of it). For when he had said he had subsisted in the form of God, he could (before he condescended) say also, he was equal to God, i.e. the Father, without any robbery, rapine, or usurpation. And if Socinus urge that it is absurd and false in any sense to say, God thought he had robbed, or taken by robbery, the Divine essence; then this contradictory, God thought not he took by robbery the Divine essence, is rational and true; as when it is said, God cannot lie, or God changeth not, as 1Sa 15:29 Isa 55:8 Mal 3:6 . What things are denied of God, do not imply the opposites are affirmed of him. The particle but, which follows in its proper place before made himself of no reputation, may be fairly joined with this sense. For if Christ should know that by rapine and unjust usurpation he was equal to God, (as likely the attempt to be so was the sin of our first parents, which robbery of theirs Christ came to expiate), he had not emptied himself, nor vouchsafed to abase himself.

To be equal with God neither is Christ said to be equal to God only in respect of his works, (which yet argue the same cause and principle, Joh 5:19,21,23,26,27 10:37 ), but absolutely, he thought it not robbery to be altogether equal with God, as subsisting in the same nature and essence, the original phrase connoting an exact parity. All the things of Christ (though he chose to have some of them veiled for a time) are equal to God; so some expound the neuter plural emphatically, (as usual amongst the Greeks), to answer the masculine singular foregoing, to express the ineffable sameness of the nature and essence of the Divine subsistents. It may be read: He counted it no robbery that those things which are his own should be equal to God, i.e. the Father; or rather, that he himself should in all things be equal or peer to God. For had Christ been only equal by a delegated power from God, why should the Jews have consulted to kill him, for making himself equal with God? Which with them was all one as to make himself God, Joh 5:18 10:33 . But that he spake of his eternal generation, as owning him for his own Father, with whom he did work miracles, even as the Father did in his own name, by his own power, of himself, for his own glory: neither will the evangelist’ s saying: The Son can do nothing of himself, Joh 5:19 , infer an inequality with the Father, when what he doth is equally perfect in power and glory with the Father’ s, whence, as son, he hath it by nature. For (looking lower) though every son receives from his father human nature, yet he is not less a man than his father, or his father more a man than he; the son having a being of the same perfection which is naturally in both. However the Father, to whom Christ is in subordination as the Son, and in office a servant, undertaking the work of mediation, may be said to be greater than the Son, that can only be understood with respect to the order of their working, if we compare texts, Joh 14:28 16:13-15 . Neither, when Christ accounted it not robbery to be equal with God, is he said (as the adversaries urge) to be equal to himself, but to another person, viz. God the Father. Things may be equal which are so diverse, that yet they may be one in some common respect wherein they agree: wherefore when Christ is said to be equal with the Father, he is distinguished from him in person and subsistence, yet not in essence, wherein it is his due to be his equal, and therefore one.

PBC: Phi 2:6

What does he affirm? The eternality, the absolute equality between Jesus Christ and God the Father. He was very God of very God. He was in no way inferior to the Father. What’s the point Paul? He thought it not robbery to be equal with God. It wasn’t something to be grasped at, something in the ego to be seized. It was something that was inheritently fact. He and the Father were equal. What does it say in Joh 10:1-42 -I and the Father, We are One. {Joh 10:30}

51

Haydock: Phi 2:6

Who being in the form [1] of God, (that is truly, properly, and essentially God from eternity, as the ancient Fathers here observed against the Arians) taking the form of a servant, (i.e. taking upon him our human nature) became truly a man, and as man the servant of God, but remaining always God as before, thought it not robbery, no injury to his eternal Father, to be equal, to be esteemed, and to declare himself equal to God, to be one thing with him: as on divers occasions he taught the people, as we have observed in the notes on St. John's gospel, &c. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

In forma Dei, Greek: en morphe Theou. See St. John Chrysostom (tom. iv. p. 31. 32. Greek: log. 5.) where he shews how many heresies are confuted by these words: and says, Greek: e morphe tou doulou, e phusis doulou....kai e morphe tou Theou, Theou phusis. See St. Gregory of Nyssa...3. cont. Eunom.; St. Augustine, lib. 1. de Trin. chap. 1. &c.

Gill: Phi 2:6

Who being in the form of God,.... The Father; being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person. This form is to be understood, not of any shape or figure of him; for as such is not to be seen, it is not to be supposed of him; or any accidental form, for there are no accidents in God, whatever is in God, is God; he is nothing but nature and essence, he is the το ον, the Jehovah, I am what I am; and so is his Son, which is, and was, and is to come, the fountain of all created beings nor does it intend any outward representation and resemblance of him, such as in kings; who, because of the honour and dignity they are raised unto, the authority and power they have, and because of the glory and majesty they are arrayed with, are called gods: nor does it design the state and condition Christ appeared in here on earth, having a power to work miracles, heal diseases, and dispossess devils, for the manifestation of his glory; and so might be said to be in the form of God, as Moses for doing less miracles is said to be a God unto Pharaoh; since this account does not regard Christ; as he was on earth in human nature, but what he was antecedent to the assumption of it; or otherwise his humility and condescension in becoming man, and so mean, will not appear: but this phrase, "the form of God", is to be understood of the nature and essence of God, and describes Christ as he was from all eternity; just as the form of a servant signifies that he was really a servant, and the fashion of a man in which he was found means that he was truly and really man; so his being in the form of God intends that he was really and truly God; that he partook of the same nature with the Father, and was possessed of the same glory: from whence it appears, that he was in being before his incarnation; that he existed as a distinct person from God his Father, in whose form he was, and that as a divine person, or as truly God, being in the glorious form, nature, and essence of God; and that there is but one form of God, or divine nature and essence, common to the Father and the Son, and also to the Spirit; so that they are not three Gods, but one God: what the form of God is, the Heathens themselves ^g say cannot be comprehended nor seen, and so not to be inquired after; and they use the same word the apostle does here ^h: and now Christ being in this glorious form, or having the same divine nature with the Father, with all the infinite and unspeakable glories of it,

thought it no robbery to be equal with God; the Father; for if he was in the same form, nature, and essence, he must be equal to him, as he is; for he has the same perfections, as eternity, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, immutability, and self-existence: hence he has the same glorious names, as God, the mighty God, the true God, the living God, God over all, Jehovah, the Lord of glory, &c. the same works of creation and providence are ascribed to him, and the same worship, homage, and honour given him: to be "in the form of God", and to be "equal with God", signify the same thing, the one is explanative of the other: and this divine form and equality, or true and proper deity, he did not obtain by force and rapine, by robbery and usurpation, as Satan attempted to do, and as Adam by his instigation also affected; and so the mind of a wicked man, as Philo the Jew says ⁱ, being a lover of itself and impious, οιομενος ισος ειναι θεω, "thinks itself to be equal with God", a like phrase with this here used; but Christ enjoyed this equality by nature; he thought, he accounted, he knew he had it this way; and he held it hereby, and of right, and not by any unlawful means; and he reckoned that by declaring and showing forth his proper deity, and perfect equality with the Father, he robbed him of no perfection; the same being in him as in the Father, and the same in the Father as in him; that he did him no injury, nor deprived him of any glory, or assumed that to himself which did not belong to him: as for the sense which some put upon the words, that he did not "affect", or "greedily catch" at deity; as the phrase will not admit of it, so it is not true in fact; he did affect deity, and asserted it strongly, and took every proper opportunity of declaring it, and in express terms affirmed he was the Son of God; and in terms easy to be understood declared his proper deity, and his unity and equality with the Father; required the same faith in himself as in the Father, and signified that he that saw the one, saw the other, Mar 14:61 Joh 5:17. Others give this as the sense of them, that he did not in an ostentatious way show forth the glory of his divine nature, but rather hid it; it is true, indeed, that Christ did not seek, but carefully shunned vain glory and popular applause; and therefore often after having wrought a miracle, would charge the persons on whom it was wrought, or the company, or his disciples, not to speak of it; this he did at certain times, and for certain reasons; yet at other times we find, that he wrought miracles to manifest forth his glory, and frequently appeals to them as proofs of his deity and Messiahship: and besides, the apostle is speaking not of what he was, or did in his incarnate state, but of what he was and thought himself to be, before he became man; wherefore the above sense is to be preferred as the genuine one,

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Phi 2:6

¹ sn This passage has been typeset as poetry because many scholars regard this passage as poetic or hymnic. These terms are used broadly to refer to the genre of writing, not to the content. There are two broad criteria for determining if a passage is poetic or hymnic: “(a) stylistic: a certain rhythmical lilt when the passages are read aloud, the presence of parallelismus membrorum (i.e., an arrangement into couplets), the semblance of some metre, and the presence of rhetorical devices such as alliteration, chiasmus, and antithesis; and (b) linguistic: an unusual vocabulary, particularly the presence of theological terms, which is different from the surrounding context” (P. T. O’Brien, Philippians [NIGTC], 188-89). Classifying a passage as hymnic or poetic is important because understanding this genre can provide keys to interpretation. However, not all scholars agree that the above criteria are present in this passage, so the decision to typeset it as poetry should be viewed as a tentative decision about its genre.

² sn The Greek term translated form indicates a correspondence with reality. Thus the meaning of this phrase is that Christ was truly God.

Geneva Bible: Phi 2:6

Who, being in the ^{( d )} form of God, ^{( e )} thought it not robbery to be ^{( f )} equal with God:

^{( d )} Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself.

^{( e )} Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself.

^{( f )} If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Phi 2:1-30

1 Paul exhorts them to unity, and to all humbleness of mind, by the example of Christ's humility and exaltation;

12 to a careful proceeding in the way of salvation, that they be as lights to the wicked world,

16 and comforts to him their apostle, who is now ready to be offered up to God.

19 He hopes to send Timothy to them, and Epaphroditus also.

Maclaren: Phi 2:5-8

The Descent Of The Word

Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus: 6. Who, being in the form of God. counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, 7. But emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8. And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.'--Phil. 2:5-8 (R.V.).

THE purpose of the Apostle in this great passage must ever be kept clearly in view. Our Lord's example is set forth as the pattern of that unselfish disregard of one's own things, and devotion to the things of others, which has just been urged on the Philippians, and the mind which was in Him is presented as the model on which they are to fashion their minds. This purpose in some measure explains some of the peculiarities of the language here, and may help to guide us through some of the intricacies and doubtful points in the interpretation of the words. It explains why Christ's death is looked at in them only in its bearing upon Himself, as an act of obedience and of condescension, and why even that death in which Jesus stands most inimitable and unique is presented as capable of being imitated by us. The general drift of these verses is clear, but there are few Scripture passages which have evoked more difference of opinion as to the precise meaning of nearly every phrase. To enter on the subtle discussions involved in the adequate exposition of the words would far exceed our limits, and we must perforce content ourselves with a slight treatment of them, and aim chiefly at bringing out their practical side.

The broad truth which stands sun-clear amid all diverse interpretations is--that the Incarnation, Life, and Death are the great examples of living humility and self-sacrifice. To be born was His supreme act of condescension. It was love which made Him assume the vesture of human flesh. To die was the climax of His voluntary obedience, and of His devotion to us.

I. The Height From Which Jesus Descended.

The whole strange conception of birth as being the voluntary act of the Person born, and as being the most stupendous instance of condescension in the world's history, necessarily reposes on the clear conviction that He had a prior existence so lofty that it was an all but infinite descent to become man. Hence Paul begins with the most emphatic assertion that he who bore the name of Jesus lived a divine life before He was born. He uses a very strong word which is given in the margin of the Revised Version, and might well have been in its text. Being originally' as the word accurately means, carries our thoughts back not only to a state which preceded Bethlehem and the cradle, but to that same timeless eternity from which the prologue of the Gospel of John partially draws the veil when it says, In the beginning was the Word,' and to which Jesus Himself more obscurely pointed when He said, Before Abraham was I am.'

Equally emphatic in another direction is Paul's next expression, In the form of God,' for form' means much more than shape.' I would point out the careful selection in this passage of three words to express three ideas which are often by hasty thought regarded as identical, We read of the form of God' (Phil. 2:6),' the likeness of men' (Phil. 2:7), and' in fashion as a man.' Careful investigation of these two words form' and' fashion' has established a broad distinction between them, the former being more fixed, the latter referring to that which is accidental and outward, which may be fleeting and unsubstantial. The possession of the form involves participation in the essence also. Here it implies no corporeal idea as if God had a material form, but it implies also much more than a mere apparent resemblance. He who is in the form of God possesses the essential divine attributes. Only God can be in the form of God': man is made in the likeness of God, but man is not in the form of God.' Light is thrown on this lofty phrase by its antithesis with the succeeding expression in the next verse, the form of a servant,' and as that is immediately explained to refer to Christ's assumption of human nature, there is no room for candid doubt that being originally in the form of God' is a deliberately asserted claim of the divinity of Christ in His pre-existent state.

As we have already pointed out, Paul soars here to the same lofty height to which the prologue of John's Gospel rises, and he echoes our Lord's own words about the glory which I had with Thee before the foundation of the world.' Our thoughts are carried back before creatures were, and we become dimly aware of an eternal distinction in the divine nature which only perfects its eternal oneness. Such an eternal participation in the divine nature before all creation and before time is the necessary pro-supposition of the worth of Christ's life as the pattern of humility and self-sacrifice. That pro-supposition gives all its meaning, its pathos, and its power, to His gentleness, and love, and death. The facts are different in their significance, and different in their power to bless and gladden, to purge and sway the soul, according as we contemplate them with or without the background of His pre-existent divinity. The view which regards Him as simply a man, like all the rest of us, beginning to be when He was born, takes away from His example its mightiest constraining force. Only when we with all our hearts believe that the Word became flesh,' do we discern the overwhelming depths of condescension manifested in the Birth. If it was not the incarnation of God, it has no claim on the hearts of men.

II. The Wondrous Act Of Descent.

The stages in that long descent are marked out with a precision and definiteness which would be intolerable presumption, if Paul were speaking only his own thoughts, or telling what he had seen with his own eyes. They begin with what was in the mind of the eternal Word before He began His descent, and whilst yet He is in the form of God.' He stands on the lofty level before the descent begins, and in spirit makes the surrender, which, stage by stage, is afterwards to be wrought out in act. Before any of these acts there must have been the disposition of mind and will which Paul describes as' counting it not a thing to be grasped to be on an equality with .God.' He did not regard the being equal to God as a prey or treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards. That sweeps our thoughts into the dim regions far beyond Calvary or Bethlehem, and is a more overwhelming manifestation of love than are the acts of lowly gentleness and patient endurance which followed in time. It included and transcended them all.

It was the supreme example of not looking on one's own things.' And what made Him so count? What but infinite love. To rescue men, and win them to Himself and goodness, and finally to lift them to the place from which He came down for them, seemed to Him to be worth the temporary surrender of that glory and majesty. We can but bow and adore the perfect love. We look more deeply into the depths of Deity than unaided eyes could ever penetrate, and what we see is the movement in that abyss of Godhead of purest surrender which, by beholding, we are to assimilate.

Then comes the wonder of wonders, He emptied Himself.' We cannot enter here on the questions which gather round that phrase, and which give it a factitious importance in regard to present controversies. All that we would point out now is that while the Apostle distinctly treats the Incarnation as being a laying aside of what made the Word to be equal with God, he says nothing, on which an exact determination can be based, of the degree or particulars in which the divine nature of our Lord was limited by His humanity. The fact he asserts, and that is all. The scene in the Upper Chamber was but a feeble picture of what had already been done behind the veil. Unless He had laid aside His garments of divine glory and majesty, He would have had no human flesh from which to strip the robes. Unless He had willed to take the form of a servant,' He would not have had a body to gird with the slave's towel. The Incarnation, which made all His acts of lowly love possible, was a greater act of lowly love than those which flowed from it. Looking at it from earth, men say, Jesus was born.' Looking at it from heaven, Angels say, He emptied Himself.'

But how did He empty Himself? By taking the form of a slave, that is to God. And how did He take the form of a slave? By becoming in the likeness of men.' Here we are specially to note the remarkable language implying that what is true of none other in all the generations of men is true of Him. That just as emptying Himself' was His own act, also the taking the form of a slave by His being born was His own act, and was more truly described as a becoming.' We note, too, the strong contrast between that most remarkable word and the being; originally' which is used to express the mystery of divine pre-existence.

Whilst His becoming in the likeness of men stands in strong contrast with being originally,' and energetically expresses the voluntariness of our Lord's birth, the likeness of men' does not east any doubt on the reality of His manhood, but points to the fact that though certainly perfect man, He was by reason of the divine nature present in Him not simply and merely man.'

Here then the beginning of Christ's manhood is spoken of in terms which are only explicable, if it was a second form of being, preceded by a pre-existent form, and was assumed by His own act. The language, too, demands that that humanity should have been true essential manhood. It was in the form' of man and possessed of all essential attributes. It was in the likeness' of man possessed of all external characteristics, and yet was something more. It summed up human nature, and was its representative.

III. The Obedience Which Attended The Descent.

It was not merely an act of humiliation and condescension to become man, but all His life was one long act of lowliness. Just as He emptied Himself' in the act of becoming in the likeness of men,' so He humbled Himself,' and all along the course of His earthly life He chose constant lowliness and to be despised and rejected of men.' It was the result moment by moment of His own will that to the eyes of men He presented' no form nor comeliness,' and that will was moment by moment steadied in its unmoved humility, because He perpetually looked not on His own things, but on the things of others.' The guise He presented to the eyes of men was the fashion of a man.' That word corresponds exactly to Paul's carefully selected term, and makes emphatic both its superficial and its transitory character.

The lifelong humbling of Himself was further manifested in His becoming obedient.' That obedience was, of course, to God. And here we cannot but pause to ask the question, How comes it that to the man Jesus obedience to God was an act of humiliation? Surely there is but one explanation of such a statement. For all men but this one to be God's slaves is their highest honour, and to speak of obedience as humiliation is a sheer absurdity.

Not only was the life of Jesus so perfect an example of unbroken obedience that He could safely front His adversaries with the question, Which of you convinceth Me of sin?' and with the claim to do always the things that pleased Him,' but the obedience to the Father was perfected in His death. Consider the extraordinary fact that a man's death is the crowning instance of his humility, and ask yourselves the question, Who then is this who chose to be born, and stooped in the act of dying? His death was obedience to God, because by it He carried out the Father's will for the salvation of the world, His death is the greatest instance of unselfish self-sacrifice, and the loftiest example of looking on the things of others' that the world has ever seen. It dwindles in significance, in pathos, and in power to move us to imitation unless we clearly see the divine glory of the eternal Lord as the background of the gentle lowliness of the Man of Sorrows, and the Cross. No theory of Christ's life and death but that He was born for us, and died for us, either explains the facts and the apostolic language concerning them, or leaves them invested with their full power to melt our hearts and mould our lives. There is a possibility of imitating Him in the most transcendent of His acts. The mind may be in us which was in Christ Jesus. That it may, His death must first be the ground of our hope, and then we must make it the pattern of our lives, and draw from it the power to shape them after His blessed Example.

MHCC: Phi 2:5-11

The example of our Lord Jesus Christ is set before us. We must resemble him in his life, if we would have the benefit of his death. Notice the two natures of Christ; his Divine nature, and human nature. Who being in the form of God, partaking the Divine nature, as the eternal and only-begotten Son of God, Joh 1:1, had not thought it a robbery to be equal with God, and to receive Divine worship from men. His human nature; herein he became like us in all things except sin. Thus low, of his own will, he stooped from the glory he had with the Father before the world was. Christ's two states, of humiliation and exaltation, are noticed. Christ not only took upon him the likeness and fashion, or form of a man, but of one in a low state; not appearing in splendour. His whole life was a life of poverty and suffering. But the lowest step was his dying the death of the cross, the death of a malefactor and a slave; exposed to public hatred and scorn. The exaltation was of Christ's human nature, in union with the Divine. At the name of Jesus, not the mere sound of the word, but the authority of Jesus, all should pay solemn homage. It is to the glory of God the Father, to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; for it is his will, that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father, Joh 5:23. Here we see such motives to self-denying love as nothing else can supply. Do we thus love and obey the Son of God?

Matthew Henry: Phi 2:1-11

The apostle proceeds in this chapter where he left off in the last, with further exhortations to Christian duties. He presses them largely to like-mindedness and lowly-mindedness, in conformity to the example of the Lord Jesus, the great pattern of humility and love. Here we may observe,

I. The great gospel precept passed upon us; that is, to love one another. This is the law of Christ's kingdom, the lesson of his school, the livery of his family. This he represents (Phi 2:2) by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. We are of a like mind when we have the same love. Christians should be one in affection, whether they can be one in apprehension or no. This is always in their power, and always their duty, and is the likeliest way to bring them nearer in judgment. Having the same love. Observe, The same love that we are required to express to others, others are bound to express to us. Christian love ought to be mutual love. Love, and you shall be loved. Being of one accord, and of one mind; not crossing and thwarting, or driving on separate interests, but unanimously agreeing in the great things of God and keeping the unity of the Spirit in other differences. Here observe,

1. The pathetic pressing of the duty. He is very importunate with them, knowing what an evidence it is of our sincerity, and what a means of the preservation and edification of the body of Christ. The inducements to brotherly love are these: - (1.) "If there is any consolation in Christ. Have you experienced consolation in Christ? Evidence that experience by loving one another."The sweetness we have found in the doctrine of Christ should sweeten our spirits. Do we expect consolation in Christ? If we would not be disappointed, we must love one another. If we have not consolation in Christ, where else can we expect it? Those who have an interest in Christ have consolation in him, strong and everlasting consolation (Heb 6:18; 2Th 2:16), and therefore ought to love one another. (2.) " Comfort of love. If there is any comfort in Christian love, in God's love to you, in your love to God, or in your brethren's love to us, in consideration of all this, be you like-minded. If you have ever found that comfort, if you would find it, if you indeed believe that the grace of love is a comfortable grace, abound in it."(3.) " Fellowship of the Spirit. If there is such a thing as communion with God and Christ by the Spirit, such a thing as the communion of saints, by virtue of their being animated and actuated by one and the same Spirit, be you like-minded; for Christian love and like-mindedness will preserve to us our communion with God and with one another."(4.) " Any bowels and mercies, in God and Christ, towards you. If you expect the benefit of God's compassions to yourselves, be you compassionate one to another. If there is such a thing as mercy to be found among the followers of Christ, if all who are sanctified have a disposition to holy pity, make it appear this way."How cogent are these arguments! One would think them enough to tame the most fierce, and mollify the hardest, heart. (5.) Another argument he insinuates is the comfort it would be to him: Fulfil you my joy. It is the joy of ministers to see people like-minded and living in love. He had been instrumental in bringing them to the grace of Christ and the love of God. "Now,"says he, "if you have found any benefit by your participation of the gospel of Christ, if you have any comfort in it, or advantage by it, fulfil the joy of your poor minister, who preached the gospel to you."

2. He proposes some means to promote it. (1.) Do nothing through strife and vain glory, Phi 2:3. There is no greater enemy to Christian love than pride and passion. If we do things in contradiction to our brethren, this is doing them through strife; if we do them through ostentation of ourselves, this is doing them through vain-glory: both are destructive of Christian love and kindle unchristian heats. Christ came to slay all enmities; therefore let there not be among Christians a spirit of opposition. Christ came to humble us, and therefore let there not be among us a spirit of pride. (2.) We must esteem others in lowliness of mind better than ourselves, be severe upon our own faults and charitable in our judgments of others, be quick in observing our own defects and infirmities, but ready to overlook and make favourable allowances for the defects of others. We must esteem the good which is in others above that which is in ourselves; for we best know our own unworthiness and imperfections. (3.) We must interest ourselves in the concerns of others, not in a way of curiosity and censoriousness, or as busy-bodies in other men's matters, but in Christian love and sympathy: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others, Phi 2:4. A selfish spirit is destructive of Christian love. We must be concerned not only for our own credit, and ease, and safety, but for those of others also; and rejoice in the prosperity of others as truly as in our own. We must love our neighbour as ourselves, and make his case our own.

II. Here is a gospel pattern proposed to our imitation, and that is the example of our Lord Jesus Christ: Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, Phi 2:5. Observe, Christians must be of Christ's mind. We must bear a resemblance to his life, if we would have the benefit of his death. If we have not the Spirit of Christ, we are none of his, Rom 8:9. Now what was the mind of Christ? He was eminently humble, and this is what we are peculiarly to learn of him. Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, Mat 11:29. If we were lowly-minded, we should be like-minded; and, if we were like Christ, we should be lowly-minded. We must walk in the same spirit and in the same steps with the Lord Jesus, who humbled himself to sufferings and death for us; not only to satisfy God's justice, and pay the price of our redemption, but to set us an example, and that we might follow his steps. Now here we have the two natures and the two states of our Lord Jesus. It is observable that the apostle, having occasion to mention the Lord Jesus, and the mind which was in him, takes the hint to enlarge upon his person, and to give a particular description of him. It is a pleasing subject, and a gospel minister needs not think himself out of the way when he is upon it; any fit occasion should be readily taken.

1. Here are the two natures of Christ: his divine nature and his human nature. (1.) Here is his divine nature: Who being in the form of God (Phi 2:6), partaking of the divine nature, as the eternal and only begotten Son of God. This agrees with Joh 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God: it is of the same import with being the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), and the brightness of his glory, and express image of his person, Heb 1:3. He thought it no robbery to be equal with God; did not think himself guilty of any invasion of what did not belong to him, or assuming another's right. He said, I and my Father are one, Joh 10:30. It is the highest degree of robbery for any mere man or mere creature to pretend to be equal with God, or profess himself one with the Father. This is for a man to rob God, not in tithes and offerings, but of the rights of his Godhead, Mal 3:8. Some understand being in the form of God - en morphē Theou huparchōn , of his appearance in a divine majestic glory to the patriarchs, and the Jews, under the Old Testament, which was often called the glory, and the Shechinah . The word is used in such a sense by the Septuagint and in the New Testament. He appeared to the two disciples, en hetera morphē - In another form, Mar 16:12. Metemorphōthē - he was transfigured before them, Mat 17:2. And he thought it no robbery to be equal with God; he did not greedily catch at, nor covet and affect to appear in that glory; he laid aside the majesty of his former appearance while he was here on earth, which is supposed to be the sense of the peculiar expression, ouk harpagmon hēgēsato . Vid. Bishop Bull's Def. cap. 2 sect. 4 et alibi, and Whitby in loc. (2.) His human nature: He was made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He was really and truly man, took part of our flesh and blood, appeared in the nature and habit of man. And he voluntarily assumed human nature; it was his own act, and by his own consent. We cannot say that our participation of the human nature is so. Herein he emptied himself, divested himself of the honours and glories of the upper world, and of his former appearance, to clothe himself with the rags of human nature. He was in all things like to us, Heb 2:17.

2. Here are his two estates, of humiliation and exaltation. (1.) His estate of humiliation. He not only took upon him the likeness and fashion of a man, but the form of a servant, that is, a man of mean estate. He was not only God's servant whom he had chosen, but he came to minister to men, and was among them as one who serveth in a mean and servile state. One would think that the Lord Jesus, if he would be a man, should have been a prince, and appeared in splendour. But quite the contrary: He took upon him the form of a servant. He was brought up meanly, probably working with his supposed father at his trade. His whole life was a life of humiliation, meanness, poverty, and disgrace; he had nowhere to lay his head, lived upon alms, was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, did not appear with external pomp, or any marks of distinction from other men. This was the humiliation of his life. But the lowest step of his humiliation was his dying the death of the cross. He became obedient to death, even the death of the cross. He not only suffered, but was actually and voluntarily obedient; he obeyed the law which he brought himself under as Mediator, and by which he was obliged to die. I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again: this commandment have I received of my Father, Joh 10:18. And he was made under the law, Gal 4:4. There is an emphasis laid upon the manner of his dying, which had in it all the circumstances possible which are humbling: Even the death of the cross, a cursed, painful, and shameful death, - a death accursed by the law ( Cursed is he that hangeth on a tree ) - full of pain, the body nailed through the nervous parts (the hands and feet) and hanging with all its weight upon the cross, - and the death of a malefactor and a slave, not of a free-man, - exposed as a public spectacle. Such was the condescension of the blessed Jesus. (2.) His exaltation: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him. His exaltation was the reward of his humiliation. Because he humbled himself, God exalted him; and he highly exalted him, huperupsōse , raised him to an exceeding height. He exalted his whole person, the human nature as well as the divine; for he is spoken of as being in the form of God as well as in the fashion of man. As it respects the divine nature, it could only be the recognizing of his rights, or the display and appearance of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (Joh 17:5), not any new acquisition of glory; and so the Father himself is said to be exalted. But the proper exaltation was of his human nature, which alone seems to be capable of it, though in conjunction with the divine. His exaltation here is made to consist in honour and power. In honour; so he had a name above every name, a title of dignity above all the creatures, men and angels. And in power: Every knee must bow to him. The whole creation must be in subjection to him: things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, the inhabitants of heaven and earth, the living and the dead. At the name of Jesus; not at the sound of the word, but the authority of Jesus; all should pay a solemn homage. And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord - every nation and language should publicly own the universal empire of the exalted Redeemer, and that all power in heaven and earth is given to him, Mat 28:18. Observe the vast extent of the kingdom of Christ; it reaches to heaven and earth, and to all the creatures in each, to angels as well as men, and to the dead as well as the living. - To the glory of God the Father. Observe, It is to the glory of God the Father to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; for it is his will that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father, Joh 5:23. Whatever respect is paid to Christ redounds to the honour of the Father. He who receiveth me receiveth him who sent me, Mat 10:40.

Barclay: Phi 2:5-11

In many ways this is the greatest and most moving passage Paul ever wrote about Jesus. It states a favourite thought of his. The essence of it is in the simple statement Paul made to the Corinthians that, although Jesus was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor (2Co 8:9). Here that simple idea is stated with a fulness which is without parallel. Paul is pleading with the Philippians to live in harmony, to lay aside their discords, to shed their personal ambitions and their pride and their desire for prominence and prestige, and to have in their hearts that humble, selfless desire to serve, which was the essence of the life of Christ. His final and unanswerable appeal is to point to the example of Jesus Christ.

This is a passage which we must try fully to understand, because it has so much in it to awaken our minds to thought and our hearts to wonder. To this end we must look closely at some of its great Greek words.

Greek is a far richer language than English. Where English has one word to express an idea, Greek has often two or three or more. In one sense these words are synonyms, but they never mean entirely the same thing; they always have some special flavour. That is particularly so of this passage. Every word is chosen by Paul with meticulous care to show two things--the reality of the manhood and the reality of the godhead of Jesus Christ. Let us take the phrases one by one. We will set them down both in the King James Version and in our own translation, and then try to penetrate to the essential meaning behind them.

Phi 2:6: Being in the form of God; he was by nature in the very form of God. Two words are most carefully chosen to show the unchangeable godhead of Jesus Christ. The word which the King James Version translates being is from the Greek verb huparchein (5225) which is not the common Greek word for "being." It describes that which a man is in his very essence and which cannot be changed. It describes that part of a man which, in any circumstances, remains the same. So Paul begins by saying that Jesus was essentially and unalterably God.

He goes on to say that Jesus was in the form of God. There are two Greek words for form, morphe (3444) and schema (4976). They must both be translated form, because there is no other English equivalent, but they do not mean the same thing. Morphe (3444) is the essential form which never alters; schema (4976) is the outward form which changes from time to time and from circumstance to circumstance. For instance, the morphe (3444) of any human being is humanity and this never changes; but his schema (4976) is continually changing. A baby, a child, a boy, a youth, a man of middle age, an old man always have the morphe (3444) of humanity, but the outward schema (4976) changes all the time. Roses, daffodils, tulips, chrysanthemums, primroses, dahlias, lupins all have the one morphe (3444) of flowers; but their schema (4976) is different. Aspirin, penicillin, cascara, magnesia all have the one morphe (3444) of drugs; but their schema (4976) is different. The morphe (3444) never alters; the schema (4976) continually does. The word Paul uses for Jesus being in the form of God is morphe (3444); that is to say, his unchangeable being is divine. However his outward schema (4976) might alter, he remained in essence divine.

Jesus did not think it robbery to be equal with God; he did not regard existence in equality with God as something to be snatched at. The word used for robbery, which we have translated a thing to be snatched at, is harpagmos (725) which comes from a verb meaning to snatch, or to clutch. The phrase can mean one of two things, both of which are at heart the same. (a) It can mean that Jesus did not need to snatch at equality with God, because he had it as a right. (b) It can mean that he did not clutch at equality with God, as if to hug it jealously to himself, but laid it willingly down for the sake of men. However we take this, it once again stresses the essential godhead of Jesus.

Phi 2:7: He emptied himself, he made himself of no reputation. The Greek is the verb kenoun (2758) which means literally to empty. It can be used of removing things from a container, until the container is empty; of pouring something out, until there is nothing left. Here Paul uses the most vivid possible word to make clear the sacrifice of the Incarnation. The glory of divinity Jesus gave up willingly in order to become man. He emptied himself of his deity to take upon himself his humanity. It is useless to ask how; we can only stand in awe at the sight of him, who is almighty God, hungry and weary and in tears. Here in the last reach of human language is the great saving truth that he who was rich for our sakes became poor.

He took upon him the form of a servant; he took the very form of a slave. The word used for form is morphe (3444), which we have seen means the essential form. Paul means that when Jesus became man it was no play-acting but reality. He was not like the Greek gods, who sometimes, so the stories ran, became men but kept their divine privileges. Jesus truly became man. But there is something more here. He was made in the likeness of men; he became like men. The word which the King James Version translates made and which we have translated became is a part of the Greek verb ginesthai (1096). This verb describes a state which is not a permanent state. The idea is that of becoming, and it describes a changing phase which is completely real but which passes. That is to say, the manhood of Jesus was not permanent; it was utterly real, but it passed.

Phi 2:8: He was found in fashion as a man; he came in appearance as a man for all to recognise. Paul makes the same point. The word the King James Version has translated fashion and which we have translated appearance is schema (4976), and we have seen that this indicates a form which alters.

Phi 2:6-8form a very short passage; but there is no passage in the New Testament which so movingly sets out the utter reality of the godhead and the manhood of Jesus and makes so vivid the sacrifice that he made when he laid aside his godhead and took manhood upon him. How it happened, we cannot tell, but it is the mystery of a love so great that, although we can never fully understand it, we can blessedly experience it and adore it.

Barclay: Phi 2:5-11

It is always to be remembered that when Paul thought and spoke about Jesus, his interest and his intention were never primarily intellectual and speculative; they were always practical. To him theology and action were always bound together. Any system of thought must necessarily become a way of life. In many ways this passage is one of the greatest reaches of theological thought in the New Testament, but its aim was to persuade the Philippians to live a life in which disunity, discord, and personal ambition had no place.

So, then, Paul says of Jesus that he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of a cross. The great characteristics of Jesus' life were humility, obedience, and self-renunciation. He did not desire to dominate men but only to serve them; he did not desire his own way but only God's way; he did not desire to exalt himself but only to renounce all his glory for the sake of men. Again and again the New Testament is sure that only the man who humbles himself will be exalted (Mat 23:12; Luk 14:11; Luk 18:14). If humility, obedience, and self-renunciation were the supreme characteristics of the life of Jesus, they must also be the hall-marks of the Christian. Selfishness, self-seeking and self-display destroy our likeness to Christ and our fellowship with each other.

But the self-renunciation of Jesus Christ brought him the greater glory. It made certain that some day, soon or late, every living creature in all the universe, in heaven, in earth and even in hell, would worship him. It is to be carefully noted whence that worship comes. It comes from love. Jesus won the hearts of men, not by blasting them with power, but by showing them a love they could not resist. At the sight of this person who laid his glory by for men and loved them to the extent of dying for them on a cross, men's hearts are melted and their resistance is broken down. When men worship Jesus Christ, they fall at his feet in wondering love. They do not say "I cannot resist a might like that," but, "Love so amazing, so divine, demands my life, my soul, my all." Worship is founded, not on fear, but on love.

Further, Paul says that, as a consequence of his sacrificial love, God gave Jesus the name which is above every name. One of the common biblical ideas is the giving of a new name to mark a new stage in a man's life. Abram became Abraham when he received the promise of God (Gen 17:5). Jacob became Israel when God entered into the new relationship with him (Gen 32:28). The promise of the Risen Christ to both Pergamos and to Philadelphia is the promise of a new name (Rev 2:17; Rev 3:12).

What then is the new name given to Jesus Christ? We cannot be quite certain what exactly was in Paul's mind, but most likely the new name is Lord.

The great title by which Jesus came to be known in the early Church was kurios (2962), Lord, which has an illuminating history. (i) It began by meaning master or owner. (ii) It became the official title of the Roman Emperors. (iii) It became the title of the heathen gods. (iv) It was the word by which the Hebrew Jehovah was translated in the Greek version of the Hebrew scriptures. So, then, when Jesus was called kurios (2962), Lord, it meant that he was the Master and the Owner of all life; he was the King of kings; he was the Lord in a way in which the heathen gods and the dumb idols could never be; he was nothing less than divine.

Barclay: Phi 2:5-11

Phi 2:11is one of the most important verses in the New Testament. In it we read that the aim of God, is a day when every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. These four words were the first creed that the Christian Church ever had. To be a Christian was to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (compare Rom 10:9). This was a simple creed, yet all-embracing. Perhaps we would do well to go back to it. Later men tried to define more closely what it meant and argued and quarrelled about it, calling each other heretics and fools. But it is still true that if man can say, "For me Jesus Christ is Lord," he is a Christian. If he can say that, he means that for him Jesus Christ is unique and that he is prepared to give him an obedience he is prepared to give no one else. He may not be able to put into words who and what he believes Jesus to be; but, so long as there is in his heart this wondering love and in his life this unquestioning obedience, he is a Christian, because Christianity consists less in the mind's understanding than it does in the heart's love.

So we come to the end of this passage; and, when we come to its end, we come back to its beginning. The day will come when men will call Jesus Lord, but they will do so to the glory of God the Father. The whole aim of Jesus is not his own glory but God's. Paul is clear about the lonely and ultimate supremacy of God. In the first letter to the Corinthians he writes that in the end the Son himself shall be subject to him who put all things under him (1Co 15:28). Jesus draws men to himself that he may draw them to God. In the Philippian Church there were men whose aim was to gratify a selfish ambition; the aim of Jesus was to serve others, no matter what depths of self-renunciation that service might involve. In the Philippian Church there were those whose aim was to focus men's eyes upon themselves; the aim of Jesus was to focus men's eyes upon God.

So the follower of Christ must think always, not of himself but of others, not of his own glory but of the glory of God.

Constable: Phi 1:27--4:10

III. Partnership in the gospel 1:27--4:9

Paul had been saying he hoped to be able to revisit Philippi and to minister to his original readers again in person. However, he was not sure that he could do that. This uncertain state of affairs led him to exhort them now that he had the opportunity. Whether he came to them or not, their duty was the same. In the following verses he emphasized the importance of certain qualities essential to conduct worthy of the Lord. He did this so his readers would perceive the importance of these traits and give them proper attention.

Constable: Phi 2:1-30

1. Walking in unity ch. 2

In expounding on the importance of unity and steadfastness as essential for partnership in the work of the gospel, Paul dealt first with the importance of walking in unity.⁵¹ He explained the basis for unity and illustrated this basis with the example of Christ. He then clarified the believers' responsibility and further illustrated with his own example and that of two of his fellow workers.

Constable: Phi 2:5-11

The example of Christ 2:5-11

This paragraph is the most important one in the epistle and the most difficult to interpret.

"By anyone's reckoning, 2:6-11 constitutes the single most significant block of material in Philippians."⁵⁸

2:5 Paul introduced an illustration of what he meant, namely the example of Jesus Christ. He wanted his readers to remember that the very qualities he had been advocating were observable in the Lord Jesus. This verse introduces one of the great Christological passages in the New Testament (vv. 5-11).

". . . the secret of Christian joy is found in the way the believer thinks--his attitudes."⁵⁹

2:6 This verse begins a section of exalted prose that continues through verse 11.⁶⁰ The parallels in thought and action between these verses, which describe Jesus' humility, and John 13:3-17, which records Jesus washing His disciples feet, are striking.

The Son of God's preincarnate state is quite clearly in view here (cf. 2 Cor. 8:9). He existed in the form of God. The word translated "form" (NASB) or "nature" (NIV, Gr. morphe) refers to outward appearance that accurately reveals the inward nature. It does not mean outward appearance that changes as a result of time and circumstances (Gr. schema, v. 7).

"To say that he was existing in the essential metaphysical form of God is tantamount to saying that he possessed the nature of God."⁶¹

The verb translated "existed" (NASB) or "being" (NIV) is in the present tense in the Greek text and points to the Lord's continuing existence with the full nature of God. His full deity is not something Jesus Christ gave up or laid aside when He became a man at the Incarnation.

"This, then, is what it means for Christ to be in the "form" of God'; it means to be equal with God,' not in the sense that the two phrases are identical, but that both point to the same reality. Together, therefore, they are among the strongest expressions of Christ's deity in the NT. This means further that equality with God' is not that which he desired which was not his, but precisely that which was always his."⁶²

The Lord Jesus' equality with God did change in some sense, however. The manner in which He existed as God changed when He became a man. He willingly adopted a manner of existence that was different from His father's, namely that of the God-man.

"Our doctrine of Christ's humiliation will be better understood if we put it midway between two pairs of erroneous views, making it the third of five. The list would be as follows: (1) Gess: The Logos gave up all divine attributes; (2) Thomasius: The Logos gave up relative attributes only [i.e., omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence]; (3) True View: The Logos gave up the independent exercise of divine attributes; (4) Old Orthodoxy: Christ gave up the use of divine attributes; (5) Anselm: Christ acted as if he did not possess divine attributes."⁶³

". . . while it is not true that Christ in the incarnation surrendered the relative attributes of omnipresence, omnipotence and omniscience, He did embark upon a program where it was necessary to submit to a voluntary nonuse of these attributes in order to obtain His objectives. Christ does not seem to have ever exercised His divine attributes on His own behalf though they had abundant display in His miracles. This is qualified to some extent by the fact that His omniscience is revealed in His prophetic ministry, but He did not use His divine knowledge to make His own path easier. He suffered all the inconveniences of His day even though in His divine omniscience He had full knowledge of every human device ever conceived for human comfort. In His human nature there was growth in knowledge, but this must not be construed as a contradiction of His divine omniscience. Limitations in knowledge as well as limitations in power are related to the human nature and not to the divine. His omnipotence was manifested in many ways and specifically in the many miracles which He did, in some cases by the power of the Holy Spirit and in others on the basis of His own word of authority. Here again He did not use His omnipotence to make His way easy and He knew the fatigue of labor and travelling by walking. Though in His divine nature He was omnipresent, He did not use this attribute to avoid the long journeys on foot nor was He ever seen in His ministry in more than one place at a time. In a word, He restricted the benefits of His attributes as they pertained to His walk on earth and voluntarily chose not to use His powers to lift Himself above ordinary human limitations.

"The act of kenosis as stated in Philippians 2 may therefore be properly understood to mean that Christ surrendered no attribute of Deity, but that He did voluntarily restrict their independent use in keeping with His purpose of living among men and their limitations."⁶⁴

"Voluntarily he chose not to use some of his divine attributes during his earthly pilgrimage (Matt. 24:36)."⁶⁵

"It seems to me that even evangelicals blunt the point of the passage by missing its principal emphasis as suggested above and focusing on trying to delineate what limitations Christ experienced in His earthly state. To be sure, the God-Man experienced limitations; but equally sure the God-Man evidenced the prerogatives of Deity. Therefore, conservatives suggest that the kenosis means the veiling of Christ's preincarnate glory, which is true only in a relative sense (see Matt. 17:1-8; John 1:14; 17:5). Or they suggest it means the voluntary nonuse of some of His attributes of Deity. This was true on occasion but certainly not always throughout His life (see [John] 1:48; 2:24; 16:30). Neither did He only do His miracles always in the power of the Spirit, but sometimes in His own power (Luke 22:51; John 18:6). So if our understanding of kenosis comes from Philippians 2, we should get our definition of the concept there. And that passage does not discuss at all the question of how or how much Christ's glory was veiled. Nor does it say anything about the use or restriction of divine attributes. It does say that the emptying concerned becoming a man to be able to die. Thus the kenosis means leaving His preincarnate position and taking on a servant-humanity."⁶⁶

Jesus Christ did not regard His former manner of existence something that He wanted to hold onto. In view of the context this seems to be the correct interpretation. Another possibility is that He did not need to grasp after equality with God since He already possessed it. A third alternative is that He did not grasp equality with God prematurely as Adam did but waited for the Father to bestow it on Him after His passion.

Jesus was willing to alter His behavior for the welfare of others, and in this He is an example of submissiveness for us.

". . . his true nature is characterized not by selfish grabbing, but by an open-handed giving . . ."⁶⁷

2:7 Instead of maintaining His former manner of existence our Lord "emptied Himself" (NASB), "made himself nothing" (NIV), or "laid aside His privileges" (NASB margin, Gr. ekenosen).⁶⁸ What did He lay aside? It was not His deity. Jesus did not cease to be God when He became a man. This is clear from the context as well as from other Scriptures (e.g., John 10:30; Col. 1:15-20; et al.). He did not lay aside His dependence on the Father either. As the terms "Son" and "Father" reflect, the Son was always dependent on His Father within the administrative order of the Godhead.

Taking humanity imposed certain restrictions on Jesus Christ including those involved in possessing a physical body and a human, though not a sinful, nature. He laid aside the freedom that His former manner of existence afforded Him when He became a man. He became dependent on the Father in a different sense than had been true formerly. However, Paul did not say that Jesus emptied Himself of something. He simply said that He emptied Himself, He poured Himself out.⁶⁹

Paul described Jesus' self-emptying as taking the form of a bond-servant. "Taking" (Gr. labon) does not imply an exchange but adding something. The Lord did not lay aside the form of God. He did not cease to be God. He added the "form" of man. The same Greek word, morphe, occurs in verse 6 where it describes outward appearance that accurately reveals inward nature. Earlier Paul described himself and Timothy as bond-servants (1:1). Bond-servants are not just men. They are servants. The Messianic title "Servant of the Lord" reflects this humility and condescension of our Savior.

Furthermore Jesus Christ became in the likeness of men. "Likeness" (Gr. homoiomati) does not mean exactness (Gr. eikon). Even though Jesus had a fully human nature, that nature was not sinful. Every other human being has a sinful human nature. Moreover Jesus had a divine nature as well as a human nature.

As an example to the readers, this verse is an advance on the previous one. It shows that Jesus Christ was not just willing to change His behavior for others, but He really did so by becoming a man who was a servant.

2:8 Jesus Christ appeared to other people just as any other man. This was another mark of His humility. There were no visual clues in His appearance that He was sinless or divine.

". . . having said that Christ came in the likeness' of human beings (v. 7b), Paul now moves the narrative on to its next point, by saying he appeared' in a way that was clearly recognizable as human. Together the two phrases accent the reality of his humanity, just as the first two phrases in the preceding sentence accent his deity."⁷⁰

He further humbled Himself by becoming obedient to His Father's will to the point of laying down His life in death (cf. Heb. 5:8).

Beyond that He was willing to undergo death by crucifixion, a form of execution that was without equal in its pain and humiliation.

"It is difficult after sixteen centuries and more during which the cross has been a sacred symbol, to realize the unspeakable horror and loathing which the very mention or thought of the cross provoked in Paul's day. The word crux was unmentionable in polite Roman society . . .; even when one was being condemned to death by crucifixion the sentence used an archaic formula which served as a sort of euphemism: arbori infelici suspendito, hang him on the unlucky tree' (Cicero, ibid. 13)."⁷¹

The Phoenicians and Persians practiced crucifixion before the Greeks and Romans adopted it. It was a form of execution from which Roman citizens were exempt. Only the worst criminals among the slaves and foreigners underwent crucifixion.⁷² Hanging on a tree was a sign to the Jews that the person so disgraced was under the curse of God (Deut. 21:23; cf. Gal. 3:13).

The advance on Christ's example in this verse is the extent to which He was willing to go in humble submissiveness in obedience to His Father's will. All believers should be willing to do the same.

"Several years ago, while I was engaged in a study of the Philippian Epistle, a letter come to me bearing news of the death of a friend and former classmate who had laid down his life for Christ in foreign missionary service. He had been a brilliant student, was wealthy in his own right, and at the completion of the seminary course he was married to a beautiful and talented young woman. In this country he might have had everything ordinarily desirable to men--business success, comfort, ease, and luxury. But there was in him the mind of Christ; if I may dare to use the word reverently, he freely emptied himself' of all these prospects, becoming a servant of the cross in Egypt. There, having given what he could in service, he was obedient unto death.'"⁷³

"The test of the submissive mind is not just how much we are willing to take in terms of suffering, but how much we are willing to give in terms of sacrifice."⁷⁴

2:9 In view of the Son's submission to the depths of humiliation, God the Father raised Him to the height of exaltation. He literally super-exalted (Gr. hyperypsosen) Him. This process included Jesus' resurrection, ascension, and glorification in heaven.

The name that the Father has given to Jesus that is above every name is evidently "Lord Jesus," as the following two verses make clear.⁷⁵

2:10 The purpose of the Father's having given the Son great exaltation and a name suitable to such a position is that every person will bow in submission to His authority (cf. Isa. 45:23 where all bow before Yahweh). The beings in heaven that Paul referred to evidently are believers who have died and whose spirits have gone into the Lord's presence. Those on earth are people still alive on the earth. Those under the earth are unbelievers awaiting resurrection. Hades (the same as Sheol, the Old Testament term) is the place where the spirits of the unbelieving dead go until God resurrects them and judges them. The ancients thought of Sheol or Hades as being under the surface of the earth. All angelic beings will acknowledge Jesus' lordship too (1 Cor. 15:27).

Various groups will acknowledge that Jesus is Lord at different times. Christians do so at conversion, and we will do so when we see the Lord following the Rapture (Rev. 4-5). Those living on the earth and Old Testament saints resurrected at the Second Coming will do so then (Rev. 19:11-21). Most of those living on the earth during the millennial reign of Christ will submit to Him then (Ps. 2). At the end of the Millennium everyone on the earth and all resurrected unbelievers will bow the knee to Jesus Christ (Rev. 20:7-15).

2:11 Verbal confession of Jesus' lordship will accompany symbolic physical submission. Every being that has a tongue and can do so will acknowledge Jesus as Lord. The affirmation, "Jesus Christ is Lord," was the earliest confessional formula of the church (cf. Acts 2:36; Rom. 10:9; 1 Cor. 11:23; 12:3; 16:22).⁷⁶ God will by this universal confession receive glory. Jesus Christ's purpose is, always has been, and always will be to glorify the Father (1 Cor. 15:27).⁷⁷

"Verse 11 means, then, that the hope of God is that every intelligent being in his universe might proclaim openly and gladly (Lightfoot) that Jesus Christ alone has the right to reign."⁷⁸

The exaltation of Jesus Christ is as much a motivation for the Christian to live a life of submissive humility as is His incarnation. God will reward a life of self-denial now in the future. That is the obvious implication of Paul's illustration.

Is it not selfish to serve the Lord for a reward? Was it selfish for Jesus to endure what He did because He knew He would receive a reward? Motivation is the key. If we submit to God and to one another for the glory of God rather than for selfish glory, as Jesus did, our motivation is correct.

The power of a positive example is very strong. Paul had previously used himself as an example of steadfastness (1:30) and he would do so again. Here he pointed to Jesus Christ, the greatest example of submissiveness (2:2-11). He would use Timothy and Epaphroditus as examples for his readers later (2:19-23, 25-30).

College: Phi 2:1-30

PHILIPPIANS 2

B. ATTITUDES PRODUCING UNITY (2:1-4)

¹ If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, ² then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. ³ Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. ⁴ Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.

In verse 1, Paul gives four motivations, followed in verse 2 by the desired result - unity. Verse 3 prohibits acting from selfish ambition or vain conceit, but rather commands humility in placing others above self. The fourth verse counsels concern for the interests of others, in addition to concern for one's own interests.

The exhortations begun in 1:27 continue here. There unity was discussed in relation to facing external difficulties. Here the call is to internal unity within the church. The reader is still not aware of the exact contours of the Philippians' disunity, but we may suppose the addressees had no doubt as to Paul's meaning. A specific case of two women will surface in 4:2, but whether the problem had further dimensions is unknown. It is possible Paul may have counseled these Christians so they would avoid problems he had seen arise in other churches, but which may have been only beginning in Philippi.

2:1 If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion,

A fourfold motivation in verse 1 is balanced by a fourfold result (though some say threefold) in verse 2. The fourfold "if" (eij , ei ) is somewhat ironic. It was not meant to express doubt. Rather the implication was that they possessed the highest sort of motivation. To "if," the appropriate response would be a resounding, "Of course there are such motivations!"

Following Paul's usual procedure, exhortation is preceded by motivation (cf. the schemes of Eph, Col). Following Christ was a relationship in which divine realities existed, not just a rule-keeping religion. The Philippians, examining their own experience, could see the reality of what Paul was saying. Thus they should act in a way which was harmonious with what God had done for them. Paul's words put the matter of their behavior in as serious a light as they could imagine.

The words translated "encouragement" and "comfort" in the NIV carry the ideas of consolation or strengthening. On this reading the idea was that God would supply the strength necessary to acquire the characteristics listed in verse 2. It is also possible to understand both terms as being exhortations, thus implying the idea of command. Consequently, there could be no greater authority than the one calling them to unity. We prefer the first alternative, however.

There is no agreement about a theological progression in the sections of this verse. It is difficult to distinguish shades of difference in the meanings of the words translated "encouragement" (paravklhsi" , paraklçsis ) and "comfort" (paramuvqion , paramythion ).

"United with Christ" is literally "in Christ." But the idea was that people in union with the Lord must surely be united with each other. For this not to be the case would be monstrous.

"The Spirit" (pneu'ma , pneuma ) is generally held to be the Holy Spirit. Since the references to Christ and the Spirit both refer to what God had done, we may assume that "love" ("his" is not in the Greek) refers to God's love, though some would see it as Paul's love for the Philippians.

"Fellowship in the Spirit" could mean the fellowship which the Spirit created, or could refer to the possession of the Spirit by all believers. Possession of the Spirit was used as an argument against salvation by the law in Galatians 3:2, and as a strong reason for unity in Ephesians 4:4. On this view, which we favor, disunity was seen as destroying the unity which God created by his indwelling presence. Certainly the Spirit would not fight itself!

"Tenderness" (splavgcna , splanchna ) and "compassion" (oijktivrmoi , oiktirmoi ) are seen by some as two qualities, and by others as parallel statements of the same quality. Splanchna was rendered "affection" in 1:8. The terms could refer to the qualities in God which made salvation possible, or to the call for the saved to have the like qualities. In Christian terms, however, the Christian qualities are impossible without the divine qualities; and with the divine qualities, the Christian qualities become essential characteristics of redeemed persons.

2:2 then make my joy complete

The cluster of expressions used here leaves no doubt of Paul's desire for unity among the Philippians. In addition to the motivations of verse 1, the apostle also anticipated the completion of his joy by their obedience. Already, in 1:4, he had expressed joy because of them. Note also his references to rejoicing in 1:18 (twice) and see the discussion at 1:4.

by being like-minded, having the same love,

"Like-minded" and "purpose" are from the same Greek root (frovn- , phron ). It was translated "feel" in 1:7, and is found often in the rest of Philippians (see the notes at 1:7). The terms express intent and disposition. More than intellectual agreement, Paul called them to commit to one another, as they were committed to Christ. In verse 5 he will describe this "attitude" as the same as that which was found in Christ Jesus. Certainly there would be disagreements in Philippi, as there will always be when humans interrelate. But their unity on the basis of their relation to Christ was to transcend any differences. Their love for each other was their response to Christ's love for them.

being one in spirit and purpose.

"One in spirit" translates a single Greek word (suvmyucoi , sympsychoi ). "Purpose," as indicated, shows the basic direction of their lives, individually and communally.

2:3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit,

The power of this exhortation is carried by two negative terms ("selfish ambition" [ejriqeiva , eritheia ] and "vain conceit" [kenodoxiva , kenodoxia ]) and one positive one ("humility" [tapeinofrosuvnh , tapeinophrosynç ]). Eritheia was employed previously in 1:17 of those who preached Christ from unworthy motives. His own experience gave Paul ample insight into the dangers of this attitude, and gave an added edge to his exhortation here. Cf. also condemnation of this sin in 2 Corinthians 12:20 (factions) and Galatians 2:20. Kenodoxia is found only here in the New Testament. Both "selfish ambition" and "vain conceit" are stock words found in ancient catalogues of vices. "Vain conceit" has the root idea of "empty opinion, error." Thus it could depict a person who, though conceited, had no reason for it.

but in humility consider others better than yourselves.

In Christ, however, conceit was never appropriate. Though tapeinophrosynç was an uncomplimentary term to the Greek mind, the attitude of Christ had sanctified it and made it one of the most significant of Christian virtues. Humility was not a sense of worthlessness, but rather was manifested in concern for others. The last part of the verse "consider . . . yourselves" defines the term. By adopting this perspective and by drawing from the reality of Christ's deeds, "selfish ambition" and "vain conceit" could be overcome.

2:4 Each of you should look not only to your own interests,

The thought of the last of verse 3 continues here. As the NIV reads, the text does not forbid a measure of self-interest. But it does call for a dedicated concern for others when seen in the light of verse 3. Cf. what Paul says of Timothy in 2:21. The Christ hymn which follows, beginning in verse 6, shows the extremity to which Christ went in his concern for others - for humanity.

but also to the interests of others.

An alternate rendering of this verse omits the word "only," which is not in the Greek, and "also" (kaiΙ , kai ), which is not in some manuscripts. On this reading Paul did not give any legitimacy to one's own interests, but only to those of others. This interpretation argues, therefore, that Paul was calling for an observation and imitation of the good qualities of other Christians. They should not be so self-centered they failed to observe and be motivated by the virtues of others. In the general sense these things are true, but in view of what Paul will say in 2:5-11, it seems better to adopt the translation of the NIV, with the meaning discussed in the previous paragraph. O'Brien has shown that the idea of "only" can be assumed here on the basis of other Greek texts, and that there is adequate manuscript evidence to keep "also."

C. THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST (THE CHRIST HYMN) (2:5-11)

⁵ Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: ⁶ Who, being in very nature ^a God,

did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

⁷ but made himself nothing, taking the very nature ^b of a servant,

being made in human likeness.

⁸ And being found in appearance as a man,

he humbled himself

and became obedient to death -

even death on a cross!

⁹ Therefore God exalted him to the highest place

and gave him the name that is above every name,

¹⁰ that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,

in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

¹¹ and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,

to the glory of God the Father.

^a 6 Or in the form of ^b 7 Or the form

It is generally agreed that these verses are a Christian hymn, inserted into the text here as a powerful enforcement of the epistle's call to humility (and thus to unity). Though it is more evident in the Greek, the form of these words differs from the surrounding text. There are certain stylistic characteristics which are not typical of the rest of the letter. More importantly, there is a significant heightening of theology here. Several important terms in these verses are not found elsewhere in the letter.

This is a christological statement unparalleled in the New Testament. The breadth of concept has led to reams of discussion by writers who have probed the meaning of various terms in the text. Nowhere else is the self-emptying of Christ described as it is here. Indeed, the theological profundity of the passage far outstripped the needs of Paul as he employed it. Thus it can be assumed that its full significance was in its original hymnic form, and Paul has employed it in a "reduced" usage. Were it composed by Paul only for this occasion, such exalted (and puzzling) concepts would not be necessary. Craddock well notes that the context shows Paul was not having a christological debate. He also observes that the hymn itself has no moral message (although it offers an excellent platform from which to give moral exhortation). Since Paul was advocating morality (humility) these words, if composed just for this letter, would certainly have included such a thrust.

We assume, then, that prior to the writing of Philippians these words stood in another context. Some have suggested they may have been a brief compend of Christian teaching, but the omission of something as basic as even a reference to the resurrection argues against that. Lohmeyer, who was the first scholar to demonstrate these words were a hymn, argued that the early church sang it at the Lord's Supper. Others have considered it a baptismal hymn. Whatever the case, we presume the effectiveness of its use in Philippians indicates it would be familiar to the readers, surely from church usage, and that it was considered to be true.

Where did the hymn originate? A variety of views have been offered. Some argue that it originated outside Christian sources, either from pagan, philosophical, or Jewish quarters. Then the original was "baptized" and made Christian. Others argue it originated entirely within Christian circles, and was ready to hand for use by Paul. Hawthorne, for example, believes the foot washing episode in John 13 formed the conceptual background. He grants that linguistic similarities with John 13 are few, but contends there are numerous contacts in subject matter.

Others believe Paul himself was the author. Objectors to this view point out the absence of certain Pauline themes (e.g. the resurrection) but respondents contend that hymns were not meant to be complete theological statements. Paul's hymn to love in 1 Corinthians 13, if original with him, does demonstrate his talent as a hymn writer. Some advocating Pauline authorship say these words preceded Philippians, while others feel Paul composed the hymn just for this letter. In the latter case, however, it seems strange Paul would go so far beyond the purpose and needs of the epistle. It should be noted, though, that the hymn does connect smoothly with 2:1-4, and it also prepares for the thought of 3:20f.

If, as seems most likely, the hymn preexisted its use here, was there any modification of the original in order to make it fit the present context? Here again many suggestions have been made, dealing largely with the strophic arrangement of the text (two stanzas or three?; where are the divisions?). Special attention has been given to "even death on a cross" (v. 8), since it seems to violate the previous literary structure of the hymn. These analyses are complicated, however, by lack of knowledge of what the form of a hymn should be , as no set form of a hymn has been discovered to which comparison can be made. We are concerned to interpret the text as it stands, whatever may have been its prehistory.

Whatever the truth, once the hymn did not exist, and then it did. The realities described were made known to the church by what God did in Christ and through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The descriptive language used, which, as we shall see, poses many perplexing problems, may spring from the fact that such realities can only be expressed in ways that leave considerable latitude for the mystery of divine being and action.

There are certain pitfalls to avoid in interpreting these verses in the context of Philippians . One can easily become intrigued with exploring the meaning of the various statements about Christ ("very nature," "equality," "grasped," "made nothing," etc.) and thus forget the practical use to which Paul was putting these words. Another pitfall is the opposite. Preoccupation with the Pauline application can ignore the lofty theology of the text. A third pitfall is to expend all one's interpretive energy in trying to fathom the place of this hymn in early church life, considered as a text giving insight to early Christian worship. All of these inquiries have their place, but we must remember that we are primarily interpreting Philippians. We will be periodically presented with the problem of the original meaning of an expression in the hymn as compared to Paul's meaning.

Though some would analyze the text in terms of Christ's preexistence, his earthly life and his glorification, a simpler and more obvious division has verses 6-8 as one section, and verses 9-11 as a second.

2:5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

These words are not a part of the hymn, but introduce it and form a link with verses 1-4.

"Attitude" is from the same root ( phron ) as "minded" and "purpose" in verse 2 (cf. notes at 1:7). Any uncertainty about Paul's meaning there is now to be marvelously clarified. Further, "humility" of verse 3 is what verses 6-8 describe so powerfully.

The literal translation of these Greek words would be something like "think this among yourselves which also in Christ Jesus." Because this expression is somewhat vague, two distinct views of the verse have emerged. One contends that "in Christ Jesus" means "in union with Christ Jesus" or "in the church" or "as Christians." Paul reminded the Philippians of their conversion, and in his exhortation called them back to that commitment. Thus the focus was a call to reaffirmation of the new life. This view gives more emphasis to the meaning of the hymn as it existed outside Philippians.

A second interpretation, commonly known as the ethical view, considers Christ as a model to be followed. The NIV translation implies this meaning, but we must remind ourselves that any translation of the verse is somewhat interpretive. On this understanding Paul was not simply saying "remember and imitate" Christ, for in verse thirteen he said it was "God who works in you . . . ." Cf. other calls to imitate Christ in Romans 15:1-7; 1 Corinthians 11:1; 2 Corinthians 8:9; and 1 Thessalonians 1:6.

These two possibilities continue to be debated. The first has been more popular in recent years, though not universally accepted. The reader may well ask if, in the long run, there is that much difference between the new life in Christ Jesus and a personal imitation of Christ. The question is well asked, considering the ultimate nature of Paul's appeal.

The form of "your" (ejn uJmi'n , en hymin , "in/among you") indicates Paul was thinking of the attitude of the Philippians to one another. The verb fronevw (phroneô , "think" or "be intent upon") has been rendered by some passively ("let this mind be" - KJV; compare the NIV), and by many more recent translations actively ("think this" [way]). Paul described the actions of humility on Jesus' part, but he was even more concerned with the inner thoughts that produced such actions. Of course no one can truly "get inside the mind" of Jesus, but certain things can be safely assumed, as in the present verses.

2:6 Who, being in very nature God,

On the christological level, the interpretive dilemmas here concern the meaning of "nature" and the meanings of "equality" and "grasped." The sort of subtle analysis demanded in interpreting these words is fascinating, but is probably also considerably more complicated than was Paul's hortatory intent in using them.

Though interpreters generally consider this a picture of the preexistent Jesus, some suggest the earthly Jesus may be in view here as well. "Being" is an indefinite term, so it cannot settle the time of which the text speaks. However the sense of emptying and humiliation seems more powerful if we assume Christ's preexistence is what is considered.

"Nature" translates the Greek morfhv (morphç ). The term is found elsewhere in the New Testament only in 2:7 and in Mark 16:12 (the resurrected Jesus appeared in a different "form"). The scarcity of references means there is no other New Testament evidence on the basis of which to interpret the present text. Numerous meanings for the term have been offered and refuted. They include: (1) the essential nature of God; (2) the glory of God; (3) the image of God, as in Gen 1:27; (4) a mode of being for God; (5) and position or status vis-a-vis God. Without wading through all these conjectures, we believe Paul is saying, however cautiously, that Christ was God! We should remember, too, the parallel with verse 7. Whatever the basic meaning of morphç in the one place, the same should be said of the other. Thus he was God (here) and he was a servant (v. 7).

did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

Many interpretations (one author has surveyed over 20) have been offered of this text. We assume equality was already the possession of Christ Jesus, not something to which he aspired. "Grasp" (from aJrpavzw , harpazô ) means to snatch or seize, and in the passive sense indicates a prize; i.e., the thing seized. Christ did not use the equality to escape service and humiliation. It might be supposed that divinity would avoid the destiny described in the next two verses. But the idea seems to be the opposite. The servant God, because he was God and because his love and power made it possible, gave/emptied himself. His self-emptying was not a "contradiction" of God's nature, but a demonstration of it. This is surprising and wonderful. Hawthorne suggests the point could be made clearer if the first of the verse were translated "Precisely because he was in the form of God . . . ."

In interpreting this verse we come into deep waters. If these suggestions are not correct, we think something more marvelous is. The more one meditates on the reality expressed by these words, the richer the divine care for man appears. Any reader sensing the power of this exhortation should surely be moved to humility and service.

2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

The double level of interpretation certainly forces its attention on the reader here. At the christological level questions arise like "what did he give up when he 'made himself nothing'?"; "to what or whom did he make himself a servant?"; "what is the background of the word 'servant'?"; "is 'servant' the same as 'human likeness' or does it imply more?"; and "does 'likeness' imply full acceptance of and identification with humanity?" These issues lead one into the loftiest realms of human thought. Conjectured solutions must often say "about such mysteries we cannot be sure."

At the practical level, however, we must recall that Paul was making a point about human behavior. It was not his main purpose here to explore loftier issues of exact christological definition. We cannot know the depth of insight of the hymn. But we do know that Philippians is a practical, not a speculative, letter.

We have noted that the self-emptying of Christ showed the love and condescension of the "servant God." It is clear from these words ("made himself") that Christ's action was voluntary, not coerced. We assume this verse describes the incarnation itself, not Christ's actions once he became man. Those are described in verse eight.

The verb translated "made himself nothing" is ejkevnwsen (ekenôsen ). From it we derive the word "kenotic." The kenotic theory maintains that at the incarnation Christ gave up his omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence. He retained, however, qualities such as holiness, love, and righteousness. This view, though worthy, is probably asking more of this text than it says. But it does indicate how scholars have labored to understand what it was that Christ gave up when he "made himself nothing." Suggestions include divesting himself of his glory; or of his exercise of authority as God; or of his majesty; or of equality with God. Does it mean he gave up whatever kept him from being subject to the circumstances and vicissitudes of being human? Whatever the ultimate truth, Paul is more concerned with what God became, than with exactly what the specifics of that transition involved. His emptying is more fully defined in verse 8. As O'Brien says, he poured himself out totally for man's sake - whatever that meant! Again, we must marvel at the magnitude of the divine mercy! How can God, who is everything, make himself nothing? If this consideration does not carry one into the regions of awe, what can?

"Nature" is the Greek morfhv (morphç ), the term also used in verse 6 (see notes there). "Servant" is from the Greek dou'lo" ( doulos ), which means "slave" (see 1:1). This is the only place this term is used of Jesus in the New Testament. Other texts describing him as a servant use a different Greek word. One could see "slavery" as standing in opposition to deity, as if Christ went from one situation to its contradictory opposite. But we have argued that doulos defines an aspect of the divine nature, rather than being a contradiction of it (see John 13:3ff).

Two views are taken of the relation of "servant" to "human likeness." One holds them to be parallel. The other sees a progression from the first to the second. We hold to the first view. Servanthood, on this premise, was basic both to the nature of God, and to the human condition. The former was voluntary; the latter involuntary. God chose to serve. Man, though he may not recognize it, can be no other than a servant (including service to death, as the next verse shows). One might say, in paradoxical fashion, that "nothing is less like God than being a slave" and "nothing is more like God than being a slave."

What is the background from which the term "servant" is drawn? Some suggest Isaiah 53, but this view is open to objection for various reasons, including the fact that the word for "servant" there is pai'" ( pais ), not doulos . Another suggestion understands the text against the background of slavery in the society of Jesus' day.

"Being made" implies the conception and birth process. Birth and infancy are themselves risks, so they suggest again the helplessness to which Christ submitted himself. "Likeness" reiterates his complete identification with humanity.

The last line of verse 7, in the Greek, has been transferred to the first of verse 8 in the NIV.

2:8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself

The first part of the hymn concludes with this verse. To the power of the description "servant" in verse 7 is added the impact of "humbled" and "death on a cross." Paul's appeal to the Philippians was made with one powerful point after another.

Verse 7 described the fact of incarnation, and this verse depicts the nature of the incarnate life. "Now that the impossible has happened, and he is man, what will we see?" The answer is - humility! The very fact of practicing humility, so basic to the Christian lifestyle, and so contrary to the impulses of sinful and ego-centered man, is one men find exceedingly challenging and difficult. But Christ's way of living spoke volumes to the weakness of humans, and to the nature of the new life.

and became obedient to death -

To be human was to be subject to "death." But Paul added another marvel by reference to "death on a cross." From one perspective, how vast the contrast with "being in very nature God" of verse 6 and with "Lord" of verse 11. Jesus knew to be human was to die, but his obedient humanity led to the most disgraceful of deaths, as a despised criminal, intentionally humiliated, and subjected to intense sufferings. Elsewhere Paul, stressing the shame of such a death, identified it with death on a tree, which was done to one accursed by God (Deut 21:23, quoted in Gal 3:13). Of course, Christ was not accursed by God, but it could seem that way because of how he died.

"Obedient" to whom? The text does not say, but we presume the meaning is obedience to God, which led to his terrible fate. Nor does the text indicate the benefit of Christ's deed on the cross for humanity. But the church would know it well, whether it were specifically stated or not.

even death on a cross!

The role of the cross in this context prepares us for 3:18, where Paul speaks of "enemies of the cross of Christ." Whatever their exact identity, this text helps us see the enormity of their sin.

"Even death on a cross" seems to break the metric structure of the hymn. Was it original, or was it added here? Both views have been taken. Our task, however, is to understand the passage as it stands.

2:9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place

The style of Greek changes in verses 9-11 from that of verses 6-8. One difference is the increased number of Old Testament constructions and allusions.

If the story had ended with "death on a cross" we would wonder at the intent of such voluntary divine humiliation. The dramatic reversal is saluted by the words "Therefore God." To this point Christ was the active party. Now he is passive, and the Father is active. The humiliated one becomes the exalted one. The slave becomes the Lord (vv. 9 and 11 - "name" and "Lord").

The contrast with verses 6-8 makes the reader gasp with amazement. The Greek makes the point as strong as possible with "exalted . . . highest place." The term ujperuyovw (hyperypsoô ), used only here in the New Testament, goes beyond the usual word for exaltation. One author has suggested the meaning "super exalted," or "raised to the loftiest heights." The nature of the exaltation is described in the next two verses. The christological inquiries here have asked what aspect of Christ was exalted (contrast "made nothing" in v. 7) but Paul has not enlightened us on such issues.

The power of the exaltation is also conveyed by the contrast between the decisive totality of this description compared to the stages with which the humiliation was described.

and gave him the name that is above every name,

"Gave" is from a verb (carivzomai , charizomai ) which is cognate to the word for grace. The gracious divine bestowal was a name - and a reality. The name was not Jesus, for that would represent no advance on Christ's earthly status. Rather it was Lord (v. 11). He was named Lord because he was Lord.

So humiliation led in God's economy to exaltation. In the application Paul was not urging humility on the Philippians so they would be exalted. But exaltation would be the result. Jesus taught the same thing often during his ministry (cf. Luke 11:14; 14:11). Obedience to the admonition of 2:3 would lead to exaltation. Where would disobedience lead?

2:10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,

At the pinnacle of all creation Jesus is to receive the homage of all that exists. Made triumphant by God, he receives universal worship. All will know of the great reversal. "The name of Jesus" means Jesus himself. Paul borrowed the language of Isaiah 45:23 in his references to every knee bowing and every tongue confessing. There are two views about this submission. One says that all creatures would gladly make such an acknowledgment in submission to him. The second says some would submit willingly, and others would acknowledge his Lordship without submission. Thus not all who bowed and confessed would be saved (cf. Rev 9:20f; 16:9,11). But no one would escape the mastery of his Lordship. Ultimately he would not be successfully resisted.

in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

There have been numerous attempts to define the nature of "heaven," "earth," and "under the earth." One writer said they were first invisible powers, then those alive now, and then the dead, respectively. Others have suggested angels, humans, and demons; and still others have suggested spirit powers thought to rule these three realms. Whether any of these views is elected, or some other, the point is that nothing is outside the sovereignty of Jesus. As a practical application Paul's readers should beware lest their divisiveness, selfish ambition and vain conceit (in attitude and deed) put them outside the realm of those freely acknowledging Jesus' Lordship.

2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

"Jesus is Lord" is held to be the earliest Christian confession (1 Cor 12:3; Rom 10:9; Col 2:6). Paul's words here reminded the church of the powerful realities lying behind that confession, and of the great obligation which making it imposed.

The climax is the "glory of God." This is the result of Christ's Lordship. It would also be the result of the acknowledgment of that Lordship in the "attitude" (v. 5) of the Philippians.

D. EXHORTATION TO OBEDIENCE (2:12-18)

1. Work Out Salvation (2:12-13)

¹² Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed - not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence - continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, ¹³ for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.

Here Paul makes further application to the Christ hymn, calling for an obedient response from the Philippians while he was absent just as they had obeyed when he was present. This continued working out of their salvation, to be done with fear and trembling, would be energized by God. Both their wills and actions would be so empowered according to the divine purpose.

2:12 Therefore, my dear friends,

Paul has described the behavioral needs of the church (1:27f; 2:2-4) and has offered the highest possible motivation. Now, building on this most impressive foundation he urges utmost seriousness and energy in their obedience. It must be kept in mind that these much-discussed verses are to be seen in context. They are part of the hortatory section that began in 1:27, and are the "invitation to action" following the hymn. The call was to humility and service, to unity and unselfishness (vv. 2-4). That was the apostle's focus, so that he is not here simply giving a general statement about the whole of the Christian life.

C.S. Lewis has observed how these verses tie human effort and divine empowering together in one text. The words warn against a view that says "salvation" comes solely by human effort. But they also warn against holding that divine grace is so overwhelming that humans need not exert the greatest effort in God's service. Glorious grace does not excuse from work. If work could earn salvation, the in-working of God would be unnecessary. If grace alone were sufficient, there would be no call for human effort. The mandate of verse 12 would be a frightening one (and has been for many) were it not for the promise of verse 13.

"Dear friends" indicates again the affection already expressed in 1:3-11. The reference to obedience is made more powerful by an understanding of Christ's obedience described in verse 8. How could a disciple of Christ, reminded of the wonder of the Lord's obedience, refuse to obey? And how could a disciple, commended for obedience, not feel the great compliment in view of Christ's obedience? The obedience, of course, would be to the injunctions stated in 1:27-2:5, but would also look forward to further exhortations within the letter.

as you have always obeyed - not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence -

When Paul spoke of his "presence" or "absence," he could have referred to the past or to the future, depending on how the Greek is understood. It is more important to know that they were responding to Christ, and this response did not depend on the presence or absence of any human being, including Paul.

continue to work out your salvation

"Salvation" has been the subject of considerable discussion. There are two views most often advocated. An older view holds that this was individual salvation. Since the work of J.H. Michael in 1924, however, others have maintained that the reference is sociological. Since the word swthriva (sôtçria ) rendered "salvation" can also mean "wholeness" or "health," it is argued that the call was to seek the spiritual well being of the church. Hawthorne takes the latter position. O'Brien, without denying the emphasis on the entire church, argues that individual salvation cannot be excluded. It seems that Paul's call to unity in verses 2-4 must involve the whole community and its health. But how can one separate what the church is from the salvation of its members? Perhaps Melick best states the essence of the matter when he observes that Paul was telling them to act like Christians should! But the primary thrust of Paul, we maintain, was for the welfare of the Christian community.

with fear and trembling,

The word fovbo" ( phobos ) translated "fear" is the root of our "phobia," and that rendered "trembling" (trovmo" , tromos ) of our "trauma." The expression is frightening. But Paul was not speaking of apprehension about the final judgment. His intent was not to produce anxiety, but to promote seriousness and maximum dedication to the task. If we took "fear and trembling" to refer to apprehension of being eternally lost, this would seem to imply that the divine energizing of verse 13 would be of very little help. Hawthorne thinks the expression carries the sense of "obediently work." How could one not practice such exertion, given the great reality described in verses 5-11?

2:13 for it is God

To those who found the task of being Christian seemingly impossible, verse 13 offered glad news. Paul told his readers God had already been at work in them, and would continue to do so. Here the theme of growth, introduced in 1:6, resurfaces. "You can," because "God is." Thus, though maximum effort was demanded, doubt could be cast aside. Salvation does not depend solely on human effort. God calls men to his tasks, but then he works in them to realize the call. Also, they did not need Paul's presence to work, for they had God's presence.

who works in you to will and to act

"Work" in verse 13 (two times) is from the verb (ejnergevw , energço ) which yields our word "energy." Paul used the word eighteen times, of twenty uses in the New Testament. The divine energy provoked the human work. The process was one initiated by God. Human work was responsive to divine energy. God's activity affected both intent (will) and action.

according to his good purpose.

Since "his" is not in the Greek, some have suggested that "good purpose" refers to men, with a meaning such as "good will" or "good understanding." Thus, God works to produce good will in the church. This is linguistically possible, though we prefer to think that God's purpose to save man is the sense here.

2. Become Faultless Children (2:14-18)

¹⁴ Do everything without complaining or arguing, ¹⁵ so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe ¹⁶ as you hold out ^a the word of life - in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing. ¹⁷ But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you. ¹⁸ So you too should be glad and rejoice with me.

^a 16 Or hold on to

2:14 Do everything without complaining or arguing,

One might suppose that conceit and disunity in the church would produce "complaining" (goggusmov" , gongysmos ) or "arguing" (dialogismov" , dialogismos ). So, as Paul had attacked the spirit of the problem, and had urged great earnestness in meeting it, he now specifies concrete action - which was to cover all circumstances ("everything"). Little (nothing?) is said elsewhere in the book about complaint or argument, but one wonders how this relates to the disaffection between Euodia and Syntyche in 4:2? Since the next verse reflects the language of Deuteronomy 32:5, some turn to the Pentateuch for enlightenment here, suggesting that Paul's readers would think of the complaints of the Israelites in the wilderness. Concrete details about the implications of the these words elude us, but we do presume the complaints and arguments were directed against each other, not against God, since it is unity within the church which Paul addresses throughout Philippians.

2:15 so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God

The words "blameless and pure" (a[mempto" , amemptos , and ajkevraio" , akeraios ) echo Paul's prayer in 1:10. The terms doubtless had primary reference to the problems identified in 1:27-2:4, as well as to the previous verse. Paul had spoken previously of evangelism (1:12-14,15-18,27) and now he attacks the problems within the church that affected their outreach. He describes the world in two ways: as crooked and depraved; and as being in darkness. Children of God, if not blameless in the sense Paul described it, destroy the effectiveness of their main task - holding out the word of life (cf. John 17:20-23).

without fault in a crooked and depraved generation,

Why did Paul adopt the language of Deuteronomy 32:5 ("crooked and depraved" ) to describe the "outside" world? It is possible that the language had no special implications from the Old Testament. Since Deuteronomy describes Israel's transgression, however, and since the language was here applied to the world, perhaps Paul wished to contrast a blameless church with a blameworthy Israel. Was there any implication that Israel's call to impact the world for God had failed? Further, the church now constituted the children of God, and was the true Israel. These suggestions about Israel, however, do not catch up a main theme in the book, though they do bear some relation to what Paul said in 3:2-11.

in which you shine like stars in the universe

"Shine" suggests Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5:14-16 about his followers being the "light of the world." The term for "stars" (fwsth're" , phôstçres ) refers to any light-giving body, and is rendered "lights" and "stars" in different translations. "Stars" is based on usage of the term in the LXX (cf. Dan 12:3). If translated "lights" reference could be to certain literary allusions describing great Israelites as light bearers. Whatever the meaning, the world is to be enlightened by the church, and the church cannot do that if riddled by dissension.

2:16 as you hold out the word of life -

What do God's blameless children do? They "hold out" (or "hold on to") the "word of life." If the translation "hold out" is to be preferred, then the idea of mission and outreach was prominent. But "hold on to" (NIV footnote) is also a possible translation. In that case steadfastness was emphasized (cf. 1:27f). A good case could be made for either meaning, since both steadfastness and evangelism can be documented within the letter. (Cf. the notes on v. 15, as well as 1:6; cf. "stand firm" in 1:27).

in order that I may boast on the day of Christ

Paul returns to a personal reference - the first since 1:6 - in the last of this verse. "Boast" (kauvchma , kauchçma ) was a term Paul used frequently (46 of 50 New Testament references are Pauline). The idea focused more on the reason for boasting than on a boast itself. He had previously given the main motivations that should move them, but he cannot avoid a personal note. He did not intend to gloat, but in his great love for the church he indicated how severe his disappointment should be if that love had been for naught. The "day of Christ" was previously mentioned in 1:6 and 10; and is referred to in different language in 3:20 (see also 2:10f). Paul set their faith in the context of final judgment, which reinforced the seriousness called for in verse 12.

that I did not run or labor for nothing.

Paul used two words for his ministry here. "Run" describes an athlete, an idea picked up in 3:12f. (cf. also Gal 2:2; 1 Cor 9:24-27). "Labor" (kopiavw , kopiaô , "toil, work intensively") may modify "run," indicating the exertion involved, or it may be drawn from his work as a tentmaker. Both show how fully he had exerted himself on the behalf of the Philippians. He had nearly exhausted himself for their sake (cf. Col 1:29; 1 Tim 4:10).

2:17 But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you.

If Paul's boast in verse 16 were misunderstood, here he "subordinates" his work to their "sacrifice and service." In so doing he gives another demonstration of his servant role, of which he had spoken in 1:25f, and which further carries the point made by the Christ hymn. His concern for their salvation was so intense that he found joy in whatever he had done to enhance it. He was the "man for them." This was the positive side, set in opposition to "for nothing" in verse 16.

The term for "poured out" (spevndomai , spendomai ) is found as well in 2 Tim 4:6, where Paul contemplated his death. It is commonly believed the same meaning is found here. In verse 24 Paul speaks of hope for release, and in view of that we think the reference to death here describes the intensity of his dedication, not a possible death penalty from prison. He not only ran and labored, but he would die ("but even if"). Were he to be judicially executed that would be no benefit to the Philippians' "sacrifice and service," but his intense dedication would benefit them.

A drink offering would accompany a sacrifice, being poured atop it or at the foot of the altar (cf. 2 Kings 16:13; Jer 7:18; Hos 9:4). So whatever Paul endured for their sake completed their faith, as the libation completed the sacrifice. "Sacrifice and service" compliments the readers. Paul skillfully urged them to greater holiness by alternating compliment and command. "You are good, but you must be better." A libation was not significant if made alone, and Paul's work for them would lose its purpose if they did not continue to grow in obedience.

2:18 So you too should be glad and rejoice with me.

"Rejoice with" indicates either their joy in service, or joy over Paul's concern for them, or both. The first option seems most likely, since verse eighteen may be a call from Paul to rejoice in his work for them.

Some suggest the rejoicing of the Philippians in verse 17 was because of something different from that in which they were bidden to rejoice in verse 18. If so, we can only conjecture what it might have been. Perhaps, as suggested above, they and Paul found joy in their service, and now he called them to rejoice with him in his work as well. It is at points like this, however, that we should beware of being overly subtle in our interpretations.

IV. PAUL'S CO-WORKERS (2:19-30)

A. REGARDING TIMOTHY (2:19-24)

¹⁹ I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, that I also may be cheered when I receive news about you. ²⁰ I have no one else like him, who takes a genuine interest in your welfare. ²¹ For everyone looks out for his own interests, not those of Jesus Christ. ²² But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel. ²³ I hope, therefore, to send him as soon as I see how things go with me. ²⁴ And I am confident in the Lord that I myself will come soon.

Paul has referred to himself in verses 12-18. The next main personal section of this letter begins here and extends through 3:14. These biographical details, valuable to us for the detail about Paul, were not simply informational. Paul also used them for exhortation. In this passage about Timothy the basic information can be derived from verses 19, 23, and 24. Verses 20-22 compliment Timothy, but also further Paul's case for humility and service to others - a case already made in the Christ hymn (2:5-11) and by Paul's example (1:24-26; 2:17f). In the subsequent paragraph, dealing with Epaphroditus, Paul augments the basic information by noting Epaphroditus's humility and service (vv. 25,29f). Thus these two paragraphs, which some dismiss as insignificant personal data, are freighted with considerable hortatory significance.

This is the case, in fact, with all of the "personal" sections in Philippians, and may explain why Paul intersperses such material throughout the letter, rather than saving it to the end, as he sometimes does (cf. Romans, Colossians).

2:19 I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon,

Paul hopes (ejlpivzw , elpizô ) to send Timothy (cf. 1:1), and in verse 24 he is confident (a different Greek word, pevpoiqa , pepoitha [from peivqw , peithô , "persuade"]) he would come himself. Both statements place the events "in the Lord." The statement was not essential to the information, so why did Paul make it? Perhaps it was an affirmation of his faith that all plans of life are in God's hands, and thus he yielded to the divine purposes ("if the Lord wills"). He may have wished to avoid seeming to plan his plans apart from reliance on Christ. This would be especially true with the more tenuous possibility of his release implied by verse 24.

that I also may be cheered when I receive news about you.

Timothy was to be sent, apparently, to gather news about the Philippians and then return with it to Paul. We presume that in addition to personal information Paul would be greatly concerned that the problems of the church he addressed in the letter had been resolved. Very likely Timothy could be expected to contribute to such resolution, and perhaps to encourage the church in other ways. This seems implied by Paul's reference to Timothy's "genuine interest" in their welfare (v. 20). Further, Timothy could bring news to them of any further developments in Paul's case since they had received his letter. On other missions of Timothy for Paul see 1 Thessalonians 3:1-5; 1 Corinthians 4:17; 16:10; and cf. Acts 17:14f; 19:22.

"Cheered" is from a Greek word (eujyucevw , eupsychço ) that was often found on graves as a final wish for the dead. This is its only use in the New Testament.

2:20 I have no one else like him,

Timothy was with Paul when the church began in Philippi, and paid later visits to the city (Acts 19:21f; 20:3-6). His firsthand knowledge would at least partly account for his "genuine interest." This may be the significance of "no one else like him," i. e., no one else knows the church as he does. Yet we must keep in mind the words of verse 21.

who takes a genuine interest in your welfare.

"Take interest" (merimnavw , merimnaô ) is the same term translated "be anxious" in 4:6. Obviously the meaning can be positive, as here, or negative, depending on context. The word is a strong one, implying that Timothy's concern bore heavily upon him.

2:21 For everyone looks out for his own interests, not those of Jesus Christ.

It is tempting to link these words with 2:3,4, which exhorted concern for the interests of others (cf. also the negative example of 1:15-17). If we make the connection it would seem Paul was criticizing those around him for failing to display the virtues he was urging. The problem was both in his locale and in Philippi.

Paul may have been scoring selfishness here, but a case can be made for a less harsh reading of the text. Some of those around Paul had been complimented for their evangelism (1:14). If Paul were in Rome, we know from Col 4:10,14 and Phlm 24 that he was accompanied by Aristarchus, Luke, Mark and others (unless some had departed by the time Philippians was written). Surely they would not be criticized for selfishness. On the basis of this evidence, it is held by some that of those "qualified" (knowing the church and having a personal concern) to go (a formidable mission) only Timothy was a possibility. Or that others had other work, not necessarily unworthy, that occupied them. We do not have sufficient information to determine the exact force of Paul's words. It may be some could not go for legitimate reasons, and others would not go because of a lack of real concern. We need not assume all of those who looked out for their own interests were of the same stripe. Yet in the final analysis "not those of Jesus Christ" seems decisively uncomplimentary, though the things of Jesus Christ would be primarily the needs of the church in Philippi, not the entire Christian life.

2:22 But you know that Timothy has proved himself,

If verse 21 were meant as a criticism, Paul did not elaborate, but returns to discuss Timothy. Their knowledge of him would be based, at least partly, on his earlier presence with them (cf. Acts 19:21f; 20:3-6). Why did Paul find it necessary to commend Timothy here? Was it just Christian appreciation for a faithful servant? Could the Philippians have previously seen Timothy as "second fiddle" to Paul, and the apostle wished to ensure they would see him as more than a subordinate? We prefer this latter alternative.

because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.

Paul uses two images to indicate Timothy's worth. First, "father" and "son" indicate the family and the closeness of those bonds (see 1 Cor 4:17; 1 Tim 1:2). Second, "served" (from douleuvw , douleuô ) is from the same root as the word for "slave," so Timothy's slavery to God showed his dedication (cf. 1:1). "With me" indicates Paul did not consider Timothy his slave, but God's slave.

2:23 I hope, therefore, to send him as soon as I see how things go with me.

These words modify "soon" of verse 19. But what is implied by "things go with me?" A natural assumption would be that Paul's trial was the issue, though he expresses confidence in verse 24. Others hold that Paul had other things in mind, perhaps personal needs or concerns for the church. We must recall that Paul at this time was probably in his seventh or eighth decade of life, with physical problems, and might need assistance a younger man could forego. Further, he needed someone to do what he in prison was not free to do. Apparently his concerns did not fall in the same category as those of the ones who looked out for their own interests, in verse 21.

Whatever his concern, Paul expected it to be dealt with before long, and Timothy to be sent on his way.

2:24 And I am confident in the Lord that I myself will come soon.

We have previously discussed (1:18b-26) the question of Paul's expectations of release. He has indicated his yearning for them in 1:8, and has referred to the possibility of coming in 1:26f and 2:12. This is his most optimistic statement yet in the letter and is the last statement on the subject. Whatever his case, he placed it in the Lord's hands. But we suspect he had some indication or strong suspicion of good news. But even if he should not come, Timothy would offer the church the ministry Paul wished them to have.

The word tacevw" (tachços ) translated "soon" is literally "immediately," but the term is qualified by the implied situation after Timothy's trip to Philippi and return to Paul. The language may be used to emphasize that they need not wait long for Timothy to arrive.

B. REGARDING EPAPHRODITUS (2:25-30)

²⁵ But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus, my brother, fellow worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger, whom you sent to take care of my needs. ²⁶ For he longs for all of you and is distressed because you heard he was ill. ²⁷ Indeed he was ill, and almost died. But God had mercy on him, and not on him only but also on me, to spare me sorrow upon sorrow. ²⁸ Therefore I am all the more eager to send him, so that when you see him again you may be glad and I may have less anxiety. ²⁹ Welcome him in the Lord with great joy, and honor men like him, ³⁰ because he almost died for the work of Christ, risking his life to make up for the help you could not give me.

Now Epaphroditus is introduced. All we know of him is drawn from this paragraph and from 4:18. His name, a common one, is similar to Aphrodite, and means "lovely, charming, amicable." Some suggest, because of the similarity with Aphrodite, that he was a Gentile convert from a family which worshiped that goddess.

Paul continues his call to humility and service by presenting another example of such commitment. He compliments Epaphroditus five ways in verse 25, and then speaks further of his dedication in verses 29 and 30. A person who risked his life offered a strong contrast to those who were selfish and conceited, and who selfishly pursued their own interests, heedless of others (cf. 2:3f).

Though it is not stated specifically some scholars have assumed that it was the intent of Epaphroditus and of the Philippian church for him to be Paul's permanent helper. That plan was thwarted, however, by his sickness, and then by his subsequent and severe homesickness. We agree with this conjecture and with the view that Paul here was dealing with a delicate matter. Thus he gave generous commendation and comment on Epaphroditus's situation so that he would be received home with honor, rather than with criticism.

It is generally believed that Epaphroditus bore this letter to the Philippians. It is also possible, although less likely, that the letter was sent first by an unknown messenger, and that Epaphroditus came later. On the first view we see in verses 19-30 a threefold "mission" to Philippi. First Epaphroditus, then Timothy, and finally Paul. This speaks strongly of the apostle's great love and concern for this church.

2:25 But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus,

"Send back" is in a form indicating complete action. Paul spoke from the viewpoint of the readers, to whom the return was an accomplished fact. "Back" is not in the Greek, so no assumption should be made from the English text that Paul had previously planned for Epaphroditus to return.

my brother, fellow worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger,

Epaphroditus is described in three ways that indicate his relation to Paul (cf. the words about Timothy in 1:22) and in two that indicate his relation to the church. "Fellow worker" (sunergovn , synergon ) is a Pauline expression (12 of 13 New Testament references). The obvious reference was to efforts with Paul in the latter's imprisonment. Perhaps Paul also had in mind previous joint efforts in Philippi itself. "Fellow soldier" (sustratiw'th" , systratiôtçs ) may imply conflict and even suffering. "Messenger" (ajpovstolo" , apostolos ) is literally "one sent" - the same word as "apostle." Compare a similar use of the term in 2 Corinthians 8:23. Though commonly used only of the twelve the term had broader senses and was therefore also used to describe others in the New Testament who were engaged in various missions. "Minister" translates a term the Jews applied to the priesthood. In that sense it may relate to the description of the gift Epaphroditus brought to Paul as a "sacrifice" (4:18).

whom you sent to take care of my needs.

The "needs" will be described more fully in 4:10-18, though if Epaphroditus was sent as a permanent minister/ assistant for Paul, they could be even broader than that text indicates.

2:26 For he longs for all of you and is distressed because you heard he was ill.

Philippians is full of expressions of strong affection of Christians for each other (cf. 1:7f,25f; 4:1) and the relation between Epaphroditus and the Philippian church was a case in point.

The illness of Epaphroditus would be the subject of the following verses. But the present verse could be understood as implying homesickness. If that were true, and since Paul knew of it, it might have been a pressure on him in addition to the anxiety (v. 28) he felt regarding Epaphroditus's physical health. "All of you," as with "all" in 1:1,4, may depict Epaphroditus as a man who was above the Philippian divisions. That may have been a further reason Paul sent him home - to help heal the breaches in the church.

Word of Epaphroditus's illness had reached Philippi, and then word of their concern had come back to Paul and Epaphroditus. This could imply an illness of considerable length, or that it had been some time since Epaphroditus had recovered. "Distressed" (ajdhmonevw , adçmonço ) is the same term used of Jesus' agony in Gethsemane. Epaphroditus was concerned about their concern. As for the illness itself, which was extremely serious (vv. 27,30), it may have been contracted on his journey to Paul, or during his stay with him. Some suggest he became sick on the journey, but pressed on heedless of his condition, which only worsened his state.

2:27 Indeed he was ill, and almost died.

Paul may have mentioned Epaphroditus's brush with death (literally "a near neighbor to death") because the Philippians were not aware of just how serious the case was. These words prepare for the praise of Epaphroditus in verse 30, in which a powerful exhortation to sacrificial service is implied.

But God had mercy on him, and not on him only but also on me, to spare me sorrow upon sorrow.

Epaphroditus's healing is attributed to God's mercy. The exact implications of this (miracle?) cannot be determined, but the text is another example of Paul's remarkable God- and Christ-centeredness (cf. 1:19,24,29). Had Epaphroditus died, which apparently had seemed quite possible, Paul's sorrow at his own incarceration would have borne the additional burden of grief at his friend's death (sorrow upon sorrow).

2:28 Therefore I am all the more eager to send him, so that when you see him again you may be glad and I may have less anxiety.

Because of the mutual feeling of Epaphroditus and the church for one another, and for Paul's own relief, Paul was "more eager." This and the next two verses could easily be understood to conceal some anxiety felt by Paul regarding the reception of Epaphroditus (cf. the discussion prior to v. 25). Thus he made his case as strongly as he did. Epaphroditus's return would produce a joy beyond the news he was well. "Less anxiety" (ajlupovtero" , alypoteros ) is from the same root as "sorrow" in verse 27.

2:29 Welcome him in the Lord with great joy, and honor men like him,

"In the Lord" picks up the words of verses 19 and 24. Paul may mean "welcome him as Christians should," manifesting the spirit of humility and service. "Honor" will be explained in the next verse. We presume there would be a welcome in any event, but Epaphroditus's dedication deserved special consideration. Note the joy language in this and the preceding verse. On joy see the notes at 1:4.

2:30 because he almost died for the work of Christ,

This verse is the climax of the passage, adding the final important details to Paul's praise of Epaphroditus and offering a word of inspiration to the readers. Not only did Epaphroditus do Christ's work as a bringer of the gift of love, but he also demonstrated the self-renouncing spirit so powerfully shown by Christ.

risking his life

No previous usage of the word translated "risked" (paraboleuvw , paraboleuô ) has been discovered in any Greek text. One suggestion is that Paul employed a play on a gambling term. Epaphroditus risked for Christ's work, and won, because God had mercy. He did not let danger or hardship deter him from the task. It is even possible that the term may have implied some difficulties beyond the illness of Epaphroditus.

to make up for the help you could not give me.

Regarding the "help" (leitourgiva , leitourgia , the same Greek term as "take care" in v. 25) which had not been given, see 4:10,14,18. No criticism was implied in Paul's words. One has the sense of a messenger, commissioned with a great responsibility of love, determined to complete his mission, whatever the cost.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Phi 2:6

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-7 —If Christ emptied Himself of deity while on earth, then how could He be God?

PROBLEM: Paul seems to say that Jesus “emptied Himself” of His deity or “equality with God” (vv. 6-7 ), becoming “a man” (v. 8 ). But elsewhere Jesus claimed to be God on earth ( John 8:58 ; 20:28 ). But how could Jesus be God while on earth if He left His deity aside to become man?

SOLUTION: Jesus did not cease being God while on earth. Rather, in addition to being God, He also became man. His incarnation was not the subtraction of deity, but the addition of humanity. Several things in this text support this position. First, it does not say Christ gave up or emptied Himself of His deity, but merely of His rights as deity, assuming the “form of a servant” (v. 7 ) so as to be an example for us (v. 5 ). Second, the text declares that He was in the “form of God” or “in very nature God” (v. 6 , NIV ). Just as the “form of a servant” (v. 7 ) is a servant by nature, so the “form of God” (v. 6 ) is God by nature. Third, this very passage declares that every knee will one day confess Jesus is “Lord,” a citation from Isaiah 45:23 that refers to Yahweh, a name used exclusively of God.   

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Philippians (Book Introduction)

The Epistle to the Philippians

From Rome About a.d. 61

By Way of Introduction

There is something to be said for the idea that Paul wrote the Epistle to the Philippians while a prisoner in Ephesus if he ever was a prisoner there. All that can be said for that view has been presented by Professor George S. Duncan in St. Paul’s Ephesian Ministry (1930). But, when all is considered carefully in the light of the facts in the Acts and the Epistles, the best that one can say is that a possible case is made out with many difficulties remaining unexplained. The argument is more ingenious than convincing. It is not possible here to review the arguments pro and con that convince me that Paul was in Rome when he wrote this letter to Philippi. It is not clear whether it was written before the three that went together (Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) or afterwards. Probably there was no great difference in time, but there was time for Epaphroditus to come to Rome, to fall sick, for the news to reach Philippi and for Epaphroditus to hear of their concern about him. The church in Philippi was Paul’s joy and pride and they had helped him before as they did this time.

The Epistle is a beautiful expression of gratitude for the love and gifts of the Philippian saints. He is a prisoner of hope in Rome with possible death before him, but with the note of joy running through all that Paul says. He hopes to be set free and to see them again.

Meanwhile he tells the Philippians about the difficulties and triumphs in Rome. The Judaizers have followed Paul here and there is an echo in chapters Philippians 1; 3 of their opposition. But Paul rises to full stature in the great Christological passages in chapters Philippians 2; 3 which prepare the way for the controversy with the Gnostics over the Person of Christ in Colossians and Ephesians.

JFB: Philippians (Book Introduction)

The INTERNAL EVIDENCE for the authenticity of this Epistle is strong. The style, manner of thought, and doctrine, accord with Paul's. The incidental allusions also establish his authorship. PALEY [Horæ Paulinæ, ch. 7] instances the mention of the object of Epaphroditus' journey to Rome, the Philippian contribution to Paul's wants, Epaphroditus' sickness (Phi 1:7; Phi 2:25-30; Phi 4:10-18), the fact that Timothy had been long with Paul at Philippi (Phi 1:1; Phi 2:19), the reference to his being a prisoner at Rome now for a long time (Phi 1:12-14; Phi 2:17-28), his willingness to die (compare Phi 1:23, with 2Co 5:8), the reference to the Philippians having seen his maltreatment at Philippi (Phi 1:29-30; Phi 2:1-2).

The EXTERNAL EVIDENCE is equally decisive: POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 3; 11]; IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 4.18.4]; CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [The Instructor, 1.1, p. 107]; EUSEBIUS [The Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne, in Ecclesiastical History, 5. 2]; TERTULLIAN [On the Resurrection of the Flesh, 23]; ORIGEN [Against Celsus, 1.3, p. 122]; CYPRIAN [Testimonies against the Jews, 3.39].

Philippi was the first (that is, the farthest from Rome, and first which met Paul in entering Macedonia) Macedonian city of the district, called Macedonia Prima (so called as lying farthest eastward). The Greek (Act 16:12) should not be translated "the chief city," as English Version, but as above [ALFORD]. Not it, but Thessalonica, was the chief city of the province, and Amphipolis, of the district called Macedonia Prima. It was a Roman "colony" (Act 16:12), made so by Augustus, to commemorate his famous victory over Brutus and Cassius. A colony was in fact a portion of Rome itself transplanted to the provinces, an offshoot from Rome, and as it were a portrait of the mother city on a small scale [AULUS GELLIUS, Attic Nights, 16.13]. Its inhabitants were Roman citizens, having the right of voting in the Roman tribes, governed by their own senate and magistrates, and not by the governor of the province, with the Roman law and Latin language.

Paul, with Silas and Timothy, planted the Gospel there (Act 16:12, &c.), in his second missionary journey, A.D. 51. Doubtless he visited it again on his journey from Ephesus into Macedonia (Act 20:1); and Act 20:3, Act 20:6, expressly mentions his third visit on his return from Greece (Corinth) to Syria by way of Macedonia. His sufferings at Philippi (Act 16:19, &c.) strengthened the Christian bond of union between him and his Philippian converts, who also, like him, were exposed to trials for the Gospel's sake (1Th 2:2). They alone sent supplies for his temporal wants, twice shortly after he had left them (Phi 4:15-16), and again a third time shortly before writing this Epistle (Phi 4:10, Phi 4:18; 2Co 11:9). This fervent attachment on their part was, perhaps, also in part due to the fact that few Jews were in Philippi, as in other scenes of his labors, to sow the seeds of distrust and suspicion. There was no synagogue, but merely a Jewish Proseucha, or oratory, by the riverside. So that there only do we read of his meeting no opposition from Jews, but only from the masters of the divining damsel, whose gains had been put an end to by her being dispossessed.

Though the Philippian Church was as yet free from Judaizing influence, yet it needed to be forewarned of that danger which might at any time assail it from without (Phi 3:2); even as such evil influences had crept into the Galatian churches. In Phi 4:2-3 we find a trace of the fact recorded in the history (Act 16:13-14), that female converts were among the first to receive the Gospel at Philippi.

As to the state of the Church, we gather from 2Co 8:1-2 that its members were poor, yet most liberal; and from Phi 1:28-30, that they were undergoing persecution. The only blemish referred to in their character was, on the part of some members, a tendency to dissension. Hence arise his admonitions against disputings (Phi 1:27; Phi 2:1-4, Phi 2:12, Phi 2:14; Phi 4:2).

The OBJECT of the Epistle is general: not only to thank the Philippians for their contribution sent by Epaphroditus, who was now in returning to take back the apostle's letter, but to express his Christian love and sympathy, and to exhort them to a life consonant with that of Christ, and to warn them against existing dissensions and future possible assaults of Judaizers from without. It is remarkable in this Epistle alone, as compared with the others, that, amidst many commendations, there are no express censures of those to whom it is addressed. No doctrinal error, or schism, has as yet sprung up; the only blemish hinted at is, that some of the Philippian Church were somewhat wanting in lowliness of mind, the result of which want was disputation. Two women, Euodias and Syntyche, are mentioned as having erred in this respect (Phi 4:2-3). The Epistle may be divided into three parts: (1) Affectionate address to the Philippians; reference to his own state as a prisoner at Rome, and to theirs, and to his mission of Epaphroditus to them (the first and second chapters). Epaphroditus probably held a leading office in the Philippian Church, perhaps as a presbyter. After Tychicus and Onesimus had departed (A.D. 62), carrying the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, Paul was cheered in his imprisonment by the arrival of Epaphroditus with the Philippian contribution. That faithful "brother, companion in labor, and fellow soldier" (Phi 2:25), had brought on himself by the fatigues of the journey a dangerous sickness (Phi 2:26, Phi 2:30). But now that he was recovered, he "longed" (Phi 2:26) to return to his Philippian flock, and in person to relieve their anxiety on his behalf, in respect to his sickness; and the apostle gladly availed himself of the opportunity of writing to them a letter of grateful acknowledgments and Christian exhortations. (2) Caution against Judaizing teachers, supported by reference to his own former and present feeling towards Jewish legalism (Phi. 3:1-21). (3) Admonitions to individuals, and to the Church in general, thanks for their seasonable aid, and concluding benedictions and salutations (Phi. 4:1-23).

This Epistle was written from Rome during the imprisonment, the beginning of which is related in Act 28:16, Act 28:20, Act 28:30-31. The reference to "Cæsar's household" (Phi 4:22), and to the "palace" (Phi 1:13, Greek, "Prætorium," probably, the barrack of the Prætorian bodyguard, attached to the palace of Nero) confirms this. It must have been during his first imprisonment at Rome, for the mention of the Prætorium agrees with the fact that it was during his first imprisonment he was in the custody of the Prætorian Prefect, and his situation, described in Phi 1:12-14, agrees with his situation in the first two years of his imprisonment (Act 28:30-31). The following reasons show, moreover, that it was written towards the close of that imprisonment: (1) He, in it, expresses his expectation of the immediate decision of his cause (Phi 2:23). (2) Enough time had elapsed for the Philippians to hear of his imprisonment, to send Epaphroditus to him, to hear of Epaphroditus' arrival and sickness, and send back word to Rome of their distress (Phi 2:26). (3) It must have been written after the three other Epistles sent from Rome, namely, Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon; for Luke is no longer with him (Phi 2:20); otherwise he would have been specified as saluting them, having formerly labored among them, whereas he is mentioned as with him, Col 4:14; Phm 1:24. Again, in Eph 6:19-20, his freedom to preach is implied: but in Phi 1:13-18, his bondage is dwelt on, and it is implied that, not himself, but others, preached, and made his imprisonment known. Again, in Phm 1:22, he confidently anticipates his release, which contrasts with the more depressed anticipations of this Epistle. (4) A considerable time had elapsed since the beginning of his imprisonment, for "his bonds" to have become so widely known, and to have produced such good effects for the Gospel (Phi 1:13). (5) There is evidently an increase in the rigor of his imprisonment implied now, as compared with the early stage of it, as described in Acts 28:1-31; compare Phi 1:29-30; Phi 2:27. History furnishes a probable clue to account for this increase of vigor. In the second year of Paul's imprisonment (A.D. 62), Burrus, the Prætorian Prefect, to whose custody he had been committed (Act 28:16, "the captain of the guard"), died; and Nero the emperor having divorced Octavia, and married Poppoea, a Jewish proselytess (who then caused her rival, Octavia, to be murdered, and gloated over the head of her victim), exalted Tigellinus, the chief promoter of the marriage, a monster of wickedness, to the Prætorian Prefecture. It was then he seems to have been removed from his own house into the Prætorium, or barrack of the Prætorian guards, attached to the palace, for stricter custody; and hence he writes with less hopeful anticipations as to the result of his trial (Phi 2:17; Phi 3:11). Some of the Prætorian guards who had the custody of him before, would then naturally make known his "bonds," in accordance with Phi 1:13; from the smaller Prætorian bodyguard at the palace the report would spread to the general permanent Prætorian camp, which Tiberius had established north of the city, outside of the walls. He had arrived in Rome, February, 61; the "two whole years (Act 20:30) in his own hired house" ended February, 63, so that the date of this Epistle, written shortly after, evidently while the danger was imminent, would be about spring or summer, 63. The providence of God averted the danger. He probably was thought beneath the notice of Tigellinus, who was more intent on court intrigues. The death of Nero's favorite, Pallas, the brother of Felix, this same year, also took out of the way another source of danger.

The STYLE is abrupt and discontinuous, his fervor of affection leading him to pass rapidly from one theme to another (Phi 2:18, Phi 2:19-24, Phi 2:25-30; Phi 3:1, Phi 3:2-3, Phi 3:4-14, Phi 3:15). In no Epistle does he use so warm expressions of love. In Phi 4:1 he seems at a loss for words sufficient to express all the extent and ardor of his affection for the Philippians: "My brethren dearly beloved and longed for, my joy and crown, so stand fast in the Lord, my dearly beloved." The mention of bishops and deacons in Phi 1:1 is due to the late date of the Epistle, at a time when the Church had begun to assume that order which is laid down in the Pastoral Epistles, and which continued the prevalent one in the first and purest age of the Church.

JFB: Philippians (Outline)

• INSCRIPTION. THANKSGIVING AND PRAYERS FOR THE FLOURISHING SPIRITUAL STATE OF THE PHILIPPIANS. HIS OWN STATE AT ROME, AND THE RESULT OF HIS IMPRISONMENT IN SPREADING THE GOSPEL. EXHORTATION TO CHRISTIAN CONSISTENCY. (Phi. 1:1-30)
• CONTINUED EXHORTATION: TO UNITY: TO HUMILITY AFTER CHRIST'S EXAMPLE, WHOSE GLORY FOLLOWED HIS HUMILIATION: TO EARNESTNESS IN SEEKING PERFECTION, THAT THEY MAY BE HIS JOY IN THE DAY OF CHRIST: HIS JOYFUL READINESS TO BE OFFERED NOW BY DEATH, SO AS TO PROMOTE THEIR FAITH. HIS INTENTION TO SEND TIMOTHY: HIS SENDING EPAPHRODITUS MEANTIME. (Phi. 2:1-30) The "therefore" implies that he is here expanding on the exhortation (Phi 1:27), "In one Spirit, with one mind (soul)." He urges four influencing motives in this verse, to inculcate the four Christian duties corresponding respectively to them (Phi 2:2). "That ye be like-minded, having the same love, of one accord, of one mind"; (1) "If there be (with you) any consolation in Christ," that is, any consolation of which Christ is the source, leading you to wish to console me in my afflictions borne for Christ's sake, ye owe it to me to grant my request "that ye be like-minded" [CHRYSOSTOM and ESTIUS]: (2) "If there be any comfort of (that is, flowing from) love," the adjunct of "consolation in Christ"; (3) "If any fellowship of (communion together as Christians, flowing from joint participation in) the Spirit" (2Co 13:14). As Pagans meant literally those who were of one village, and drank of one fountain, how much greater is the union which conjoins those who drink of the same Spirit! (1Co 12:4, 1Co 12:13) [GROTIUS]: (4) "If any bowels (tender emotions) and mercies (compassions)," the adjuncts of "fellowship of the Spirit." The opposites of the two pairs, into which the four fall, are reprobated, Phi 2:3-4.
• WARNING AGAINST JUDAIZERS: HE HAS GREATER CAUSE THAN THEY TO TRUST IN LEGAL RIGHTEOUSNESS, BUT RENOUNCED IT FOR CHRIST'S RIGHTEOUSNESS, IN WHICH HE PRESSES AFTER PERFECTION: WARNING AGAINST CARNAL PERSONS: CONTRAST OF THE BELIEVER'S LIFE AND HOPE. (Phi. 3:1-21)
• EXHORTATIONS: THANKS FOR THE SUPPLY FROM PHILIPPI: GREETING; AND CLOSING BENEDICTION. (Phi. 4:1-23) "Wherefore"; since we have such a glorious hope (Phi 3:20-21).

TSK: Philippians (Book Introduction)

The Church at Philippi in Macedonia was planted by the Apostle Paul about ad 53 (Acts 16:9-40); and it appears he visited them again, ad 60, though no particulars are recorded concerning that visit (Act 20:6). The Philippians were greatly attached to St. Paul, and testified their affection by sending him supplies, even when labouring for other churches (Phi 4:15, Phi 4:16; 2Co 11:9); and when they heard that he was under confinement at Rome, they sent Epaphroditus, one of their pastors, to him with a present, lest he should want necessaries during his imprisonment (Phi 2:25; Phi 4:10, Phi 4:14-18). The more immediate occasion of the Epistle was the return of Epaphroditus, by whom the apostle sent it as a grateful acknowledgment of their kindness; which occurred towards the close of his first imprisonment, about the end of ad 62, or the commencement of 63.

TSK: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Phi 2:1, Paul exhorts them to unity, and to all humbleness of mind, by the example of Christ’s humility and exaltation; Phi 2:12, to a careful proceeding in the way of salvation, that they be as lights to the wicked world, Phi 2:16. and comforts to him their apostle, who is now ready to be offered up to God; Phi 2:19, He hopes to send Timothy to them, and Epaphroditus also.

Poole: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 2

MHCC: Philippians (Book Introduction)

The Philippians felt a very deep interest for the apostle. The scope of the epistle is to confirm them in the faith, to encourage them to walk as becomes the gospel of Christ, to caution them against judaizing teachers, and to express gratitude for their Christian bounty. This epistle is the only one, among those written by St. Paul, in which no censures are implied or expressed. Full commendation and confidence are in every part, and the Philippians are addressed with a peculiar affection, which every serious reader will perceive.

MHCC: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(Phi 2:1-4) Exhortations to a kind, humble spirit and behaviour.

(Phi 2:5-11) The example of Christ.

(Phi 2:12-18) Diligence in the affairs of salvation, and to be examples to the world.

(Phi 2:19-30) The apostle's purpose of visiting Philippi.

Matthew Henry: Philippians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians

Philippi was a chief city of the western part of Macedonia, prōtē tēs Makedonias polis , Act 16:12. It took its name from Philip, the famous king of Macedon, who repaired and beautified it, and it was afterwards made a Roman colony. Near this place were the Campi Philippici, remarkable for the famous battles between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great, and that between Augustus and Antony on one side and Cassius and Brutus on the other. But it is most remarkable among Christians for this epistle, which was written when Paul was a prisoner at Rome, a.d. 62. Paul seems to have had a very particular kindness for the church at Philippi, which he himself had been instrumental in planting; and, though he had the care of all the churches, he had, upon that account, a particular fatherly tender care of this. To those to whom God has employed us to do any good we should look upon ourselves both as encouraged and engaged to study to do more good. He looked upon them as his children, and, having begotten them by the gospel, he was desirous by the same gospel to nourish and nurse them up. I. He was called in an extraordinary manner to preach the gospel at Philippi, Act 16:9. A vision appeared to Paul in the night: There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us. He saw God going before him, and was encouraged to use all means for carrying on the good work which was begun among them, and building upon the foundation which was laid. II. At Philippi he suffered hard things; he was scourged, and put into the stocks (Act 16:23, Act 16:24); yet he had not the less kindness for the place for the hard usage he met with there. We must never love our friends the less for the ill treatment which our enemies give us. III. The beginnings of that church were very small; Lydia was converted there, and the jailer, and a few more: yet that did not discourage him. If good be not done at first, it may be done afterwards, and the last works may be more abundant. We must not be discouraged by small beginnings. IV. It seems, by many passages in this epistle, that this church at Philippi grew into a flourishing church, and particularly that the brethren were very kind to Paul. He had reaped of their temporal things, and he made a return in spiritual things. He acknowledges the receipt of a present they had sent him (Phi 4:18), and this when no other church communicated with him as concerning giving and receiving (Phi 4:15); and he gives them a prophet's, an apostle's reward, in this epistle, which is of more value than thousands of gold and silver.

Matthew Henry: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle proceeds to further exhortations to several duties, to be like-minded, and lowly-minded, which he presses from the example of Christ (Phi 2:1-11), to be diligent and serious in the Christian course (Phi 2:12, Phi 2:13), and to adorn their Christian profession by several suitable graces (Phi 2:14-18). He then concludes with particular notice and commendation of two good ministers, Timothy and Epaphroditus, whom he designed to send to them (Phi 2:19-30).

Barclay: Philippians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227). It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church, and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time, there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to let

me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly, that

I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and because

of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give Capito my

heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and my friends.

I sent you a little picture of myself painted by Euctemon. My

military name is Antonius Maximus. I pray for your good health.

Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and Turbo,

Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri,

36.)

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who would Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col_1:1-2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added Ws own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end). In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me." (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 .)

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

THE LETTER TO THE PHILIPPIANS

Introduction To The Letter To The Philippians

We are fortunate in one thing in our study of Philippians--there are practically no critical problems involved; for no reputable New Testament critic has ever doubted its genuineness. We can accept Philippians as undoubtedly an authentic letter of Paul.

Philippi

When Paul chose a place wherein to preach the gospel, he always did so with the eye of a strategist. He always chose one which was not only important in itself but was also the key point of a whole area. To this day many of Paulpreaching-centres are still great road centres and railway junctions. Such was Philippi which had at least three great claims to distinction.

(i) In the neighbourhood there were gold and silver mines, which had been worked as far back as the time of the Phoenicians. It is true that by the time of the Christian era they had become exhausted, but they had made Philippi a great commercial centre of the ancient world.

(ii) The city had been founded by Philip, father of Alexander the Great, and it is his name that it bears. It was founded on the site of an ancient city called Krenides, a name which means The Wells or Fountains. Philip had founded Philippi in 368 B.C. because there was no more strategic site in all Europe. There is a range of hills which divides Europe from Asia, east from west and just at Philippi that chain of hills dips into a pass so that the city commanded the road from Europe to Asia, since the road must go through the pass. This was the reason that one of the great battles of history was fought at Philippi; for it was here that Antony defeated Brutus and Cassius, and thereby decided the future of the Roman Empire.

(iii) Not very long after, Philippi attained the dignity of a Roman Colony. The Roman Colonies were amazing institutions. They were not colonies in the sense of being outposts of civilization in unexplored parts of the world. They had begun by having a military significance. It was the custom of Rome to send out parties of veteran soldiers, who had served their time and been granted citizenship, to settle in strategic road centres. Usually these parties consisted of three hundred veterans with their wives and children. These colonies were the focal points of the great Roman road systems which were so engineered that reinforcements could speedily be sent from one colony to another. They were founded to keep the peace and to command the strategic centres in Romefar-flung Empire. At first they had been founded in Italy; but soon they were scattered throughout the whole Empire, as the Empire grew. In later days the title of colony was given by the government to any city which it wished to honour for faithful service.

Wherever they were, these colonies were little fragments of Rome and their pride in their Roman citizenship was their dominating characteristic. The Roman language was spoken; Roman dress was worn; Roman customs were observed; their magistrates had Roman titles, and carried out the am ceremonies as were carried out in Rome itself. They were stubbornly and unalterably Roman and would never have dreamt of becoming assimilated to the people amidst whom they wert set. We can hear the Roman pride breathing through the charge against Paul and Silas in Ac 16:20-21: "These men are Jews, and they are trying to teach and to introduce laws and customs which it is not right for us to observe--for we are Romans."

"You are a colony of heaven" (King James Version), Paul wrote to the Philippian Church (Phi_3:20 ). Just as the Roman colonist never forgot in any environment that he was a Roman, so they must never forget in any society that they were Christians. Nowhere were men prouder of being Roman citizens than in these colonies; and such was Philippi.

Paul And Philippi

It was on the second missionary journey, about the year A.D. 52, that Paul first came to Philippi. Urged on by the vision of the man of Macedonia with his appeal to come over and help us, Paul had sailed from Alexandrian Troas in Asia Minor. He had landed at Neapolis in Europe, and thence made his way to Philippi.

The story of Paulstay in Philippi is told in Ac 16 ; and an interesting story it is. It centres round three people--Lydia, the seller of purple; the demented slave-girl, used by her masters to tell fortunes; and the Roman jailor. It is an extraordinary cross-section of ancient life. These three people were of different nationalities. Lydia was an Asiatic, and her name may well be not a proper name at all but simply "the Lydian lady." The slave-girl was a native Greek. The jailor was a Roman citizen. The whole Empire was being gathered into the Christian Church. But not only were these three of different nationalities; they came from very different grades of society. Lydia was a dealer in purple, one of the most costly substances in the ancient world, and was the equivalent of a merchant prince. The girl was a slave, and, therefore, in the eyes of the law not a person at all, but a living tool. The jailor was a Roman citizen, member of the sturdy Roman middle-class from which the civil service was drawn. In these three the top, the bottom and middle of society are all represented. No chapter in the Bible shows so well the all-embracing faith which Jesus Christ brought to men.

Persecution

Paul had to leave Philippi after a storm of persecution and an illegal imprisonment. That persecution was inherited by the Philippian Church. He tells them that they have shared in his bonds and in his defence of the gospel (Phi_1:7 ). He bids them not to fear their adversaries for they are going through what he himself has gone through and is now enduring (Phi_1:28-30 ).

True Friendship

There had grown up between Paul and the Philippian Church a bond of friendship closer than that which existed between him and any other Church. It was his proud boast that he had never taken help from any man or from any Church, and that, with his own two hands, he had satisfied his needs. It was from the Philippians alone that he had agreed to accept a gift. Soon after he left them and moved on to Thessalonica, they sent him a present (Phi_4:16 ). When he moved on and arrived in Corinth by way of Athens, they alone again remembered him with their gifts (2Co_11:9 ). "My brethren whom I love and long for," he calls them, "my joy and crown in the Lord" (Phi_4:1 ).

The Occasion Of The Writing Of The Letter

When Paul wrote this letter he was in prison in Rome, and he wrote it with certain definite objects.

(i) It is a letter of thanks. The years have passed; it is now A.D. 63 or 64 and once again the Philippians have sent him a gift (Phi_4:10-11 ).

(ii) It has to do with Epaphroditus. It seems that the Philippians had sent him not only as a bearer of their gift, but that he might stay with Paul and be his personal servant. But Epaphroditus had fallen ill. He was sick for home; and he was worried because he knew that the people at home were worried about him. Paul sent him home, but he had the unhappy feeling that the people in Philippi might think Epaphroditus a quilter, so he goes out of his way to give him a testimonial: "Receive him with all joy, and honour such men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ" (Phi_2:29-30 ). There is something very moving in the sight of Paul, himself in prison and awaiting death, seeking to make things easier for Epaphroditus, when he was unexpectedly and unwillingly compelled to go home. Here is the peak of Christian courtesy.

(iii) It is a letter of encouragement to the Philippians in the trials which they are going through (Phi_1:28-30 ).

(iv) It is an appeal for unity. It is from that, that there rises the great passage which speaks of the selfless humility of Jesus Christ (Phi_2:1-11 ). In the Church at Philippi there were two women who had quarrelled and were endangering the peace (Phi_4:2 ); and there were false teachers who were seeking to lure the Philippians from the true path (Phi_3:2 ). This letter is an appeal to maintain the unity of the Church.

The Problem

It is just here that the problem of Philippians arises. At Phi_3:2 there is an extraordinary break in the letter. Up to Phi_3:1 everything is serenity and the letter seems to be drawing gently to its close; then without warning comes the outburst: "Beware of dogs; beware of evil workers; beware of the concision." There is no connection with what goes before. Further, Phi_3:1 looks like the end. "Finally, my brethren," says Paul, "rejoice in the Lord" and having said finally he begins all over again! (That, of course, is not an unknown phenomenon in preaching).

Because of this break many scholars think that Philippians, as we possess it, is not one letter but two letters put together. They regard Phi_3:2-21 and Phi_4:1-3 as a letter of thanks and warning sent quite early after the arrival of Epaphroditus in Rome; and they regard Php 1 - 2; Phi_3:1 and Phi_4:4-23 as a letter written a good deal later, and sent with Epaphroditus when he had to go home. That is perfectly possible. We know that Paul almost certainly did, in fact, write more than one letter to Philippi, for Polycarp, in his letter to the Philippian Church, says of him, "when he was absent he wrote letters to you."

The Explanation

And yet it seems to us that there is no good reason for splitting this letter into two. The sudden break between Phi_3:1 and Phi_3:2 can be otherwise explained in one of two ways.

(i) As Paul was writing, fresh news may have come of trouble at Philippi; and there and then he may have interrupted his line of thought to deal with it.

(ii) The simplest explanation is this. Philippians is a personal letter and a personal letter is never logically ordered like a treatise. In such a letter we put things down as they come into our heads; we chat on paper with our friends; and an association of ideas which may be clear enough to us may not be so obvious to anyone else. The sudden change of subject here is just the kind of thing which might occur in any such letter.

The Lovely Letter

For many of us Philippians is the loveliest letter Paul ever wrote. It has been called by two titles. It has been called The Epistle of excellent Things--and so indeed it is; and it has been called The Epistle of Joy. Again and again the words joy and rejoice recur. "Rejoice," writes Paul, "again I will say rejoice," even in prison directing the hearts of his friends--and ours--to the joy that no man can take from us.

FURTHER READINGS

Philippians

J. B. Lightfoot, Saint PaulEpistle to the Philippians (MmC; G)

R. P. Martin, The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians (TC; E)

J. H. Michael, The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians (MC; E)

M. R. Vincent, Philippians and Philemon (ICC; G)

Abbreviations

CGT: Cambridge Greek Testament

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The Causes Of Disunity (Phi_2:1-4)

The Cure Of Disunity (Phi_2:1-4 Continued)

True Godhead And True Manhood (Phi_2:5-11)

Humiliation And Exaltation (Phi_2:5-11 Continued)

All For God (Phi_2:5-11 Continued)

Co-Operation In Salvation (Phi_2:12-18)

The Signs Of Salvation (Phi_2:12-18 Continued)

The Pictures Of Paul (Phi_2:12-18 Continued)

The Faithful Henchman (Phi_2:19-24)

The Courtesy Of Paul (Phi_2:25-30)

Constable: Philippians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

The name of the city of Philippi was originally Krinides (lit. springs). It stood about 10 miles inland from the Aegean Sea in the Roman province of Macedonia. In 356 B.C. Philip II, king of Macedonia and father of Alexander the Great, renamed the town after himself and enlarged it.

In 42 B.C. the Romans Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus defeated Brutus and Cassius in a battle fought just west of Philippi. After that battle Philippi became a military colony. Subsequent battles in 42 and 31 B.C. resulted in Philippi receiving even higher status. The citizens enjoyed autonomous government, immunity from taxes, and treatment as if they lived in Italy.¹ Some commentators have seen indications of the pride the Philippians took in their city in Acts 16:20-21 and Philippians 1:27 and 3:20. Luke's description of Philippi as a "leading city of the district of Macedonia" (Acts 16:12) probably refers to its colonial status since it was the only colony in the area. Amphipolis was the capital of the district, and Thessalonica was the capital of the province.

The Via Egnatia, the main highway from Rome to the east, ran through Philippi and brought much commerce and many travelers to Philippi. Also the nearby Gangites (modern Angitis) River was another natural advantage since it constituted another ancient thoroughfare (cf. Acts 16:13).

The story of the founding of the church in Philippi appears in Acts 16. Philippi was the first town in which Paul preached after he crossed the Aegean Sea from Troas and entered Europe. Then (50 A.D.) the city had few Jewish residents and the first converts were Lydia, a Gentile businesswoman from Thyatira in the province of Asia Minor, and the Philippian jailer. The church evidently met in Lydia's home at first (Acts 16:15). Paul's companions on his first visit to Philippi included Silas, Timothy, and Luke. Luke may have stayed in Philippi to establish the new converts when the other members of Paul's missionary team moved on to Thessalonica.² The Philippian Christians sent financial support to Paul in Thessalonica more than once (Phil. 4:15-16).

Probably Paul visited Philippi again during his third missionary journey in 57 A.D. He travelled from Ephesus to Corinth by land and then from Corinth back to Miletus mostly by land. From there he took a ship to Jerusalem. The land route he took on both occasions would have led him through Philippi.

No serious question about the Pauline authorship of this epistle arose until the nineteenth century. Paul claimed to have written it (Phil. l:1), and the references to his acquaintances, events in his life, and his way of thinking all point to him as the writer.

The apostle was a prisoner when he penned this letter (Phil. 1:7, 13, 16). References to the palace guard (1:13) and Caesar's household (4:22) have led most interpreters to conclude that Paul wrote from Rome rather than from Caesarea (cf. 1:19-24; 2:24).³ The Marcionite Prologue (c. 170 A.D.) also refers to Paul writing Philippians from Rome. Evidently he did so during his first Roman imprisonment (60-62 A.D.) during which time he also wrote Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, the other Prison Epistles.⁴

The primary purpose Paul had in mind in writing this epistle seems to have been to reassure the Philippians. Epaphroditus, whom they had sent with a gift for Paul and to minister to his needs in prison, had recovered from a serious illness and was about to return to Philippi. Paul built up Epaphroditus in the eyes of his readers (2:25-30), which suggests that they may not have appreciated him adequately for some reason. Secondary reasons for sending this letter include expressing thanks for the Philippians' gift to Paul in prison (4:10-14) and announcing Timothy's approaching visit (2:19). Paul also wanted to explain his desire to revisit his readers (2:24) and to deal with the problem of the two women in the church who needed to reconcile (4:2). One commentator identified the genre of this epistle as a letter of friendship and moral exhortation.⁵

Of all Paul's epistles Philippians is the most consistently positive and personal. It reflects a joyful spirit.⁶ Paul did not rebuke this church sharply nor did he refer to any major problems in it. His warnings are of a precautionary nature. His occupation with Jesus Christ also stands out. In 104 verses there are 51 references to the Lord Jesus by name.

". . . what is most noticeable in this letter is the general paucity of Paul's more specialized theological vocabulary and the infrequency of the explanatory for,' which is always a dead giveaway that Paul is involved in heavy argumentation."⁷

Message⁸

The Philippian Christians were special favorites of the apostle Paul. Their response to the gospel and their subsequent progress in the faith were exemplary. However the connections between Paul and Philippi that the New Testament records, both in Acts and in this letter, reveal an interesting paradox.

In both books there is a lot about prison and a lot about rejoicing. Paul ended up in prison when he first evangelized Philippi. Yet in prison Paul and Silas sang praises to God. When Paul wrote Philippians he was in prison, this time in Rome. However the dominant emotion that he projected in this book was rejoicing.

The paradox of a man in prison rejoicing lies at the root of what this book is all about. Such an attitude demonstrates an unusual view of life. It is a uniquely Christian view of life. It demonstrates the mind of Christ, which is the key to this epistle.

The theme of the epistle is participation in the gospel. Everything in this letter deals with that subject in some way, as I have pointed out in the notes. By participation in the gospel I mean the fellowship that Paul and the Philippians shared in the work of disseminating the gospel. This is the work in which all Christians should participate as well. Paul, the Philippians, and we are all partners in the work of the gospel. The key to working together effectively as partners in the gospel is having the mind of Christ. Therefore in this overview of the book I would like to emphasize this fundamental attitude about which Paul had so much to say in this book.

The key revelation in this epistle is that of the Christian attitude, or viewpoint, or consciousness. Note some of the references to the mind or attitude in this epistle: 1:7; 2:2, 3, 5; 3:15, 19; 4:2, 10. This is a key word in this book, and it indicates the emphasis of Philippians.

Paul revealed what the mind of Christ was in the Savior. We find this revelation in 2:5-11, one of the greatest Christological passages in the Bible. The Gospels reveal Jesus' words and works, but this passage unveils His mind.

Notice first the mental attitude of our Savior in 2:6. He did not regard His privileged position as something that He needed to retain. He did not value His position for the sake of the position. He laid it aside and stooped to unbelievable depths to lift those who needed redemption out of ruin.

This attitude resulted in certain activity, which we read of in verses 7 and 8. Jesus Christ selflessly gave up what was in His own best interests for the sake of the betterment of others. He left the heights of heaven for the lowliness of earth. He who was sovereign became a servant. Instead of becoming the highest of servants, an angel, he became a lowly servant, a man. He could have lived a life of ease, but He submitted to shame and death. He might have died in comfort and private surrounded by those who loved Him. Instead He died in agony and shame in public surrounded by those who hated Him. He could have died appreciated, but instead he died hated and misunderstood. This is the mind of Christ, a lowly mind, a loving mind.

This activity resulted in an award: verses 9-11.

Paul also revealed what the mind of the saints who are in Christ should be. We too should have a certain attitude that expresses itself in specific activity, which God will just as surely reward.

Our attitude should be that our love abounds increasingly and that we are sincere and void of offense (1:9-10). Christ's love is to be our love. His attitude is to be our attitude. Regardless of the present privileged position we may occupy we must not retain it as a prize.

Paul had this attitude. We can see it clearly in the statement he made in Romans 9:1-3. Just before he wrote these words, Paul wrote that nothing could separate him for the love of God in Christ Jesus. Yet he did not count that secure position something to retain for his own benefit. He was willing to give it up for the welfare of the Jews. You may remember that Moses voiced a similar sentiment in Exodus 32:32.

What is the activity that should flow out of this attitude?

Look first at 1:27. Our life should be worthy of the gospel. This was one of Paul's favorite ways to describe our conduct responsibility as Christians (cf. Eph. 4:1; Col. 1:10; 1 Thess. 2:12). Worthy conduct is not just morally upright behavior. It is conduct that the gospel drives, conduct that aims at proclaiming the gospel, making it known. It is conduct that responds appropriately to God's gift of grace to us.

Notice also 2:14-15. We are to be blameless in our relationship to God. Moreover we are to be harmless in our relationships with people, not doing them harm but good. Our Lord's example of humble service to the point of death is our model. How much do we know about emptying ourselves, humbling ourselves, becoming obedient to death, even the death of the cross?

What is the award that will follow this attitude and this activity? It is twofold.

There is present victory over circumstances. This whole epistle is a revelation of Paul's triumph over circumstances that would have defeated many people. The pioneer missionary to the regions beyond sat confined in prison. Rather than saying everything was against him, Paul rejoiced that God's program was advancing. In all the Prison Epistles, Paul viewed himself not as the prisoner of Nero but of Jesus Christ. He believed the Lord had placed him where he was for the best purpose. Anyone can sing when he or she escapes from prison, but Paul sang in prison.

Second, there is also future reward. Throughout this epistle Paul had the judgment seat of Christ in view (1:6, 10-11, 20; 2:16; 3:8-9, 14; 4:1, 5). God will reward the mind of Christ in the saints just as He has rewarded the mind of Christ in the Savior. We should strive to gain that prize, not to glorify ourselves in heaven but to have a crown to lay down at Jesus' feet in worship in heaven (cf. Rev. 4:10).

We have seen that the mind of Christ is the key to this epistle. We have also seen that Paul revealed this mind in the Savior and in the saints. What did he say about this mind or attitude? He said, "Have this mind in you" (2:5).

What is the resource for this kind of thinking? Where do we find what it takes to have the mind of Christ in us? We find it in Christ. Specifically we find it when we orient our lives with Him at the center. Paul put it this way: "To me, to live is Christ" (1:21). For some people to live is finances. For others it is fame. For some it is family. For others to live is fun. Life is whatever we put at the center of living. Paul put Christ there. Consequently he viewed God as Christ did. He saw people as Christ did. He viewed his purpose as Christ did. He established his priorities as Christ did. He conducted his daily affairs as Christ did. His life was Christ.

What is our responsibility with this attitude? It is to work out our own salvation in response to God's working in us (2:12-13). We work out what God works in. How do we do this? We do this by forgetting what is past and by pressing on to God's goal for us. Paul used the same Greek word to describe his persecution of Christians (3:6) and his pressing toward his new goal (3:14; dioko). He pursued both goals zealously. He transferred all the passion and fervor that he once expended on tearing down the church into building it up. Our responsibility is absolute dedication and unfailing endeavor to the goal of building the church.

What are the rules we must follow with this attitude? Primarily we must rejoice in the Lord (3:1; 4:4). Rejoicing is not only a privilege, but it is a duty for the Christian. God has commanded us to rejoice. To do this we need to focus our thinking on what God is really doing as He has revealed this in His Word. We must also be forbearing toward all men rather than antagonistic (4:5). We must also give ourselves to prayer rather than to anxiety (4:6). These are the basic rules we need to follow.

By way of application, what does adopting the mind of Christ mean?

For the church the measure of her authority is the measure of her conformity to the mind of Christ. The church, the corporate body of believers, depends on many different things today to give it authority: political power, charismatic leaders, social influence, etc. Yet the church's real authority today is the same as Jesus Christ's authority was when He walked this earth, His humble attitude of submissiveness and obedience to His Father. The essence of the mind of Christ is love. Its consciousness is joy. Its expression is sacrifice. If love, joy, and sacrificial service characterize the church, it will have authority in the world.

For the individual Christian the application is that we should allow Jesus Christ to master us completely. We should view ourselves as His captives, His prisoners (cf. 1:1). It is only by entering into bondage to the Savior that we can find true liberty. His ideal must become our ideal. His power should be what we depend on to fulfill that ideal. Furthermore the certainty of His ultimate victory and ours now and in the future should be the inspiration for our ceaseless song. The present joy of our lives should come from our comradeship with Him day by day. Sharing the mind of Christ will teach us how to love, to serve, and to sing as we live the Christian life.

Constable: Philippians (Outline)

Outline

I. Salutation 1:1-2

II. Prologue 1:3-26

A. Thanksgiving 1:3-8

B. Prayer 1:9-11

C. Progress report 1:12-26

1. Paul's present imprisonment 1:12-18

2. Paul's anticipated deliverance 1:19-26

III. Partnership in the gospel 1:27-4:9

A. A worthy walk 1:27-30

B. Unity and steadfastness 2:1-4:1

1. Walking in unity ch. 2

2. Walking in steadfastness 3:1-4:1

C. Specific duties 4:2-9

1. Restoring unity 4:2-3

2. Maintaining tranquillity 4:4-9

IV. Epilogue 4:10-20

A. The recent gift 4:10-14

B. The previous gifts 4:15-20

V. Greetings and benediction 4:21-23

Constable: Philippians

Philippians

Bibliography

Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. 4 vols. Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, and Co., 1884.

Barclay, William. The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians. Daily Study Bible series, 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1960.

Bateman, Herbert W., IV. "Were the Opponents at Philippi Necessarily Jewish?" Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-March 1998):39-61.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Beare, F. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1959.

Bing, Charlie. "Does Philippians 1:6 Teach Perseverance?" Grace Evangelical Society News 6:2 (February 1991):2.

Blazek, Gerald. "Unity through Humility in Philippians." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1977.

Bock, Darrell L. "A Theology of Paul's Prison Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 299-331. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Boice, James Montgomery. Philippians. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1971.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Brug, John F. "The Principles of Financial Stewardship in Paul's Letter to the Philippians," Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 86:3 (Summer 1989):215-24.

Burtch, Bryan Gordon. "The Greek Words for Prayer in the New Testament." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1951.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Dahms, John V. "The Subordination of the Son." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:3 (September 1994):351-64.

Dalton, William J. "The Integrity of Philippians." Biblica 60:1 (1979):97-102.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Deissmann, Adolf. Light from the Ancient East. Translated by Lionel R. M. Strachan. Revised and reprinted ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Philippians, Epistle to the," by D. Mackenzie.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Philippians, Epistle to the," by J. Gibb.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Duncan, George B. The Life of Continual Rejoicing. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Duncan, G. S. "A New Setting for Paul's Epistle to the Philippians." Expository Times 43 (1931-32):7-11.

Eadie, John. A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1894; reprint ed. Minneapolis: James and Klock Christian Publishing Co., 1977.

Fee, Gordon D. Paul's Letter to the Philippians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

_____. "Philippians 2:5-11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose?" Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992):29-46.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised, and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert. Stand United in Joy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Harrison, Norman B. His in Joyous Experience. Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1926.

Hawthorne, Gerald F. Philippians, Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1983.

Hendricks, Howard G. Color Outside the Lines: A Revolutionary Approach to Creative Leadership. Swindoll Leadership Library series. Nashville: Word Publishing, 1998.

Hendricksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Philippians and Exposition of Colossians and Philemon. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Leslie F. Church. 1 vol. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Ironside, Harry A. Notes on Philippians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Bible Truth Depot, n. d.

Jackson, F. J. Foakes, and Lake, Kirsopp, eds. The Beginnings of Christianity. Part I: The Acts of the Apostles. 5 vols. London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1939; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, A. R.; and Brown, David. Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jewett, Robert. "Conflicting Movements in the Early Church as Reflected in Philippians." Novum Testamentum 12 (1970):362-90.

_____. "The Epistolary Thanksgiving and the Integrity of Philippians." Novum Testamentum 12:1 (January 1970):40-53.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "The Out-Resurrection from the Dead." Bibliotheca Sacra 110 (1953):139-46.

Kelly, J. N. D. A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. Thornapple Commentaries series. London: A. & C. Black Publishers Limited, 1963; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Kennedy, H. A. A. "The Epistle to the Philippians." In The Expositor's Greek Testament, 3 (1910):399-473. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. 5 Vols. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1900-10.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. "Philippians." In Ephesians-Philemon. Vol. 11 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 11: Galatians-Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braune, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starbuck, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lees, Harrington C. "Epaphoditus, God's Gambler." Expository Times 37 (1925):46.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians to the Ephesians and to the Philippians. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lightfoot, J. B. St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan & Co., 1913; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1953.

Lightner, Robert P. Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986.

_____. "Philippians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 647-66. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Lloyd-Jones, D. Martyn. Life of Peace. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1990.

Luter, A. Boyd. "Partnership in the Gospel: The Role of Women in the Church at Philippi." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:3 (September 1996):411-20.

Martin, Ralph P. The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

Matzat, Don. Christ-Esteem. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 1990.

McClain, Alva J. "The Doctrine of the Kenosis in Philippians 2:5-8, " Biblical Review 13:4 (October 1928):506-27.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Minirth, Frank B. and Meier, Paul D. Happiness Is a Choice. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Motyer, Alec. The Message of Philippians. The Bible Speaks Today series. Leicester, England, and Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1984.

Moule, H. C. G. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: University Press, 1936.

Mounce, Robert H. "The Epistle to the Philippians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp.1319-31. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Muller, Jac J. The Epistles of Paul to the Philippians and to Philemon. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids; Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

Munro, John "Prayer to a Sovereign God." Interest 56:2 (February 1990):20-21.

Murray, George W. "Paul's Corporate Witness in Philippians." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:619 (July-September 1998):316-26.

New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Crucifixion," by D. H. Wheaton, pp. 281-82.

New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by E. Schuyler English, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

O'Brien, P. T. Commentary on Philippians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1991.

Panikulam, George. Koinonia in the New Testament--A Dynamic Expression of Christian Life. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. The Joy of Living. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1973.

Plummer, Alfred. A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. London: Robert Scott, 1919.

Pope, W. B. The Prayers of St. Paul. London: Charles H. Kelly, 1897.

Pyne, Robert A. "Antinomianism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:610 (April-June 1996):141-54.

Ramsay, William M. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1897; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960

Ridderbos, Herman N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Translated by J. R. DeWitt. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Ryrie, Charles C. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1986.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Smith, Charles R. "The Book of Life." Grace Theological Journal 6:2 (Fall 1985):219-30.

Stagg, Frank. "Philippians." In Broadman Bible Commentary; 11:178-216. Edited by Clifton J. Allen. 12 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1972.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Strauch, Alexander. Biblical Eldership. Littleton, Co.: Lewis & Roth Publishers, 1986.

Strong, Augustus Hopkins. Systematic Theology. Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1907.

Swift, Robert C. "The Theme and Structure of Philippians." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:563 (July-September 1984):234-54.

Swindoll, Charles R. Laugh Again. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1992.

Tatford, Frederick A. The Patmos Letters. By the Author, 1969; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, n.d.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. 1964-74. S.v. "kardia," by Friedrich Baumgartel and Johannes Behm, 3 (1965):605-14.

_____. S.v. "koinonos," et al., by Friedrich Hauck, 3 (1965):797-809.

_____. S.v. "tareinos," et at., by Walter Grundmann, 8 (1972):11-12.

Trench, Richard Chenevix. Synonyms of the New Testament. Revised ed. London: James Clarke & Co. Ltd., 1961.

Vincent, Marvin. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897.

Vine, W. E. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. 4 vols. London: Oliphants Ltd., 1940.

Vos, Howard F. Philippians: A Study Guide. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Walvoord, John F. Jesus Christ Our Lord. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. Philippians. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1971.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Joyful. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1981.

_____. The Bible Exposition Commentary. 2 vols. Wheaton: Scripture Press, Victor Books, 1989.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Philippians 3:10: Is Our Resurrection Certain?" Grace Evangelical Society Newsletter, November 1987, pp. 1-2.

_____. "Raised to Run." Grace Evangelical Society News 6:8 (August 1991):2-3.

_____. "Working Out Your Salvation." Grace Evangelical Society News 8:3 (May-June 1993):2-3.

Witmer, John A. "The Man with Two Countries." Bibliotheca Sacra 133:532 (October-December 1976):338-49.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Philippians (Book Introduction)

THE

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE PHILIPPIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

Philippi, a considerable city in Macedonia, so called from Philip, father of Alexander the Great. St. Paul had preached there. (Acts xvi.) Those people had a great veneration for him, and supplied his wants when he was at Corinth, and again when he was a prisoner at Rome, sending to him by Epaphroditus, who is thought to have been the bishop of Philippi. St. Paul sent this letter by him to the Philippians, (written during his imprisonment) from Rome; but whether during his first or second imprisonment, is uncertain. (Witham) --- It is generally believed that St. Paul wrote it about the year 62, in his first confinement. In it he testifies to the faithful his most tender gratitude and acknowledgement for the assistance they had sent him, and a zeal the most ardent for their salvation. He felicitates them on their courage under sufferings for the cause of Jesus Christ, on their good works also, and forcibly excites them to confidence and joy. --- The Philippians were the first among the Macedonians converted to the faith. St. Paul, in this epistle, recommends charity, unity, and humility; and warns against false teachers, whom he calls dogs, and enemies of the cross of Christ. He also returns thanks for their benefactions. It was written about twenty-nine years after our Lord's ascension. (Challoner)

====================

Gill: Philippians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO PHILIPPIANS

Philippi was a Roman colony, and the chief city of one part of Macedonia, Act 16:12, it is by Appianus called Datos which was its original name; and by Diodorus Siculus it is called Crenidae ^a, from, the fountains about it; and it took its name Philippi, from Philip king of Macedon, father of Alexander the great, who rebuilt and fortified it; near this place a famous battle was fought, and a victory obtained by Augustus Caesar and Mark Antony, over Brutus and Cassius; it is now called Chrixopolis, properly Chrysopolis, from the plenty of golden mines near it: here the apostle was directed by a vision, to go and preach the Gospel; and which was succeeded, to the conversion of Lydia, and the jailer, and their families; which laid the foundation of a Gospel church in this place, to whom this epistle is written; and which was written by the apostle when he was a prisoner at Rome, as many things in it show; for he more than once makes mention of his bonds, and of these being made manifest in Caesar's palace, and of some of Caesar's household sending their Christian salutations to this church: Dr. Hammond makes the date of this epistle to be the year 59, and Dr. Lightfoot places it in the year 60, and the sixth of Nero; the occasion of it was this, the Philippians, to whom the apostle was very dear, he being the first preacher of the Gospel to them, and the instrument of their conversion, hearing that he was a prisoner at Rome, send their minister and pastor Epaphroditus to him, to visit him, and by him a present to support him under his afflicted circumstances, and who related to him the case of this church; and at his departure he sent by him this letter; the design of which is, to express his love and affection to them; to give them an account of his bonds, and the usefulness of them, and how he was supported under them; to encourage them under all the afflictions and persecutions, they endured for the sake of Christ; to excite them to love, unity, and peace, among themselves; to caution them against false teachers, judaizing Christians, that were for joining Moses and Christ, law and Gospel, works and grace together, in the business of salvation; to exhort them to a holy life and conversation, and to return them thanks for their kind present.

Gill: Philippians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO PHILIPPIANS 2

This chapter contains several exhortations to unity, love, and concord, to humility, and lowliness of mind, and to a becoming life and conversation; and concludes with commendations of two eminent ministers of Christ, Timothy and Epaphroditus. The arguments engaging to harmony and mutual affection, are taken from the consolation that is in Christ, the comfort there is in love, the fellowship of the Spirit, and the bowels and mercies which become saints, Phi 2:1, as also from the joy this would fill the apostle with; and the things exhorted to are expressed by likeness of mind, sameness of love, and unity of soul, Phi 2:2, and the manner directed to for the preservation of such a spirit, is to do nothing in a contentious and vainglorious way, but in an humble and lowly manner, having a better opinion of others than themselves; and observing their superior gifts and graces, and so submit things unto them, Phi 2:3, and which humble deportment is further urged, from the instance and example of our Lord Jesus Christ, Phi 2:5, which is illustrated by the dignity of his person, the glorious divine form in which he was, and his indisputable equality with his Father, Phi 2:6, and yet such was his great condescension, that he became man, appeared in the form of a servant, and was humbled to the lowest degree, even to die the death of the cross, Phi 2:7, nevertheless God exalted him as man, and gave him superior honour to all creatures; and will oblige all to be subject to him, and acknowledge his dominion over them, to the glory of his divine Father, Phi 2:9, hereby suggesting, that in like manner, though not to the same degree, such who are humble and lowly minded shall be exalted by the Lord; and then with the greatest affection to the Philippians, and with high commendations of them, the apostle renews his exhortation to do all the duties of religion with humility and modesty; knowing that all the grace and strength in which they performed them was owing to the internal operation of divine power in them, Phi 2:12, and therefore should be done without murmuring against God, or disputings among themselves, Phi 2:14, and next he proceeds to exhort to an unblemished and inoffensive life and conversation, as the end and issue of a modest and humble behaviour; and this he enforces on them, from the consideration of their relation to God, being his children, which would appear hereby; and from the wickedness and perverseness of the people they lived among; and therefore should be careful, lest they be ensnared by them, to the dishonour of God, and the grief of themselves; and from their character as lights in the world, whose business it was to hold forth the word of life; and also from this consideration, that it would be the joy of the apostle in the day of Christ, that his labours among them had not been fruitless, Phi 2:15, yea, such was his love to them, that if even he was to die on their account, it would be matter of joy and gladness to him; and he desires they would express the same joy with him, Phi 2:17, and though he could not be with them in person, he hoped in a little time to send Timothy, for this end, that he might know how things stood with them; which if well, would be a comfort to him, Phi 2:19, the reasons why he picked Timothy as a messenger to them were, because there were none like him, for the sincere regard he had for their spiritual good, Phi 2:20, and which is illustrated by the contrary disposition and conduct of others, who sought themselves, and not Jesus Christ, his honour and interest, Phi 2:21, and besides, they themselves were witnesses of his filial affection to the apostle, and of his faithful service with him in the Gospel, Phi 2:22, and then he repeats his hopes of sending him quickly, as soon as ever he knew how it would go with him, whether he should be released or suffer, Phi 2:23, the former of which he had some confidence of, and that he should be able to see them himself in a little time, Phi 2:24, however, in the mean while he thought it proper to send Epaphroditus to them, whom he commends as a brother of his, a co-worker, a fellow soldier, a messenger of theirs, and a minister to his wants, Phi 2:25, the reasons of sending him were, because he longed to see them, and because he was uneasy that they had heard of his sickness; which was not only true that he had been sick, but his sickness was very dangerous, and threatened with death; however, through the mercy of God to him, he was recovered; and which was a mercy also to the apostle, who otherwise would have had an additional sorrow; wherefore another reason of sending him was, that upon the sight of him they might be filled with joy, and the apostle himself have less sorrow, Phi 2:26, and then he exhorts them, that when he was returned to them, they would gladly receive him, and highly esteem of him; and the rather, since the dangerous illness he was attended with was brought upon him through his labours in the service of Christ, and also of the apostle, which he performed in their stead, even to the neglect of his health and life, Phi 2:29.

College: Philippians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

THE CITY

When Paul bypassed the seaport at Neapolis and moved eight miles inland to Philippi, he did so because Philippi, though small, was a city of some importance. The history of the city stretched back several centuries. A small village, known as Krenides, was captured by Philip of Macedon and annexed to his empire in 356 B.C. The area was attractive because of the many springs in the vicinity, and because of the nearby gold mines. Hence Philip named the city after himself, i.e., Philippi.

The city remained insignificant until conquered by the Romans almost two centuries later (168, 167 B.C.). The area was made a Roman province, and included in the first of the four districts into which the Romans divided Macedonia.

The most significant event of the pre-Pauline city took place in 42 B.C. There, on the plain of Philippi, the forces of Brutus and Cassius (Caesar's assassins) clashed with the armies of Antony and Octavian, only to go down in defeat. Thus Philippi was the spot at which the destiny of the Roman empire was set for some time to come.

Later (31 B.C.) Octavian defeated Antony. As a result of the battles of 42 and 31 B.C. a number of military veterans, from both the victors and the vanquished, were settled there. In 31 B.C. the name of the town was enhanced to honor Octavian (Caesar Augustus), its conqueror.

Philippi was made a Roman colony, a high privilege indeed for a provincial city within the empire. Rights of the citizenry included Roman citizenship, the right to own and transfer property, and exemption from certain taxes. The city was in municipal pattern and architecture modeled on Rome, as well as in legal and administrative detail. The citizens wore Roman dress, had coinage with Roman inscriptions, and used (though not exclusively) the Latin language. Roman citizens had certain rights under Roman law, a fact that stood to Paul's advantage when he came to Philippi (Acts 16:37ff).

The city was located on the Via Egnatia, one of the major Roman roads of the time. Some evidence indicates the road in this area was in bad condition during the time of Paul's visit, so that visitors to Philippi may have used the sea route (as Paul did) with greater frequency. However, bad roads, though an inconvenience to travel, did not stop it completely. When Paul left the city it was by road toward the west.

Residents of the city would have included a core of veterans of the Roman wars or their descendants. Also in residence were Greeks, descendants of the native Thracian population, and some Jews. Some read the story of the conversion of Lydia in Acts 16 to indicate there were not enough male Jews in the city to constitute a synagogue. But others argue that there was a synagogue built by the river to which Paul went to preach.

ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH

The origins of this church are recorded in Acts 16:6-40. Compare the commentary by Dennis Gaertner in this series for detailed comments. The following should be noted.

First, it was by divine impulse that the mission to Philippi and Europe was undertaken. A vision, coupled with earlier prohibitions, spurred Paul on his way (Acts 16:6-10). Paul traveled with Silas, Timothy (who had joined the party earlier), and, by assumption, Luke, who is identified by "we" in Acts 16:10. This is based on the view that Acts was written by Luke. When Paul and Silas left the city, Luke was apparently left with the fledgling church, to be picked up by Paul when he passed through Philippi on his third journey (Acts 20:5).

Second, the initial convert in the city was Lydia (Acts 16:13-15), an open-minded God-fearer, whose profession (a dealer in purple cloth) and hospitality lead to the conclusion she was a person of some means. Though she is not mentioned in Philippians, two of the four specific names of Philippian Christians given in the letter are women, and it is generally thought that the women exercised significant roles in the church.

Third, a slave girl was exorcised, and this good deed destroyed her commercial advantage to her owners. In retaliation they inflamed a crowd, with the result that Paul and Silas were beaten and imprisoned in the most miserable of conditions (Acts 16:16-24).

Fourth, this incarceration served to make the faith of Paul and Silas shine more brightly, as they sang praises to God from their cell, rather than uttering the groans of pain that might have been expected. An earthquake so devastated the prison that the prisoner's cells were opened and their bonds loosed. The jailer, contemplating suicide because he thought his prisoners would have escaped, was reassured by Paul and Silas that they were all still there. More importantly, he found Christ, and he and his family became Christians in what is one of the remarkable conversions of the New Testament (Acts 16:23-34).

Finally, the release of Paul and Silas from prison and the embarrassment of the Philippian officials when they learned they had afflicted Roman citizens is told with a touch of humor. Paul and Silas, apparently taking their time, finally left the city, no doubt much to the relief of the city authorities (Acts 16:35-40). But their companion Luke stayed behind, with a group of believers whose ties to Paul through the years were especially affectionate. Though the first convert was a God-fearer, evidence indicates the church was composed predominantly of Gentiles who had not necessarily been sympathetic to Judaism. The date for these events is generally considered to be from A.D. 49-52.

PAUL'S LOCALE

Paul nowhere in this letter names the place of his imprisonment. A long held tradition, dating as early as the second century, identifies Rome as his locale. In recent years two other main options have been advanced: Ephesus and Caesarea. In considering this issue there are basic data to be kept in mind.

(1) Paul was a prisoner (1:7) and did not know the outcome of his trial (1:19f; 2:17).

(2) The place from which Paul wrote was also populated by those of "Caesar's household" (4:22).

(3) Timothy was with Paul (1:1; 2:19ff).

(4) The Christians in Paul's locale were engaged in evangelism (1:14ff).

(5) Paul hoped to visit Philippi if circumstances allowed (2:24).

(6) There was frequent communication between Philippi and Paul. The Philippians had heard Paul was in prison and sent Epaphroditus, who became ill. This news reached Philippi, and their anxiety reached back to Paul. The letter Paul wrote would be sent to Philippi, to be followed by visits from Timothy, and later (if possible) Paul himself (2:19-28).

A theoretical Ephesian imprisonment meets some of these criteria, but founders on others. Most telling is the fact that though Acts says Paul was in Ephesus for some time (Acts 19:8, 10) there is no record of an imprisonment there.

Paul was imprisoned for at least two years at Caesarea (Acts 24:27), but again that imprisonment does not account for all the statements in Philippians. One of the reasons for objection to Rome as the place of origin was that the distance between Rome and Philippi was too great for all the trips indicated by Philippians. But the distance was just as great to Caesarea. Actually the journey from Rome to Philippi took about forty days. Thus a major objection to a Roman imprisonment, and justification for a Caesarean, is removed.

Two major objections to Rome have to do with the amount of time needed for travel, just discussed, and the change in Paul's travel plans from his announced intention to visit Spain (Rom 15:24, 29) to his intent to visit Philippi (Phil 1:25-27; 2:24). Given Paul's unexpected changes in circumstances due to his arrest and imprisonment (Acts 21), a change of intent should not be found too surprising.

Though Rome cannot be proved to be the place from which Paul wrote, it does seem to fit the circumstances better than the alternatives. If from Rome, the date of writing was probably the early 60s. While holding this view, students still should not close themselves to evidence suggesting other possibilities. Despite the details in Acts and his biographical statements in the letters, there is still a great deal we do not know about Paul's activities.

REASONS FOR WRITING

Hawthorne lists a number of reasons Paul wrote this letter. From his list we may select the following as the most obvious.

First, there was the matter of Epaphroditus and the gift sent to Paul by his hand. Paul wished to respond to their generosity (4:10-20). He also wished to allay their apprehensions about Epaphroditus (2:25-30), with whom he doubtless sent the letter.

Second, he took the opportunity to share certain news about himself and his situation. He especially told them of a problem he faced because some brethren hoped to create trouble for him by preaching Christ out of envy and rivalry (1:14-18). At the same time he addressed the issue of his imprisonment and his possible future (1:19-30; 2:24).

Third, he wished to address a serious problem of division within the church. He names two women (4:2), but we suspect the problem was of wider dimension. There are touches throughout the book directed to this need, but it is addressed most powerfully in 2:1-11.

Fourth, Paul wished to warn about those he calls "dogs," "men who do evil," and "mutilators of the flesh" in 3:2. Later in the chapter he laments about "enemies of the cross" ( v. 18).

EMPHASES

In addition to these central purposes there are certain notes sounded throughout the book which can enrich pursuit by the serious student. The joy motif through the book has been often observed (cf. the reference at 1:4). Though some have argued the church was a joyful one, we believe that not to have been the case. Paul's repeated exhortations indicate their lack of joy, and we suppose that a capturing of the "joy of the Lord" would go far to resolving the Philippians' problems.

Another noteworthy emphasis is the repeated use of the forms of the root fron- ( phron ; references at 1:7). From examining these it can be discerned how Paul's call was for a whole approach to life, not just to superficial thought or action. Study of this term makes it clear that Christianity was a deep and total commitment to the Lord and to a way of life.

In addition the reader might examine the texts listed under "all" (1:1), "partnership" (1:5), and "in the Lord" (4:1).

DEVOTIONAL TEXTS

Some of the great devotional New Testament texts are found in Philippians (see 1:21; 2:5-11,12f; 3:7-11; 4:4-7,8f, and 11-13). Often these verses are taken out of context, and are given an independent existence. We note this to stress the fact that Paul did not write Philippians (or any letter) so it could be the subject of a commentary - though commentaries have real value. To follow Christ meant to live a life, not to judiciously make detailed observations about grammar, word meanings, syntax, etc. So if a commentary enhances understanding, that is a noble thing. But understanding may stop short of salvation. As Paul wrote to enhance discipleship, so this author hopes this work will have the same effect! To God be the glory!

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PHILIPPIANS

Beare, F.W. The Epistle to the Philippians . London: Adam and Charles Black, 1959.

Bruce, F.F. Philippians . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1983.

Craddock, Fred. Philippians . Atlanta: John Knox, 1985.

Harrell, Pat. The Letter of Paul to the Philippians . Austin: Sweet, 1969.

Hawthorne, Gerald. Philippians . Waco: Word Books, 1983.

Martin, Ralph. Philippians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Melick, Richard. Philippians, Colossians, Philemon. Nashville: Broadman, 1991.

O'Brien, Peter. Philippians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.

Saunders, Ernest. First Thessalonians, Second Thessalonians, Philippians, Philemon . Atlanta: John Knox, 1981.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV