Philippians 3

Philippians 3:1-99

Ch. 3:1-4:1. Warning against certain Judaizers,— enforced by his own example (1-16): also against immoral persons (17-4:1).

1. He appears to have been closing his Epistle (τὸλοιπόν , and reff.), but to have again gone off, on the vehement mention of the Judaizers, into an explanation of his strong term κατατομή . Chrys., al., find a connexion with the foregoing, but it is farfetched (ἔχετεἘπαφρ ., δι ʼ ὃνἤλγειτε , ἔχετεΤιμόθ ., ἔρχομαικἀγώ . τὸεὐαγγέλιονἐπιδίδωσι · τίὑμῖνλείπειλοιπόν ;): the sense is evidently closed with ch. 3:30.

τὰαὐτά ] It seems to me that Wiesinger has rightly apprehended the reference of this somewhat difficult sentence. The χαίρετεἐνκυρίῳ , taken up again by the οὕτωςστήκετεἐνκυρίῳ , ch. 4:1, is evidently put here emphatically, with direct reference to the warning which follows— let your joy (your boast) be in the Lord. And this same exhortation, χαίρειν , is in fact the groundtone of the whole Epistle. See ch. 1:18, 25; 2:17; 4:4, where the πάλινἐρῶ seems to refer back again to this saying. So that there is no difficulty in imagining that the Apostle may mean χαίρετε by the τὰαὐτά . The word ἀσφαλές is no objection to this: because the χαίρ . ἐνκυρ . is in fact an introduction to the warning which follows: a provision, by upholding the antagonist duty, against their falling into deceit.

And thus all the speculation, whether τὰαὐτά refer to a lost Epistle, or to words uttered (γράφειν) when he was with them, falls to the ground. And the inference from Polycarp’ s words in his Epistle to these Philippians, § 3, p. 1008, ὃςκαὶἀπὼνὑμῖνἔγραψενἐπιστολάς , may be a true one, but does not belong here.

ὀκνηρόν ] troublesome: Mey. quotes from Plato, Ep. ii. 310 D, τἀληθῆλέγεινοὔτεὀκνήσωοὔτεαἰσχυνοῦμαι .

2. βλέπετε , not, ‘ beware of,’ as E. V. (βλ . ἀπό , Mark 8:15 reff.), but as in reff., observe, with a view to avoid: cf. σκοπεῖν , Romans 16:17.

τοὺςκύνας ] profane, impure persons. The appellation occurs in various references; but in the Jewish usage of it, uncleanness was the prominent idea: see, besides reff., Deuteronomy 23:18; Isaiah 56:10, Isaiah 56:11; Matthew 15:26, Matthew 15:27. The remark of Chrys. is worth noting in connexion with what follows: οὐκέτιτέκναἸουδαῖοι . ποτὲοἱἐθνικοὶτοῦτοἐκαλοῦντο , νῦνδὲἐκεῖνοι . But I would not confine it entirely to them, as the next clause certainly generalizes further.

τοὺςκακοὺςἐργάτας ] cf. δόλιοιἐργάται , 2 Corinthians 11:13,— ἐργάτηνἀνεπαίσχυντον , 2 Timothy 2:15,— ἐργάζονταιμὲνγὰρ , φησιν , ἀλλ ʼ ἑπὶκακῷ . By ἐργάτας , he seems to point out persons who actually wrought, and professedly for the Gospel, but who were ‘ evil workmen,’ not mere ‘ evil-doers.’

τ . κατατομήν ] ‘ gloriosam appellationem περιτομῆς , circumcisionis, vindicat Christianis.’ Beng.

Observe the (I will not say, circumcision, but mere) concision :

3. for we are the περιτομή , the real circumcision (whether bodily circumcised, or not— there would be among them some of both sorts: see Romans 2:25, Romans 2:29; Colossians 2:11), who serve (pay religious service and obedience) by the Spirit of God (cf. John 4:23, John 4:24. The dative is instrumental, Romans 8:13,— expressing the agent, whereby our service is rendered: see Romans 5:5; Romans 8:14; Romans 12:1; Hebrews 9:14. The emphasis is on it: for both profess a λατρεία . The θεοῦ is expressed for solemnity), and glory in (stress on καυχώμενοι ,— are not ashamed of Him and seek our boast in circumcision, or the law, but make our boast in Him) Christ Jesus, and trust not in the flesh .

4. Although (see Hartung, Partik. i. 340: πίθουγυναιξί , καίπεροὐστέργων , ὅμως , Æ sch. Theb. 709: προσεκύνησαν , καίπερεἰδότες , ὅτιἐπὶθανάτῳἄγοιτο , Xen. Anab. i. 6. 10) I (emphatic. There is no ellipsis, but the construction is regular, καίπερ , as in the above examples, having a participle after it: had it been καίπερἔχοντες , this would have been universally seen: now, only one of the οὐπεποιθότες , viz. ἐγώ , is made the exception; but the construction is the same) have (not, ‘ might have,’ as E. V.

I have it, but do not choose to make use of it: I have it, in the flesh, but I am still of the number of the οὐπεποιθότες , in spirit) confidence (not, ‘ ground of confidence,’ as Beza, Calv., Grot., &c.: there is no need to soften the assertion, see above: nor, with Van Hengel, to understand it of the unconverted state of the Apostle) also (over and above) in the flesh. If any other man thinks (δοκεῖ is certainly, as De W., Wiesinger, al., and reff., of his own judgment of himself, not of other men’ s judgment of him, as Meyer, al.: for how can other men’ s judging of the fact of his having confidence be in place here? But it is his own judgment of the existence of the πεποίθησινἔχειν which is here in comparison) he has confidence in the flesh, I more:

5. “ predicates of the ἐγώ , justifying the ἐγὼμᾶλλον ,” Meyer. He compares himself with them in three particulars: 1. pure Jewish extraction: 2. legal exactitude and position: 3. legal zeal. In circumcision (i.e. ‘ as regards circumcision:’ reff. Many (Erasm., Beng., all.) have taken περιτ . as nominative, and understood it concrete, ‘ circumcisus,’ but wrongly, for the usage applies only collectively, see Winer, edn. 3 (not in edn. 6), § 31. 3), of eight days (Genesis 17:12: as distinguished from those who, as proselytes, were circumcised in after life. For usage, see reff.), of the race, of Israel (cf. Romans 11:1; 2 Corinthians 11:22, οὔτεμὴνἐκπροσηλύτωνγεγέννημαι , ἀλλὰτὸνἸσραὴλαὐχῶπρόγονον .

Thdrt.), of the tribe of Benjamin , an Hebrew, of Hebrews (i.e. from Hebrew parents and ancestry (which the word parents was of course meant to imply in my earlier editions: not, as Ellic., to limit the assertion to St. Paul’ s father and mother) on both sides: ἐντεῦθενδείκνυσινὅτιοὐχὶπροσήλυτος , ἀλλ ʼ ἄνωθεντῶνεὐδοκίμωνἸουδαίων . ἐνῆνμὲνγὰρεἶναιτοῦἸσραήλ , ἀλλ ʼ οὐχἙβραῖονἐξἙβραίων . πολλοὶγὰρκαὶδιέφθειρονἤδητὸπρᾶγμα , καὶτῆςγλώσσηςἦσανἀμύητοι , ἑτέροιςμεμιγμένοιἔθνεσιν .

Chrys.: see also Trench, Synonyms, § xxxix. p. 153 ff. So Demosth. adv. Androt. p. 614, δούλουςἐκδούλωνκαλῶνἑαυτοῦβελτίουςκ . ἐκβελτιόνων : see other examples in Kypke and Wetst.), as regards the law (with reference to relative legal position and observance), a Pharisee (cf. Acts 23:6; Acts 26:5), as regards zeal (for the law), a persecutor of the church (of Christ: on the participle, see ref.: Ellic. holds the pres. part. to have an adjectival force, being predicate to a suppressed verb subst.), as regards righteousness which is in (as its element: consists in the keeping of) the law, become blameless .

7. But whatsoever things (emphatic (cf. ταῦτα below) and general: these above mentioned, and all others. The law itself is not included among them, but only his κέρδη from this and other sources) were to me gains (different kinds of gain: cf. Herod. iii. 71, περιβαλλόμενοςἑωυτῷκέρδεα , these (emphatic) I have esteemed, for Christ’ s sake (see it explained below, vv. 8, 9), as loss (“ this one loss he saw in all of which he speaks: hence no longer the plural, as before κέρδη .” Meyer. Ellicott remarks that the singular is regularly used in this formula, referring to Kypke and Elsner in loc. But the reason of this usage in analogous to that given above, and not surely lest ζημίαι should be mistaken to mean “ punishments.” Thus, in the instance from Xen. in Kypke, ἐπὶμὲντοῖςοἰκέταιςἀχθομένουςκαὶζημίανἡγουμένους , the separate deaths of the servants are all massed together, and the loss thought of as one).

8. But moreover (not only have I once for all passed this judgment, but I continue to count, &c. The contrast is of the present ἡγοῦμαι to ἥγημαι above) I also continue to esteem them all (not, all things, which would require πάντα or τὰπάντα (see below) before ἡγοῦμαι , emphatic) to be loss on account of the supereminence (above them all: τοῦγὰρἡλίουφανέντος , προσκαθῆσθαιτῷλύχνῳζημία . Chrys. On the neuter adjective (or participle) construction, see ref. and 2 Corinthians 4:17) of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord (‘ quod Dominum suum vocat, id ad exprimendam affectus vehementiam facit.’ Calv.), on whose account (explained by ἵνα … below) I suffered the loss of all things (now, emphatic and universal. Or, it may be, “ them all,” as Ellic.: but this almost involves a tautology; and, besides, τὰπάντα stands too far from ἅτινα for the τά to be reflexive), and esteem them to be refuse, that I may (by so disesteeming them: ἵνα gives the aim of what went before) gain Christ (not, as the rationalizing Grot., ‘ Christi favorem:’ no indeed, it is Christ Himself,— His perfect image, His glorious perfection, which he wishes to win.

He has Him now, but not in full: this can only be when his course is finished, and to this time the next words allude) and be found (now, and especially at His coming,— ‘ evadam:’ — not as Calv., ‘ Paulum renuntiasse omnibus … ut recuperaret (urgrammatical) in Christo.’ Cf. ref. 2 Cor.) in Him (living and being, and included, in Him as my element), not having (specification of εὑρ . ἐναὐτῷ ,— but not to be joined, as Lachm., al., with ἐναὐτῷ , which would make this latter superfluous) my own righteousness (see on ver. 6) which is of (arising from) the law, but that which is through (as its medium) the faith of (in) Christ , the righteousness which is of (answering to ἐκνόμου ,— as its source, see Ephesians 2:8) God on my faith (built on, grounded on, granted on condition of, my faith. It is more natural to take ἐπὶτῇπίστει with δικαιοσύνην , which it immediately follows, than with Meyer to understand another ἔχων to attach it to. The omission of the article is no objection, but is very frequent, where the whole expression is joined as one idea. Chrys., al., join ἐπὶτῇπίστει with τοῦγνῶναι , as if it were τοῦἐπὶτ . π . γνῶναι , which of course is unallowable: Calv., Grot., Bengel, make the infinitive τοῦγνῶναι dependent on πίστει (“ describit vim et naturam fidei, quod scilicet sit Christi cognitio.” Calv.), which is also inadmissible, for πίστις , as Mey. observes, is never joined with a genitive article and infinitive: and when with a genitive, not the nature but the object of faith is described by it),

10. (aim and employment of this righteousness,— taking up again the ὑπερέχοντῆςγνώσεως , ver. 8. De W., al., treat τοῦγν . as parallel with ἵνακερδήσω , κ .τ .λ . But as Mey. remarks, it is no real parallel, for there is more in ἵναχρ . κερδήσω &c. than in τοῦγνῶναιαὐτόν &c. Besides, thus the process of thought is disturbed,— in which, from ἵνα to ἐπὶτῇπίστει answers to διὰτὸνχριστόν above, and from τοῦγν . to νεκρῶν answers to διὰτὸὑπερέχοντ . γνώσεωςαὐτοῦ . See a similar construction, Romans 6:6), in order to know Him (know, in that fulness of experimental knowledge, which is only wrought by being like Him), and the power of His resurrection (i.e. not ‘ the power by which He was raised,’ but the power which His resurrection exercises on believers— in assuring them of their justification, Romans 4:25; 1 Corinthians 15:17;— mostly however here, from the context which goes on to speak of conformity with His sufferings and death,— in raising them with Him,— cf. Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12),— and the participation of His sufferings (which is the necessitating condition of being brought under the power of His resurrection, see as above, and 2 Timothy 2:11), being conformed (the nominative is an anacoluthon, belonging to τοῦγνῶναι , and referring, as often, to the logical subject) to His Death (it does not appear to me that St.

Paul is here speaking, as Mey., al., of his imminent risk of a death of martyrdom, but that his meaning is general, applying to his whole course of suffering and self-denial, as indeed throughout the sentence. This conformity with Christ’ s death was to take place by means of that perfect self-abjuration which he here asserts of himself— see Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 2:14; 2 Corinthians 4:10 ff.; 1 Corinthians 15:31, and especially Galatians 2:20), if by any means (so Thucyd. ii. 77, πᾶσανγὰρἰδέανἐπενόουν , εἴπωςσφίσινἄνευδαπάνηςκ . πολιορκίαςπροσαχθείη : Herod. vi. 52, βουλομένην , εἴκωςἀμφότεροιγενοίατοβασιλῆες .

It is used when an end is proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible: see Hartung, ii. 206; Kü hner, ii. 584. ὅμωςμετὰταῦταπάνταοὔπωθαῤῥῶ · ὅπερἀλλαχοῦλέγειὁδοκῶνἑστάναιβλεπέτωμὴπέσῃ . κ . πάλιν , φοβοῦμαιμήπωςἄλλοιςκηρύξας , αὐτὸςἀδόκιμοςγένωμαι . Chrys.) I may attain (not future, but subjunctive aorist. On the sense, see Acts 26:7; from which alone, it is evident that it does not signify ‘ live until,’ as Van Hengel) unto the resurrection from the dead (viz. the blessed resurrection of the dead in Christ, in which οἱτοῦχριστοῦ shall rise ἐντῇπαρουσίᾳαὐτοῦ , 1 Corinthians 15:23, see also 1 Thessalonians 4:16. But the ἐξ - in ἐξανάστ . does not distinctively point out this first resurrection, but merely indicates rising up, out of the dust; cf. the verb Mark 12:19 L., Acts 15:5, and the word itself in ref. Polyb.).

12-14. This seems to be inserted to prevent the misapprehension, that he conceived himself already to possess this knowledge, and to have grasped Christ in all His fulness.

12. not that (I do not mean, that … , see reff.) I have already acquired (this χριστὸνκερδῆσαι : not the βραβεῖον below (Mey.), which is an image subsequently introduced, whereas the reference here must be to something foregoing, nor τὴνἀνάστασιν , which has just been stated as an object of his wishes for the future: but as Calv., “ nempe ut in solidum communicet Christi passionibus, ut perfectum habeat gustum potentiæ resurrectionis, ut ipsum plane cognoseat” ) or am already completed (in spiritual perfection. Philo de Alleg. iii. 23, vol. i. p. 101, πότεοὖν , ὦψυχή , μάλιστανεκροφορεῖνσαυτὴνὑπολήψῃ ; ἆράγεοὐχὅταντελειωθῇςκαὶβραβείωνκ . στεφάνωνἀξιωθῇς ;), but I pursue (the image of a runner in a course is already before him. So διώκω absolute in Æ sch. Theb. 89, ὄρνυταιλαὸς … ἐπὶπόλινδιώκων . This is simpler than to suppose that an object, the βραβεῖον , is in his mind, though not expressed. See Ellic.’ s note) if (nearly = εἴπως above) I may also , sondern auch ergreife: nor does it answer to the καί following, as De W.) lay hold of that for which (this seems the simplest rendering, and has been the usual one.

Meyer’ s rendering of ἐφ ʼ ᾧ ‘ because,’ after Chrys., Thdrt., Thl., requires καταλάβω to be absolute, and would more naturally be expressed ἐφ ʼ ᾧκἀγὼκατελήμφθην , the emphatic first person hardly admitting of being supplied from the preceding clause: whereas on our rendering the whole forms but one clause, the first person recurring throughout it. Grot.’ s, ‘ quo ut pervenire possem,’ Beza’ s, &c., ‘ for which reason,’ — all keeping καταλάβω absolute, are not open to the above objection) I was also laid hold of (the καί belongs to the verb, not to ἐγώ understood, nor to the ἐφ ʼ ᾧ , as if there might be other ends for which he was apprehended (Ellic.): see above— and brings out, that in my case there was another instance of the καταλαβεῖν . For the sense, cf. 1 Corinthians 13:12, ἐπιγνώσομαικαθὼςκαὶἐπεγνώσθην : and Plato, Tim. p. 39, τῇδὴταὐτοῦφορᾷτὰτάχισταπερμόνταὑπὸτῶνβραδυτέρωνἰόντωνἐφαίνετοκαταλαμβάνοντακαταλαμβάνεσθαι . The time referred to by the aorist was his conversion: but we need not, as Chrys., al., press the image of the race, and regard him as flying and overtaken) by Christ.

13. Emphatic and affectionate re-statement of the same, but not merely so;— he evidently alludes to some whom he wishes to warn by his example. Brethren, I (emphatic: cf. John 5:30; John 7:17; John 8:33; Acts 26:9) do not reckon myself (emphatic) to have laid hold: but one thing (I do: not λογίζομαι , nor διώκω , nor φροντίζω , none of which correspond to the epexegesis following: nor can we say that nothing requires to be supplied (Grot., al.), for even in τοῦτοδέ this would not be so— the sense must have a logical supplement: nor will it do to join ἕν to διώκω (Aug., al.), or to supply ἐστι (Beza)): forgetting the things behind (me, as a runner in the course; by which image, now fully before him, the expressions in this verse must be explained: καὶγὰρὁδρομεὺςοὐχὅσουςἤνυσενἀναλογίζεταιδιαύλους , ἀλλ ʼ ὅσουςλείπεται … τίγὰρἡμᾶςὠφελεῖτὸἀνυσθέν , ὅταντὸλειπόμενονμὴπροστεθῇ ; Chr. Thdrt. explains it περὶτῶντοῦκηρύγματοςπόνων : but this seems insufficient), but ever reaching out towards (as the runner whose body is bent forwards in his course; the ἐπί giving the continual addition of exertion in this direction (Mey.) or perhaps merely the direction itself. ὁγὰρἐπεκτεινόμενος , τοῦτ ʼ ἐστιν , ὁτοὺςπόδαςκαίτοιτρέχονταςτῷλοιπῷσώματιπρολαβεῖνσπουδάζων , ἐπεκτείνωνἑαυτὸνεἰςτὸἔμπροσθεν , κ . τὰςχεῖραςἐκτείνων , ἵνακ . τοῦδρόμουπλέοντιἐργάσηται . Chr.) the things before (i.e. the perfection not yet reached), I pursue (on διώκω absolute, see note, ver. 12) towards the goal (the contrary of ἀπὸσκοποῦ , beside the mark, Plato, Tim. p. 25 al.) for (to reach, with a view to; or perhaps simply in the direction of: see reff. for both) the prize (see 1 Corinthians 9:24; 2 Timothy 4:8; Revelation 2:10) of my heavenly (reff. and κλῆσιςἐπουράνιος Hebrews 3:1, Ἱερουσ . ἐπουράνιος Hebrews 12:22.

Not, ‘ from above,’ = ἄνωθεν : but the allusion is to his appointment having been made directly in heaven, not by delegation on earth) calling of God (who was the caller: but we must not think of Him, as Grot., al.,— as the arbiter sitting above and summoning to the course,— for in these last words the figure is dropt, and ἡἄνωκλῆσις represents real matter of fact) in Christ Jesus (to what are these last words to be referred? Chrys., al., join them with διώκω :— ἐνχ . Ἰ . τοῦτοποιῶ , φησιν . οὐγὰρἔνιχωρὶςτῆςἐκείνουῥοπῆςτοσοῦτονδιελθεῖνδιάστημα · πολλῆςδεῖτῆςβοηθείας , πολλῆςτῆςσυμμαχίας . But I own the arrangement of the sentence thus seems to me very unnatural— and the constant practice of St. Paul to join θεός and things said of θεός with ἐνχριστῷ weighs strongly for the other connexion, viz. that with τ . κλήσεωςτοῦθεοῦ . The objection that then τῆς or τοῦ would be required before ἐν , is not valid; the unity of the idea of the κλῆσιςἐνκυρίῳ , 1 Corinthians 7:22, would dispense with it).

15, 16. Exhortation to them to be unanimous in following this his example. In order to understand this somewhat difficult passage, we must remember (1) that the description of his own views and feelings which he holds up for their imitation (συμμιμηταίμουγίν .) began with having no confidence in the flesh, ver. 4, and has continued to ver. 14. Also (2) that the description commencing with ὅσοιοὖντέλειοι , is taken up again from ver. 3, ἡμεῖςγάρἐσμενἡπεριτομή , οἱπνεύματιθεοῦλατρεύοντες , κ . καυχώμενοιἐνχ . Ἰησοῦ , κ . οὐκἐνσαρκὶπεποιθότες . These two considerations will keep us from narrowing too much the τοῦτοφρονῶμεν , and from misunderstanding the ὅσοιοὖντέλειοι . As many of us then (refers to ver. 3: see above) as are perfect (mature in Christian life, = those described above, ver. 3), let us be of this mind (viz. that described as entertained by himself, vv. 7-14): and if in any thing (accusative of reference: see Kü hner, Gramm. ii. 220 ff.) ye be differently minded (for ἑτέρως , cf.

Od. α . 232 ff., μέλλενμένποτεοἶκοςὅδ ʼ ἀφνειὸςκ . ἀμύμων | ἔμμεναι , ὄφρ ʼ ἔτικεῖνοςἀνὴρἐπιδήμιοςἦεν | νῦνδ ʼ ἑτέρωςἐβάλοντοθεοί , κακὰμητιόωντες : Demosth. p. 298. 22, εἰμέντιτῶνδεόντωνἐπράχθη , τὸνκαιρόν , οὐκἐμέφησιναἴτιονγεγενῆσθαι , τῶνδ ʼ ὡςἑτέρωςσυμβάντωνἁπάντωνἐμὲκαὶτὴνἐμὴντύχηναἰτίανεἶναι . Hence it gives the meaning of diversity in a bad sense. The difference referred to seems to be that of too much self-esteem as to Christian perfection: see below), this also (as well as the rest which he has revealed) will God reveal to you (i.e. in the progress of the Christian life, you will find the true knowledge of your own imperfection and of Christ’ s all-sufficiency revealed to you by God’ s Spirit, Ephesians 1:17 ff. ὅραπῶςσυνεσταλμένωςτοῦτόφησιν . ὁθεὸςὑμᾶςδιδάξει , τουτέστιν , ὑμᾶςπείσει , οὐχὶδιδάξειἁπλῶς . ἐδίδασκεμὲνγὰρὁΠαῦλος , ἀλλ ʼ ὁθεὸςἐνῆγε . καὶοὐκεἶπεν , ἐνάξει , ἀλλ ʼ ἀποκαλύψει , ἵναδόξῃμᾶλλονἀγνοίαςεἶναιτὸπρᾶγμα . οὐπερὶδογμάτωνταῦτ ʼ εἴρηται , ἀλλὰπερὶβίουτελειότητος , κ . τοῦμὴνομίζεινἑαυτοὺςτελείουςεἶναι · ὡςὅγενομίζωντὸπᾶνεἰληφέναι , οὐδὲνἔχει . Chrys.

τοῦτο must not be taken as Œ c., Grot., &c. as representing the fact, that ye ἑτέρωςφρονεῖτε , but is the thing, respecting which ye ἑτ . φρ .).

16. Let not however this diversity, respecting which some of you yet await deeper revelations from God’ s Spirit, produce any dissension in your Christian unity.

Nevertheless (notwithstanding that some of you, &c. as above. On πλήν , see Devarius, and Klotz’ s note, i. 188; ii. 725) as far as we have attained (towards Christian perfection: ὃκατωρθώσαμεν , Thl.: including both knowledge and practice, of both which he spoke above in his own case. On the construction, see reff.), walk by the same (path) . The exhortation refers to the onward advance of the Christian life— let us go on together, each one in his place and degree of advance, but all in the same path.

17-4:1. Exhortation to follow his example (17): warning against the enemies of the cross of Christ (18, 19): declaration of the high privileges and hopes of Christians (20, 21), and affectionate entreaty to stedfastness (4:1). Be imitators together (i.e. with one another: so, and not imitators together with those mentioned below (Mey., Wies.), must the word here be rendered. The latter would be allowable as far as the word is concerned, but the form of the sentence determines for the other. συμμιμηταίμουγίνεσθε forms a complete clause, in which συμμιμηταί has the place of emphasis, and in συμμιμηταί the preposition: it is therefore unallowable to pass on the sense of the συμ . to another clause from which it is separated by καί and another verb. So that instead of καὶσκοπεῖτεκ .τ .λ . being a reason for this meaning, it is in fact a reason against it) of me, and observe (for imitation: τοὺςεὐτέλειανμᾶλλονἢπολυχρηματίανσκοποῦντας , Xen. Symp. iv. 42) those who walk in such manner as ye have an example in us.

The construction is much controverted. Meyer and Wiesinger would separate οὕτως and καθώς — observe those who thus walk (i.e. as implied above); as ye have (emphatic— ye are not in want of) an example in us (viz.

Paul and those who thus walk). My objection to this is, that if οὕτως and καθώς are to be independent— the three verbs γίνεσθε , σκοπεῖτε , ἔχετε , being thus thrown into three independent clauses, will be all correlative, and the ἔχετετύπον will not apply to οὕτωςπεριπατοῦντας , but to the foregoing verbs, thus stultifying the sentence: “ Be &c., and observe &c., as ye have an example in us.” Besides which, the οὕτωςπεριπατοῦντας would he (1) very vague as referring back to what went before, seeing that no περιπατεῖν has been specified, whereas (2) it is directly related to what follows, by the πολλοὶπεριπατοῦσιν of ver. 18. I therefore retain the usuul rendering. Meyer’ s objections to it are, (1) that it is ἔχετε , not ἔχουσιν :— but this does not affect the matter: for, the example including in its reference the τοὺςοὕτωςπεριπατοῦντας and the Philippians, the 2nd person would be more naturally used, the 3rd making a separation which would not be desirable:— (2) that it is ἡμᾶς , not ἐμέ :— but granting that this does not apply to Paul alone, it certainly cannot, as Mey., be meant to include the τοὺςοὕτ . περ . with him, which would be a way of speaking unprecedented in his writings,— but must apply to himself and his fellow-workers, Timotheus, Epaphroditus, &c. Of course the τύπον is no objection (as De W.) to the proper plural sense of ἡμᾶς , for it is used of that wherein they were all united in one category, as in ἡδεῖςτὴνὄψιν (Plato), κακοὶτὴνψυχήν (Æ sch.): see Kü hner, ii. 27.

18. For (reason for σκοπεῖτεκ .τ .λ . in the form of warning against others who walk differently) many walk (no need to supply any thing, as κακῶς (Œ c.), or ‘ longe aliter’ (Grot.), nor to understand the word ‘ circulantur,’ as 1 Peter 5:8 (Storr, al., but inconsistently with ver. 17),— still less with Calv. ‘ ambulant terrena cogitantes’ (ungrammatical: οἱτὰἐπίγ . φρ .): or to consider the sentence as broken off by the relative clause (De W., al.); for περιπατοῦσιν is a ‘ verbum indifferens,’ as in ver. 17, τοὺςοὕτωςπεριπ .) whom I many times mentioned to you (viz. when I was with you) but now mention even weeping (διὰτί ; ὅτιἐπέτεινετὸκακόν , ὅτιδακρύωνἄξιοιοἱτοιοῦτοι … κλαίειτοίνυνὁΠαῦλοςἐφ ʼ οἷςἕτεροιγελῶσικαὶσπαταλῶσιν . οὕτωςἐστὶσυμπαθητικός , οὕτωφροντίζειπάντωνἀνθρώπων . Chrys.), the enemies (the article designates the particular class intended) of the cross of Christ ,— of whom perdition (everlasting, at the coining of the Lord: see ch. 1:28) is the (fixed, certain) end; of whom their belly is the god and their glory in their shame (“ ἡδόξα is subjective,— in the judgment of these men,— and τῇαἰσχύνῃ objective,— according to the reality of morals. Cf. Polyb. xv. 23. 5, ἐφ ʼ οἷςἐχρῆναἰτχύνεσθαικαθ ʼ ὑπερβολήν , ἐπὶτούτοιςὡςκαλοῖςσεμνύνεσθαικαὶμεγαλαυχεῖν . On εἶναιἐν , ‘ versari,’ to be found in, or contained in, any thing, cf.

Plato Gorg. 470 e, ἐντούτῳἡπᾶσαεὐδαιμονίαἐστίν ,— Eur. Phœ n. 1310,— οὐκἐναἰσχύνῃτὰσά .” Meyer.

Ambr., Hil., Pel., Aug., Beng., al., refer the expression to circumcision, taking another meaning for αἰσχύνη (‘ venter et pudor sunt affinia.’ Beng.), but without reason; and Chrys., al., disown the meaning), who regard (it is not easy to give φρονεῖν , φρόνημα , in this sense, by one word in English. They betoken the whole aspect, the set of the thoughts and desires: τὰἐπίγεια , are the substratum of all their feelings) the things on earth (in opposition to the things above, cf. Colossians 3:1 ff. The construction is that of logical reference to the subject of the sentence, setting aside the strictness of grammatical connexion: so Thuc. iii. 36,— ἔδοξεναὐτοῖς … ἐπικαλοῦντες … , and iv. 108; vi. 24; vii. 42: see more examples in Kü hner, ii. 377.

The οἱ serves as τούς above, to indicate and individualize the class).

20. For (I may well direct you to avoid τοὺςτὰἐπίγειαφρονοῦντας :— for— our state and feelings are wholly alien from theirs) our (emphatic) country (the state, to which we belong, of which we by faith are citizens,— ἡπατρίς , Thl.; meaning the Kingdom of God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Galatians 4:26. Colossians 3:1 ff.). This objective meaning of the word is better than the subjective one, ‘ our citizenship’ (πολιτεία , Acts 22:28: but they seem sometimes to be used indifferently, see Palm and Rost’ s Lex., and Aristot. Pol. iii. 4, κύριονμὲνγὰρτὸπολίτευματῆςπόλεως · πολίτευμαδ ʼ ἐστὶνἡπολιτεία , cf. however, on the other side, Ellicott: and his note through out), or, ‘ our conversation,’ as vulg. E.

V., which rendering seems to want precedent. Conyb. renders it ‘ life:’ but this is insufficient, even supposing it justifiable, as giving the English reader the idea of ζωή , and so misleading him.

I may remark, in passing, on the unfortunate misconception of St. Paul’ s use of the plural, which has marred so many portions of Mr. Conybeare’ s version of the Epistles, and none more sadly than this,— where he gives the Apostle’ s noble description of the state and hopes of us Christians, as contrasted with the τὰἐπίγ . φρονοῦντες ,— all in the singular— ‘ For my life, &c.,— from whence also I look, &c.’ ) subsists (the word is more solemn, as indicating priority and fixedness, than ἐστιν would be: see notes, ch. 2:6, and Acts 16:20) in the heavens, from whence also (additional particular, following on heaven being our country) we wait for (expect, till the event arrives: see note on Romans 8:19, and a dissertation in the Fritzschiorum Opuscula, p. 150 ff.) a Saviour (emphatic: therefore we cannot τὰἐπίγ . φρονεῖν , because we are waiting for one to deliver us from them. Or, as Saviour (Ellic.): but perhaps the other is preferable, as being simpler), (viz.) the Lord Jesus Christ,

21. (describes the method, in which this Saviour shall save us— a way utterly precluding our making a God of our body) who shall transform (see 1 Corinthians 15:51 ff. The words assume, as St. Paul always does when speaking incidentally, the ἡμεῖς surviving to witness the coming of the Lord. The change from the dust of death in the resurrection, however we may accommodate the expression to it, was not originally contemplated by it; witness the ἀπεκδεχόμεθα , and the σῶματῆςταπεινώσεωςἡμῶν . It is quite in vain to attempt to escape from this inference, as Eilicott does, by saying that “ every moment of a true Christian’ s life involves such an ἀπεκδοχήν .” This is most true, but in no way accounts for the peculiar expressions used here) the body of our humiliation (beware of the hendiadys, by which most Commentators, and even Conyb. here enervate the Apostle’ s fine and deep meaning. The body is that object, that material, in which our humiliation has place and is shewn, by its suffering and being degraded— πολλὰπάσχεινῦντὸσῶμα , δεσμεῖται , μαστίζεται , μυρίαπάσχειδεινά , Chrys.

He once had such a ταπείνωσις , and has passed through it to His glory— and He shall change us so as to be like Him.— Whereas the rendering ‘ our vile body’ sinks all this, and makes the epithet merely refer to that which is common to all humanity by nature. It is besides, perhaps, hardly allowable: for ταπείνωσις cannot— unless the exigency of context require it, as in ref. Luke (not in Proverbs 16:19),— signify mere ‘ vileness,’ ταπεινότης , but must imply the act whereby the body ταπεινοῦται ) (so as to be) conformed to (on this common idiom, εὔφημον , ὦτάλαινα , κοίμησονστόμα , Æ sch. Ag. 1258, al. freq.,— cf. Kü hner, ii. 121) the body of His glory (in which, as its object or material, His glory has place and is displayed: see above), according to (after the analogy of) the working of His power also (besides the μετασχήμ . &c. spoken of) to subject to Him all things (the universe: see the exception, 1 Corinthians 15:25-27). ταῦταδὲποιήσει , says Thdrt., ἅτεδὴδύναμινἄῤῥητονἔχων , κ . ῥᾳδίωςκ . τὴνφθορὰνκ . τὸνθάνατονκαταπαύων , κ . εἰςἀθανασίαντὰἡμέτερασώματαμεταβάλλων , κ . παρασκευάζωνἅπανταςεἰςαὐτὸνἀποβλέπειν . And Chrys.:— ἔδειξεμείζοναἔργατῆςδυνάμεωςαὐτοῦ , ἵνακ . τούτοιςπιστεύσῃς .

αὐτῷ , used of the αὐτός of the whole sentence, from the position of the writer, not of the agent in the clause itself.