Philippians 1

Philippians 1:2-3

ing to ἱερός, that the former was adopted by the LXX translators as the common rendering of Ὕρ, while the latter is very rarely used by them in any sense: see esp. Lev. xi. 44 ἀγιασθήσεσθε καὶ ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε ὅτι ἅγιός εἰμι ἐγώ.

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ to be connected with ἁγίοις. For the omission of the article see the notes on 1 Thess. i. 1.

ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις] ’the presbyters and deacons.’ The contributions were probably sent to St Paul in the name of the officers, as well as of the church generally: comp. Acts xv. 23. Hence St Paul mentions them in reply. It seems hardly probable that this mention was intended, as some have thought, to strengthen the hands of the presbyters and deacons, their authority being endangered. The dissensions in the Philippian Church do not appear to have touched the officers. On ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος, as interchangeable terms, see the detached note, p. 95.

2. χάρις ὑμῖν κ.τ.λ.] On the form of salutation see the note on 1 Thess. i. 1.

3. The thanksgiving in this epistle is more than usually earnest. The Apostle dwells long and fondly on the subject. He repeats words and accumulates clauses in the intensity of his feeling. As before in the omission of his official title, so here in the fulness of his thanksgiving, the letters to the Thessalonians present the nearest parallel to the language of this epistle: see introduction p. 66.

3 5. ‘I thank my God for you all at all times, as I think of you, whensoever I pray for you (and these prayers I offer with joy), for that you have co-operated with me to the furtherance of the Gospel from the day when you first heard of it to the present moment.’

The arrangement of the clauses in these verses is doubtful. They may be connected in various ways, and the punctuation will differ accordingly. On the whole however the words πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν seem naturally to run together; and if so, we have the alternative of attaching them to the foregoing or to the following words. I have preferred the former for two reasons. (1) The structure of the passage is dislocated and its force weakened, by disconnecting clauses pointed out so obviously as correlative by the repetition of the same word πάσῃ, πάντοτε, πάσῃ, πάντων; see Lobeck Paral. p. 56. (2) The words μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος seem to stand apart, as an explanatory clause defining the character of the foregoing πάσῃ δεήσει; for there would be great awkwardness in making one sentence of the two, ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος. For the connexion εὐχαριστεῖν πάντοτε (in most cases with περὶ or ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν) see 1 Cor. i. 4, 1 Thess. i. 2, 2 Thess. i. 3, ii. 13, Ephes. v. 20, and perhaps also Col. i. 3, Philem. 4: comp. also Ephes. i. 16 οὐ πνεύμασι εὐχαριστῶν.

τῷ Θεῷ μου] ‘my God.’ The singular expresses strongly the sense of a close personal relationship: comp. Acts xxvii. 23 ‘whose I am and whom I serve’: see also the note on Gal. ii. 20, and comp. iii. 8.

ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ] ‘in all my remembrance,’ not ‘on every remembrance (ἐπὶ πάσῃ μνείᾳ),’ which would point rather to isolated, intermittent acts. On μνεία and εὐχαριστῶ see the notes 1 Thess. i. 2.

Philippians 1:4-5

4 πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος, 5 ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἀπὸ [τῆς] πρώτης ἡμέρας ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν·

4. ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν] should be connected rather with εὐχαριστώ than with ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει, for the following reasons. (1) The words are more naturally taken as independent and coordinate with all the preceding clauses, ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ, πάντοτε, ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει, than as dependent on any one singly. (2) The stress of the Apostle’s statement is rather on the thanksgiving for all than the prayer for all, as he is dwelling on their good deeds. (3) In the parallel passages already quoted the common connexion is εὐχαριστεῖν ὑπὲρ (οἱ περὶ) ὑμῶν.

There is a studied repetition of the word ‘all’ in this epistle, when the Philippian Church is mentioned: see i. 2, 7 (ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, πάντας ὑμᾶς), 8, 25, ii. 17, iv. 21. It is impossible not to connect this recurrence of the word with the strong and repeated exhortations to unity which the epistle contains (i. 27, ii. 1-4, iv. 2, 3, 5, 7, 9). The Apostle seems to say, ‘I make no difference between man and man, or between party and party: my heart is open to all; my prayers, my thanksgivings, my hopes, my obligations, extend to all.’ See the introduction, p. 67.

μετὰ χαρᾶς κ.τ.λ.] ‘Summa epistolae,’ says Bengol, ‘gaudeo gaudete’: comp. i. 18, 25, ii. 2, 17, 18, 28, 29, iii. 1, iv. 1, 4, 10. The article before δέησιν refers it back to the previous δεήσει.

5. ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ κ.τ.λ.] The previous clause μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος being a parenthesis, these words are connected with εὐχαριστώ. For εὐχαριστεῖν ἐπὶ see 1 Cor. i. 4. The words signify not ‘your participation in the Gospel’ (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, comp. ii. 1, iii. 10), but ‘your cooperation towards, in aid of the Gospel’ (εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον). For the construction see 2 Cor. ix. 13 ἀπλάτητε τῆς κοινωνίας εἰς αὐτούς, Rom. xv. 26 κοινωνίαν τινὰ ποιήσασθαι εἰς τοὺς πτωχούς. In the passages just quoted κοινωνία has a restricted meaning, ‘contributions, almsgiving’ (as also in 2 Cor. viii. 4, Hebr. xiii. 16; so κοινωνεῖν, Rom. xii. 13; κοινωνικός, 1 Tim. vi. 18; see Fritzsche Rom. iii. p. 81); but here, as the context shows, it denotes cooperation in the widest sense, their participation with the Apostle whether in sympathy or in suffering or in active labour or in any other way. At the same time their almsgiving was a signal instance of this cooperation, and seems to have been foremost in the Apostle’s mind. In this particular way they had cooperated from the very first (ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἡμέρας) when on his departure from Philippi they sent contributions to Thessalonica and to Corinth (iv. 15, 16 ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου), and up to the present time (ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν) when again they had despatched supplies to Rome by the hands of Epaphroditus (iv. 10 ἤδη πότε).

πρώτης] ’the first.’ The article is frequently omitted, because the numeral is sufficiently definite in itself: comp. Mark xii. 28-30, xvi. 9, Acts xii. 10, xvi. 12, xx. 18, Ephes. vi 2. Here some of the oldest xss read τῆς πρώτης, but the article might perhaps be suspected, as a likely addition of some transcriber for the sake of greater precision.

6, 7. ‘I have much ground for thanksgiving; thanksgiving for past experience, and thanksgiving for future hope. I am sure, that as God has inaugurated a good work in you, so He will complete the same, that it may be prepared to stand the test in the day of Christ’s advent. I have every reason to think thus favourably of you all; for the remembrance is ever in

G-2

Philippians 1:6-7

⁶πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ὅτι ὁ ἐναρξάμενος ἐν ὑμῖν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐπιτελέσει ἄχρι[s] ἡμέρας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ⁷καθὼς ἐστιν δίκαιον ἐμοὶ τοῦτο φρονεῖν ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, διὰ τὸ ἔχειν με ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμᾶς ἐν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς 6. ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

my heart, how you—yes, all of you— have tendered me your aid and love, whether in bearing the sorrows of my captivity or in actively defending and promoting the Gospel: a manifest token that ye all are partakers with me of the grace of God.’

6. πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο] ‘since I

have this very confidence.’ This assurance, built on the experience of the past, enables the Apostle to anticipate matter for thankfulness. For αὐτὸ τοῦτο comp. Gal. ii. 10, 2 Cor. ii. 3, 2 Pet. i. 5 (with a v. l.). The order alone seems sufficient to exclude another proposed rendering of αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ‘on this very account,’ i. e. ‘by reason of your past cooperation.’ ὁ ἐναρξάμενος] The words ἐνάρχεσθαι, ἐπιτελεῖν, possibly contain a sacrificial metaphor: see the notes on Gal. iii. 3, and compare ii. 17 εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ. For the omission of Θεὸς before ὁ ἐναρξάμενος compare Gal. i. 6, 15 (notes).

ἔργον ἀγαθόν] By this ‘good work’ is meant their cooperation with and affection for the Apostle. By the workers of this work St Paul doubtless means the Philippians themselves. Nevertheless it is God’s doing from beginning to end: He inaugurates and He completes. This paradox of all true religion is still more broadly stated in ii. 12, 13, ‘Work out your own salvation, for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to work etc.’ ἄχρις ἡμέρας Ἰησοῦ] refers to the foregoing notes of time, ἀπὸ πρώτης ἡμέρας and ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν; but the expression implies something more than a temporal limit. The idea of a testing is prominent: ‘God will advance you in grace, so that you may be prepared to meet the day of trial.’ On the meaning of ἡμέρα and on the absence of the definite article see the notes on 1 Thess. v. 2.

As ’the day of Christ’ is thus a more appropriate limit than ’the day of your death,’ it must not be hastily inferred from this expression that St Paul confidently expected the Lord’s advent during the lifetime of his Philippian converts. On the other hand, some anticipation of its near approach seems to underlie ἄχρις here, as it is implied in St Paul’s language elsewhere, e. g. in ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες 1 Thess. iv. 17, and in πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα (probably the correct reading) 1 Cor. xv. 51.

7. This confidence is justified by their past cooperation, which is indelibly stamped on the Apostle’s memory. The stress of the reason (διὰ), which is the foundation of this assurance, reats not on ἔχειν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ but on συνκοινωνοὺς τῆς χάριτος, not on the act of remembering but on the thing remembered.

καθὼς] See the note Gal. iii. 6.

τοῦτο φρονεῖν κ.τ.λ.] ’to entertain this opinion concerning you all.’ On the difference between ὑπὲρ and περὶ see the note on Gal. i. 4, and comp. Winer § xlvii. p. 466.

διὰ τὸ ἔχειν με κ.τ.λ.] ‘because I have you’; not, as it is sometimes taken, ‘because you have me.’ The order of the words points to this as the correct rendering; and the appeal which follows, ‘for God is my witness,’ requires it.

ἐν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς κ.τ.λ.] Are these words to be taken with the foregoing or with the following clause? According as they are attached to the

Philippians 1:8

μου καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ καὶ βεβαιώσει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου συγκοινωνούς μου τῆς χάριτος πάντας ὑμᾶς ὄντας· 8 μάρτυς γάρ μου ὁ Θεός, ὡς ἐπιποθῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς ἐν σπλάγone or the other, their meaning will be different. (1) If we connect them with what precedes, ἡν will be temporal, and the sense will then be, ‘I bear this in mind, both when I am in bonds and when I am pleading my cause in court.’ But even if there were ground for supposing that the trial had already begun, the clause is thus rendered almost meaningless. (2) On the other hand, if they are attached to the following words, the sense is easy: ‘participators with me both in my bonds and in my defence and maintenance of the Gospel,’ i.e. ‘If I have suffered, so have you; if I have laboured actively for the Gospel, so have you’: comp. vv. 29, 30.

τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ κ.τ.λ.] The two words, being connected by the same article, combine to form one idea. As ἀπολογία implies the negative or defensive side of the Apostle’s preaching, the preparatory process of removing obstacles and prejudices, so βεβαίωσις denotes the positive or aggressive side, the direct advancement and establishment of the Gospel. The two together will thus comprise all modes of preaching and extending the truth. For ἀπολογία see ver. 16; for βεβαίωσις 1 Cor. i. 6.

συγκοινωνούς μου κ.τ.λ.] ‘partakers with me in grace.’ The genitives are best treated as separate and independent, so e.g. ii. 30: comp. Wiuer § xxx. p. 239. In this case ἡ χάρις with the definite article stands absolutely for ’the Divine grace,’ as frequently: e.g. Acts xviii. 27, 2 Cor. iv. 15, Gal. v. 4, Ephes. ii. 8. ‘Grace’ applies equally to the ‘bonds,’ and to the ‘defence and confirmation of the Gospel.’ If it is a privilege to preach Christ, it is not less a privilege to suffer for Him: comp. ver. 29 ὑμῖν ἐχαρίσθη τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μόνον τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύειν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πάσχειν. A more special condering of the passage is sometimes adopted, ‘joint contributors to the gift which I have received’: see e.g. Paley’s Hor. Paul. vii. 1. But though χάρις sometimes refers specially to abus living (e.g. 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 2 Cor. vili. 4), such a restriction here seems to sever this clause from the context and to destroy the whole force of the passage.

ὑμᾶς] repeated: comp. Col. ii. 13

(the correct reading), and see Wiuer § xxii. p. 184.

8. ‘I call God to witness that I did not exaggerate, when I spoke of having you all in my heart.’ The same form of attestation occurs in Rom. i. 9: see also 2 Cor. i. 23, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 10. ἐπιποθῶ] ‘I yearn after.’ The preposition in itself signifies merely direction; but the idea of straining after the object being thereby suggested, it gets to imply eugerness: comp.

Diod. Sic. xvii. 101 παρόντι μὲν οὐ χρησάμενος ἀπόντα δὲ ἐπιποθήσας. It is a significant fact, pointing to the greater intensity of the language, that, while the simple words πόθος, ποθεῖν, etc. are never found in the New Testament, the compounds ἐπιποθεῖν, ἐπιποθία, ἐπιπόθησις, ἐπιπόθητος, occur with tolerable frequency.

ἐν σπλάγχνοις κ.τ.λ.] ‘Did I speak of having you in my own heart? I should rather have said that in the heart of Christ Jesus I long for you.’ A powerful metaphor describing perfect union. The believer has no yearnings apart from his Lord; his pulse beats with the pulse of Christ; his heart throbs with the heart of Christ. ‘In Paulo non Paulus vivit,’ says Bengel, ‘sed Jesus Christus’; see the note on Gal. ii. 20. Comp. Test. xii. Patr. Levi 4 ἐν σπλάγχνοις υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ. Theophilus

Philippians 1:9-10

χνοις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ· ⁹καὶ τοῦτο προσεύχομαι, ἵνα ἡ ἀγ- άπη ὑμῶν ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύη ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει, ¹⁰εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ δια- φέροντα, ἵνα ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι εἰς ἡμέραν

9. μᾶλλον περισσεύση.

(ad Autol. ii. 10, 22) ases σπλάγχνα and καρδία as convertible terms, speak- ing of the Word in one passage as ἐνδιάθετον ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις σπλάγχνοις (τοῦ Θεοῦ), in another as ἐνδιάθετον ἐν καρ- δίᾳ Θεοῦ.

The σπλάγχνα are properly the no- bler viscera, the heart, lungs, liver etc., as distinguished from the ἕντερα, the lower viscera, the intestines: e.g. Æsch. Agam. 1221 σὺν ἑντέραις τε σπλάγχνα. The σπλάγχνα alone seem to be re- garded by the Greeks as the seat of the affections, whether anger, love, pity, or jealousy. On the other hand no such distinction is observed in He- brew. The words מֵעִים, חֲמִים, and even קָרַב, which occur commonly in this metaphorical sense, seem to cor- respond rather to ἕντερα than to σπλάγχνα: whence even κοιλία and ἔγκαια are so used in the LXX. The verb σπλαγχνίζεσθαι seems not to be classical, and was perhaps a coinage of the Jewish dispersion, the metaphor being much more common in Hebrew than in Greek.

9. ‘I spoke of praying for you (ver. 4). This then is the purport of my prayer (τοῦτο προσεύχομαι), that your love may ever grow and grow, in the attainment of perfect knowledge and universal discernment.’ ἵνα] introduces the clause which de- scribes the purport of τοῦτο. For this connexion of τοῦτο ἵνα compare 1 Joh. iv. 17: see also 3 Joh. 4 μειξο- τέραν τούτων οὐκ ἔχω χαρὰν ἵνα ἀκούω κ.τ.λ., Joh. xv. 13 μείζονα ταύτης ἀγά- πην οὐδεὶς ἔχει ἵνα τις τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ θῇ κ.τ.λ. For such later usages of ἵνα, which in older classical Greek always denotes motive or design, see the notes on 1 Thess. ii. 16, v. 4, Gal. v. 17. ἡ ἀγάπη] ’love,’ neither towards the

Apostle alone nor towards one another alone, but love absolutely, the inward state of the soul.

ἔτι μᾶλλον κ.τ.λ.] An accumulation of words to denote superabundance, as below ver. 23. The present (περισ- σεύη), perhaps better supported than the aorist (περισσεύση), is certainly more in place, as expressing the con- tinuous growth.

ἐπιγνώσει] ‘advanced, perfect know- ledge.’ The intensive preposition (ἐπὶ) before γνώσει answers to the adjective before αἰσθήσει. Comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 12 ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους τότε δὲ ἐπι- γνώσομαι: see also the distinction of γνῶσις and ἐπίγνωσις in Justin Dial. p 220 D. The substantive, which ap- pears in St Paul in the Epistle to the Romans (i. 28, x. 2) for the first time, is found several times in the letters of the captivity and afterwards. Its more frequent occurrence thus corre- sponds to the more contemplative as- pect of the Gospel presented in these later epistles. See Col. i. 9 (note).

πάσῃ αἰσθήσει] ‘all perception.’ Love imparts a sensitiveness of touch, gives a keen edge to the discriminating fa- culty, in things moral and spiritual. While ἐπίγνωσις deals with general principles, αἴσθησις is concerned with practical applications. The latter word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, but αἰσθητήρια is used si- milarly to denote the organs of moral sense, Hebr. v. 14 τῶν διὰ τὴν ἑξιν τὰ αἰσθητήρια γεγυμνασμένα ἐχόντων πρὸς διάκρισιν καλοῦ τε καὶ κακοῦ: comp. Jer. iv. 19 τὰ αἰσθητήρια τῆς καρδίας.

10. τὰ διαφέροντα] not ’things which are opposed,’ as good and bad (so for instance Fritzsche Rom. I. p. 129)— for it requires no keen moral sense to discriminate between these—but

Philippians 1:11-12

Χριστοῦ, “πεπληρωμένοι καρπὸν δικαιοσύνης τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς δόξαν καὶ ἔπαινον Θεοῦ.

“Γινώσκειν δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι τὰ κατ’ ἐμὲ μᾶλλον εἰς προκοπὴν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐλήλυθεν,

’things that transcend,’ ’ex bonis meliora’ in Bengel’s words. The phrase δοκιμάζειν τὰ διαφέροντα occurs also Rom. ii. 18.

εἰλικρινεῖς] signifies properly ‘distinct, unmixed,’ and hence ‘pure, unsullied.’ The probable derivation and first meaning of the word (a strategical term, εἴλη, εἰληδόν, ‘gregatim,’ comp. φυλοκρινεῖν) are suggested by Xen. Cyrop. viii. 5. 14 καὶ διὰ τὸ εἰλικρινῆ ἕκαστα εἶναι τὰ φύλα, πολὺ μᾶλλον ἦν δῆλα, καὶ ὑπότε τις εὐτακτοῖς καὶ εἴ τις μὴ πράττοι τὸ προσταττόμενον. A different account of the word however (deriving it from εἴλη, ‘sunlight’) is generally received.

ἀπρόσκοποι] might be either intransitive, ‘without stumbling,’ as Acts xxiv. 16 ἀπρόσκοπον συνείδησιν ἔχειν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, or transitive, ’not causing offence,’ as 1 Cor. x. 32 ἀπρόσκοποι καὶ Ἰουδαίοις γίνεσθε καὶ Ἑλλήσιν. If the former sense be taken, εἰλικρινεῖς and ἀπρόσκοποι will be related to each other as the positive and the negative: if the latter, they will denote respectively the relation to God (εἰλικρινεῖς) and the relation to men (ἀπρόσκοποι). The former is to be preferred; for it is a question solely of the fitness of the Philippians to appear before the tribunal of Christ, and any reference to their influence on others would be out of place. Comp. Jude 24, 25, τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ φυλάξαι ὑμᾶς ἁπταίστον καὶ στήσαι κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους κ.τ.λ.

εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ] not ‘until,’ but ‘for the day of Christ’; comp. ii. 16, and see also i. 6.

11. καρπὸν δικαιοσύνης] The expression is taken from the Old Testament, e.g. Prov. xi. 30, Amos vi. 12, and occurs also James iii. 18. For the accusative after πληροῦσθαι comp. Col. i. 9: similarly Luke xi. 46 φορτίζετε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους φορτία δυσβάστακτα. See Winer § xxxii. p. 287.

τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ] added to guard against misunderstanding. The Apostle means ‘righteousness in Christ,’ as contrasted with ‘righteousness by law’: comp. iii. 9. Only so far as the life of the believer is absorbed in the life of Christ, does the righteousness of Christ become his own. Thus righteousness by faith is intimately bound up with the life in Christ: it must in its very nature be fruitful; it is indeed the condition of bearing fruit. Comp. John xv. 4 ‘As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me.’ εἰς δόξαν κ.τ.λ.] The only true aim of all human endeavours: comp. ii. 11. ‘The glory,’ the manifestation of His power and grace; ’the praise,’ the recognition of these divine attributes by men: comp. Ephes. i. 6 εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ, ib. i. 12, 14.

12. ‘Lest you should be misinformed, I would have you know that my sufferings and restraints, so far from being prejudicial to the Gospel, have served to advance it. My bonds have borne witness to Christ, not only among the soldiers of the imperial guard, but in a far wider circle. The same bonds too have through my example inspired most of the brethren with boldness, so that trusting in the Lord they are more zealous than ever, and preach the word of God courageously and unflinchingly.’ τὰ κατ’ ἐμί] ‘my circumstances,’ as Col. iv. 7, Ephes. vi. 21: comp. Tobit x. 8, 1 Esdr. i. 22.

μᾶλλον] ‘rather’ than the reverse, as might have been anticipated.

[L. 13, 14

¹³ ὥστε τοὺς δεσμοὺς μου φανεροὺς ἐν Χριστῷ γενέσθαι ἐν ὕλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, ¹⁴ καὶ τοὺς πλείονας τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου περισσοτέρως τολμᾶν ἀφόβως τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ προκοπήν] The verb προκόπτειν is

strictly classical; not so the substantive, which is condemned in Phrynichus (Lobeck, p. 85). It is however common in writers of this age.

13. φανεροὺς κ.τ.λ.] ‘have become

manifest in Christ,’ i.e. ‘have been seen in their relation to Christ, have borne testimony to the Gospel.’

ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ] ’throughout

the praetorian guard,’ i.e. the soldiers composing the imperial regiments.

This seems to be the best supported meaning of πραιτώριον. If a local sense is assigned to it, it will probably signify the ‘praetorian camp,’ but clear examples of this sense are wanting: see the detached note, p. 93. On St Paul’s intercourse with the praetorian soldiers see the introduction, pp. 7 19.

τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν] ’to all the rest’: comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 2; a comprehensive expression, which must not be rigorously interpreted: see the introduction, p. 32 sq. The translation of the Authorised Version, ‘in all other places,’ will not stand.

14. τοὺς πλείονας] ’the greater number.’ St Paul excepts a minority, who through cowardice or indifference held back.

ἐν Κυρίῳ] to be taken with πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. Similarly Gal. v. 10 πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν Κυρίῳ, 2 Thess. iii. 4 πεποίθαμεν δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς. Comp. also below ii. 24, Rom. xiv. 14. The words ἐν Κυρίῳ are thus emphatic by their position. They cannot well be attached to τῶν ἀδελφῶν, as τῶν ἀδελφῶν alone designates the Christian brotherhood, and the addition would be unmeaning. The instances quoted in favour of this connexion (Col. i. 2, iv. 7, Ephes. vi. 21) are no correct parallels; for in none of these passages does the preposition depend directly on ἀδελφός. For πέποιθα, with a dative of the thing in which the confidence reposes (τοῖς δεσμοῖς), see Philem. 21.

περισσοτέρως] This word seems never to lose its comparative force: see the note on Gal. i. 14. Here it denotes the increased zeal of the brothren, when stimulated by St Paul’s endurance. The Apostle accumulates words expressive of courage, πεποιθότας, περισσοτέρως, τολμᾶν ἀφόβως, as above in ver. 9 (see the note).

τοῦ Θεοῦ] These words, which are wanting in the received reading, have a decided preponderance of authority in their favour, and should probably stand in the text: comp. Acts iv. 31 ἐλώλουν τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ μετὰ παρρησίας.

15-17. ‘But though all alike are active, all are not influenced by the same motives. Some preach Christ to gratify an envious and quarrelsome spirit: others to manifest their goodwill. The latter work from love, acknowle-lging that I am appointed to plead for the Gospel: the former proclaim Christ from headstrong partisanship and with impure motives, having no other aim than to render my bonds more galling.’

These antagonists can be none other than the Judnizing party, who call down the Apostle’s rebuke in a later passage of this letter (iii. 2 sq.) and whose opposition is indirectly implied in another epistle written also from Rome (Col. iv. 11): see above, pp. 17, 18. They preach Christ indeed, but their motives are not single. Their real object is to gain adherents to the law. The main-spring of their activity

Philippians 1:15-17

λαλεῖν· ¹⁵τινὲς μὲν καὶ διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν, τινὲς δὲ καὶ δι’ εὐδοκίαν τὸν Χριστὸν κηρύσσουσιν· ¹⁶οἱ μὲν ἐξ ἀγάπης, εἰδότες ὅτι εἰς ἀπολογίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου κεῖμαι, ¹⁷οἱ

is a factious opposition to the Apostle, a jealousy of his influence. They value success, not as a triumph over heathendom, but as a triumph over St Paul. It enhances their satisfaction to think that his sufferings will be made more poignant by their progress.

But how, it has been asked, can St Paul rejoice in the success of such teachers? Is not this satisfaction inconsistent with his principles? Does he not in the Epistle to the Galatians for instance wholly repudiate their doctrine, and even maintain that for those who hold it Christ has died in vain? This apparent incongruity has led some writers to deny any reference to the Judaizers here; while to others it has furnished an argument against the genuineness of the whole epistle. But the two cases are entirely different. In the one, where the alternative is between the liberty of the Gospel and the bondage of ritualism, he unsparingly denounces his Galatian converts for abandoning the former and adopting the latter. Here on the other hand the choice is between an imperfect Christianity and an unconverted state; the former, however inadequate, must be a gain upon the latter, and therefore must give joy to a high-minded servant of Christ. In Rome there was room enough for him and for them. He was content therefore that each should work on independently. It was a step in advance to know Christ, even though He were known only ‘after the flesh.’ καὶ διὰ φθόνον] ’even from envy,’ monstrous as this will seem. For διὰ φθόνον see Matt. xxvii. 18, Mark xv. 10. Philemon the comic poet (Meineke, IV. p. 55), πολλὰ με διδάσκεις ἀφθόνως διὰ φθόνον, has been quoted in illustration of this passage.

καὶ δι’ εὐδοκίαν] ‘also out of goodwill’; this second καὶ must be differently translated from the former. The substantive εὐδοκία may mean either (1) ‘purpose, design, desire,’ Ecclus. xi. 17 ἡ εὐδοκία αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα εὐδοκίαν, Rom. x. 1 ἡ εὐδοκία τῆς ἐμῆς καρδίας καὶ ἡ δέσαις πρὸς τὸν Θεόν; or (2) ‘satisfaction, contentment, happiness,’ Ecclus. xxxv. 14 οἱ ἀρθρίζοντες εὑρήσουσιν εὐδοκίαν, 2 Thess. i. 11 πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης; or (3) ‘benevolence, goodwill,’ Ps. 1. 20 ἀγάθυναν, Κύριε, ἐν τῇ εὐδοκίᾳ σου τὴν Σιών, cv. 4, and perhaps Luke ii. 14. These different significations arise out of the object to which εὐδοκία is directed. In the first case it refers to things future, in the second to things present, in the third to persons. Fritzsche (Rom. II. p. 371) has separated the different meanings of this word, but is not happy in his examples. In the present passage the opposition to διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν seems to require the third meaning.

16, 17. The order of the clauses is reversed by the figure called chiasm, so that the subject last introduced is discussed first; as e.g. Gal. iv. 4, 5. In the received text the verses are transposed, with a view to remedying this supposed irregularity.

ἐξ ἀγάπης] ’the one preach Christ out of love’; and ἐξ ἐριθείας must be similarly taken. Others connect οἱ ἐξ ἐριθείας, οἱ ἐξ ἀγάπης, ’the factious,’ ’the loving,’ comparing Rom. ii. 8 τοῖς δὲ ἐξ ἐριθείας (see also iii. 26, Gal. iii. 7, 9); but the order in the second clause is very awkward with this arrangement, which makes τὸν Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν unduly emphatic.

κεῖμαι] ‘I am appointed,’ as Luke ii. 34 οὗτος κεῖται εἰς πτῶσιν καὶ ἀνάστασιν πολλῶν, 1 Thess. iii. 3 αὐτοὶ γὰρ

Philippians 1:18-19

δὲ ἐξ ἐριθείας [τὸν] Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν οὐχ ἁγνῶς, οἰόμενοι θλίψιν ἐγείρειν τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. $^(18)$τί γάρ; πλὴν ὅτι παντὶ τρόπῳ, εἴτε προφάσει εἴτε ἀληθεία, Χριστὸς καταγγέλλεται, καὶ ἐν τούτῳ χαίρω· ἀλλὰ καὶ χαρήσομαι· $^(19)$οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι τοῦτό μοι ἀπο-

19. οἶδα δὲ ὅτι.

οἶδατε ὅτι εἰς τοῦτο κείμεθα: comp. Josh. iv. 6. The idea of prostration, if implied at all, can only be subordinate.

17. ἐξ ἐριθείας] The interests of party were predominant with the Judaizers: their missionary zeal took the form of a political canvass. For the proper meaning of ἐριθεία, ‘partisanship,’ see the note on Gal. v. 20. The words τὸν Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν seem to be added to bring out the contrast between the character of their motives and the subject of their preaching; for there is a moral contradiction between ἐριθεία and Χριστός.

οὐχ ἁγνῶς] ‘with mixed, impure motives,’ explained afterwards by προφάσει. The insincere, selfish, and even sordid motives of the Judaizers are denounced in other passages also: 2 Cor. xi. 13, 20, Gal. vi. 12.

θλίψιν ἐγείρειν] ’to make my chains gall me,’ where the metaphor in θλίψις is clearly seen. This word, though extremely common in the LXX, occurs very rarely in classical writers even of a late date, and in these few passages has its literal meaning. The same want in the religious vocabulary, which gave currency to θλίψις, also created ’tribulatio’ as its Latin equivalent. On the accent of θλίψις see Lipsius Gramm. Unters. p. 35. The reading ἐγείρειν, besides being better supported, carries out the metaphor better than ἐπιφέρειν of the received text. The gathering opposition to the Apostle’s doctrine of liberty, the forming of a compact party in the Church bound to the observance of the law, were the means by which they sought to annoy and wound him.

18. τί γάρ;] ‘What then,’ as Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 2, 3, iii. 3. 6, and commonly in classical writers: comp. also LXX, Job xvi. 3, xxi. 4.

πλὴν ὅτι] ‘only that,’ as Acts xx. 23; comp. Plut. Mor. p. 780 A, Plato Phœd. p. 57 B, Theœt. p. 183 A. This seems on the whole the most probable reading. Some texts have πλὴν alone, others ὅτι alone; both which readings appear like attempts to smooth the construction. The latter however, which is supported by one excellent authority, may possibly be correct.

προφάσει] ‘as a cloke for other designs,’ i.e. using the name of Christ to promote the interests of their party and to gain proselytes to the law. On πρόφασις, ‘an ostensible purpose,’ generally but not necessarily implying insincerity, see the note on 1 Thess. ii. 5. The opposition of πρόφασις and ἀλήθεια is illustrated by numerous examples in Wettstein and Raphel.

ἐν τούτῳ] ‘herein,’ i.e. ἐν τῷ καταγγέλλεσθαι Χριστόν.

ἀλλὰ καὶ χαρήσομαι] ‘yea and I shall rejoice.’ The abruptness reflects the conflict in the Apostle’s mind: he crushes the feeling of personal annoyance, which rises up at the thought of this unscrupulous antagonism. The A. V. however, ‘I will rejoice,’ brings out the idea of determination more strongly than the original justifies.

19, 20. ‘Is not my joy reasonable? For I know that all my present trials and sufferings will lead only to my salvation, and that in answer to your prayers the Spirit of Christ will be shed abundantly upon me. Thus will be

Philippians 1:20

βήσεται εἰς σωτηρίαν διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως καὶ ἐπιχορηγίας τοῦ πνεύματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ²⁰κατὰ τὴν ἀποκαραδοκίαν καὶ ἐλπίδα μου, ὅτι ἐν οὐδενὶ αἰσχυνθήσομαι, ἀλλ’ ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ ὡς πάντοτε καὶ νῦν μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν τῷ σώματί μου, εἴτε διὰ ζωῆς εἴτε διὰ

fulfilled my earnest longing and hope, that I may never hang back through shame, but at this crisis, as always, may speak and act courageously; so that, whether I die a martyr for His name or live to labour in His service, He may be glorified in my body.’

19. τοῦτο] ’this state of things,’ these perplexities and annoyances. It is unconnected with the preceding ἐν τούτῳ, ver. 18.

σωτηρίαν] ‘salvation,’ in the highest sense. These trials will develope the spiritual life in the Apostle, will be a pathway to the glories of heaven. His personal safety cannot be intended here, as some have thought; for the σωτηρία, of which he speaks, will be gained equally whether he lives or dies (ver. 20).

τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως κ.τ.λ.] The two clauses are fitly connected by the same article; for the supply of the Spirit is the answer to their prayer.

ἐπιχορηγίας] ‘bountiful supply’; see the note on Gal. iii. 5. But must the following genitive τοῦ πνεύματος be considered subjective or objective? Is the Spirit the giver or the gift? Ought we not to say in answer to this question, that the language of the original suggests no limitation, that it will bear both meanings equally well, and that therefore any such restriction is arbitrary? ‘The Spirit of Jesus’ is both the giver and the gift. For the expression τὸ πνεῦμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ compare Rom. viii. 9, Gal. iv. 6, and Acts xvi. 7 (the correct reading).

20. ἀποκαραδοκίαν] ’earnest desire.’ The substantive occurs once again in the New Testament, Rom. viii. 19. The verb is not uncommon in Polybius and later writers. The idea of eagerness conveyed by the simple word καραδοκείν is further intensified by the preposition, which implies abstraction, absorption, as in ἀποβλέπειν, ἀπεκδέχεσθαι, etc.: comp. Joseph. B. J. iii. 7. 26 τοῖς μὲν οὖν καθ’ ἕτερα προσφέρουσι τὰς κλίμακας οὐ προσεῖχεν, ἀπεκαραδόκει δὲ τὴν ὁρμὴν τῶν βελῶν, i.e. his attention was drawn off and concentrated on the missiles; a passage quoted by C. F. A. Fritzsche, whose account of the word however (Fritzsch. Opusc. I. p. 150) is not altogether satisfactory.

αἰσχυνθήσομαι κ.τ.λ.] αἰσχύνη and παρρησία are opposed, Prov. xiii. 5 ἀσεβῆς δὲ αἰσχύνεται καὶ οὐχ ἕξει παρρησίαν, 1 Joh. ii. 28 σχῶμεν παρρησίαν καὶ μὴ αἰσχυνθῶμεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ. This right of free speech (παρρησία) is the badge, the privilege, of the servant of Christ: see esp. 2 Cor. iii. 12.

καὶ νῦν] ‘so now.’ For καὶ νῦν (καὶ ἄρτι) corresponding to ὡς (καθὼς) comp. 1 Joh. ii. 18, Gal. i. 9.

μεγαλυνθήσεται] After ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ the first person might naturally be expected: but with sensitive reverence the Apostle shrinks from any mention of his own agency, lest he should seem to glorify himself. It is not μεγαλυνθήσομαι, not even μεγαλυνῶ τὸν Χριστόν, but μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν τῷ σώματί μου. For the thought compare 2 Cor. iv. 10 πάντοτε τὴν νέκρωσιν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι περιφέροντες, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν φανερωθῇ, 1 Cor. vi. 20 δοξάσατε δὴ τὸν Θεὸν ἐν τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν.

21-26. ‘Others may make choice between life and death. I gladly

Philippians 1:21-22

θανάτου. ²¹ἐμοὶ γὰρ τὸ ζῆν Χριστὸς καὶ τὸ ἀποθανεῖν κέρδος· ²²εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν ἐν σαρκὶ τοῦτό μοι καρπὸς ἔργου—

accept either alternative. If I live, my life is one with Christ: if I die, my death is gain to me. Yet when I incline to prefer death, I hesitate: for may not my life—this present existence which men call life—may not my life be fruitful through my labours? Nay, I know not how to choose. I am hemmed in, as it were, a wall on this side and a wall on that. If I consulted my own longing, I should desire to dissolve this earthly tabernacle, and to go home to Christ; for this is very far better. If I consulted your interests, I should wish to live and labour still: for this your needs require. And a voice within assures me, that so it will be. I shall continue here and abide with you all; that I may promote your advance in the faith and your joy in believing: and that you on your part may have in me fresh cause for boasting in Christ, when you see me present among you once more.

21. ἐμοί, ’to me,’ whatever it may be to others: 80 ἡμῶν, iii. 20.

τὸ ζῆν Χριστός] ’life is Christ.’ ‘I live only to serve Him, only to commune with Him; I have no conception of life apart from Him.’ ‘Quicquid vivo,’ is Bengel’s paraphrase, ‘Christum vivo’: comp. Gal. ii. 20 ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός, and Col. iii. 3, 4.

τὸ ἀποθανεῖν κέρδος] ‘death is gain, for then my union with Christ will be more completely realised.’ The tense denotes not the act of dying but the consequence of dying, the state after death: comp. 2 Cor. vii. 3 εἰς τὸ συναποθανεῖν καὶ συνζῆν, ’to be with you in death and in life.’ The proper opposition to ζῆν is not ἀποθνήσκειν, but ἀποθανεῖν or τεθνάναι, e.g. Plato Leg. p. 958 π. Gorg. p. 483 π. Phæd. 62 π. The difference is marked in Plato Phæd. 64 π οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἐπιτηδεύ-

ουσιν ἢ ἀποθνήσκειν τε καὶ τεθνάναι.

22. The grammar of the passage reflects the conflict of feeling in the Apostle’s mind. He is tossed to and fro between the desire to labour for Christ in life, and the desire to be united with Christ by death. The abrupt and disjointed sentences express this hesitation.

εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν κ.τ.λ.] Of several interpretations that have been suggested, two only seem to deserve consideration: (1) ‘But if my living in the flesh will be fruitful through a laborious career, then what to choose I know not.’ In this case καὶ will introduce the apodosis. The only passage at all analogous in the New Testament Isaiah 2 Cor. ii. 2 εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ λυπῶ ὑμᾶς, καὶ τίς οὐφραίνων με; comp. Clem. Hom. ii. 44 εἰ δὲ τὸ πῖον ὄρος ἐπιθυμεῖ, καὶ τίνος τὰ πάντα; εἰ ψεύδεται, καὶ τίς ἀληθεύει; κ.τ.λ. But the parallel is not exact, for in these instances καὶ introduces a direct interrogative. Passages indeed are given in Hartung (I. pp. 130, 131) where καὶ ushers in the apodosis after εἰ, but these are all poetical. And even if this use of καὶ be admissible, the sentence still runs awkwardly. (2) ‘But if (it be my lot) to live in the flesh, then my labour will be productive of fruit. And so what to choose I know not.’ Thus the sentence εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν κ.τ.λ. is treated as elliptical, the predicate being suppressed. But, though ellipses are very frequent in St Paul (comp. e.g. Rom. iv. 9, v. 18, ix. 16, 1 Cor. iv. 6, xi. 24, 2 Cor. i. 6, Gal. ii. 9, v. 13, etc.), yet the present instance would be extremely harsh. Of the two explanations already considered the first seems preferable; but may not a third be hazarded? (3) ‘But what if my living in the flesh will bear fruit, etc.? In fact what to choose I know not.’ In this case εἰ implies an interrogation,

Philippians 1:23

καὶ τί αἱρήσομαι οὐ γνωρίζω· ²³συνέχομαι δὲ ἐκ τῶν δύο, τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἔχων εἰς τὸ ἀναλύσαι καὶ σὺν Χρισ-

the apodosis being suppressed; as in Rom. ix. 22, Acts xxiii. 9 (where the received text adds μὴ θεομαχῶμεν). On this and similar uses of εἰ see Winer § lvii. p. 639, § lxiv. p. 750, A. Buttmann pp. 214, 215. I do not know whether this interpretation has ever been suggested; but it seems to be in keeping with the abruptness of the context, and to present less difficulty than those generally adopted.

τὸ ζῆν ἐν σαρκί] St Paul had before spoken of the natural life as τὸ ζῆν simply; but the mention of the gain of death has meanwhile suggested the thought of the higher life. Thus the word ζῆν requires to be qualified by the addition of ἐν σαρκί. After all death is true life. The sublime guess of Euripides, τίς οἶδεν εἰ τὸ ζῆν μὲν ἐστι κατθανεῖν τὸ κατθανεῖν δὲ ζῆν, which was greeted with ignoble ridicule by the comic poets, has become an assured truth in Christ.

καρπὸς ἔργου] Comp. Rom. i. 13 ἵνα τινὰ καρπὸν σχῶ καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν. For the metaphor see 1 Cor. iii. 6 sq.

οὐ γνωρίζω] ‘I do not perceive.’ Γνωρίζειν has two distinct senses; (1) ‘To understand, know’; (2) ‘To declare, make known.’ In classical Greek the former seems to be the more common, even at a late date, though the latter occurs not infrequently. On the other hand in biblical Greek the latter is the usual meaning (e.g. below, iv. 6), the exceptions being very few, as here and Job iv. 16 (Symm.), xxxiv. 25 (Lxx): comp. Tert. xii. Patr. Daniel 2 φίλον οὐ γνωρίζει.

23. συνέχομαι ἐκ τῶν δύο] ‘I am hemmed in on both sides, I am prevented from inclining one way or the other.’ The proposition seems to denote direction, as in ἐκ δεξιᾶς, ἐκ θαλάσσης, etc. The δύο are the two horns of the dilemma, stated in verses 21, 22.

τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν κ.τ.λ.] ‘my own desire

tends towards.’ Comp. Gal. vi. 4.

τὸ ἀναλύσαι] ’to break up, depart, comp. ἀνάλυσις 2 Tim. iv. 6. The metaphor is drawn from breaking up an encampment, e.g. Polyb. v. 28. 8 αὖθις εἰς παραχειμασίαν ἀνέλυσε, 2 Macc. ix. 1 ἀναλελυκὼς ἀκόσμῳς. The camp-life of the Israelites in the wilderness, as commemorated by the annual feast of Tabernacles, was a ready and appropriate symbol of man’s transitory life on earth: while the land of promise with its settled abodes, the land flowing with milk and honey, typified the eternal inheritance of the redeemed: Hebr. iv. 1 sq. See especially 2 Cor. v. 1 ἐὰν ἡ ἐπίγειος ἡμῶν οἰκία τοῦ σκήνους καταλυθῇ, οἰκοδομὴν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἔχομεν, οἰκίαν ἀχειροποίητον αἰώνιον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, and ver. 4. Compare also the metaphor in Plut. Mor. 76 D οὐ μονὰς ποιοῦσιν ἢ ἐποχὰς ὥσπερ ἐν ὁδῷ τῆς προκοπῆς ἀλλ’ ἀναλύσεις.

σὺν Χριστῷ εἶναι] The faithful immediately after death are similarly represented as in the presence and keeping of the Lord also in 2 Cor. v. 6, 8 ἐνδημοῦντες ἐν τῷ σώματι ἐκδημοῦμεν ἀπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου κ.τ.λ., Acts vii. 59; comp. Cicm. Rom. § 5 ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς δόξης of St Peter and εἰς τὸν ἅγιον τόπον ἐπορεύθη of St Paul, Polyc. Phil. § 9 εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον αὐτοῖς τόπον εἰσὶ παρὰ τῷ Κυρίῳ. On the other hand their state after death is elsewhere described as a sleep from which they will arise, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52, 1 Thess. iv. 14, 16. The one mode of representation must be qualified by the other.

πολλῷ μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον] For the triple comparative see Isocr. Archid. § 83 πολὺ γὰρ κρεῖττον…τελευτῆσαι τὸν βίον μᾶλλον ἢ ζῆν κ.τ.λ. and other references in Wetstein: comp. Winer § xxxv. p. 254. The insertion of γὰρ is supported by most of the best MSS; and yet a reading which comes to the

Philippians 1:24-26

τῷ εἶναι· πολλῷ [γὰρ] μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον· ²⁴ τὸ δὲ ἐπιμένειν [ἐν] τῇ σαρκὶ ἀναγκαιότερον δι’ ὑμᾶς. ²⁵ καὶ τοῦτο πεποιθὼς οἶδα, ὅτι μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν εἰς τὴν ὑμῶν προκοπὴν καὶ χαρὰν τῆς πίστεως, ²⁶ ἵνα τὸ καύχημα ὑμῶν περισσεύῃ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ διὰ τῆς ἐμῆς παρουσίας πάλιν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. relief of a disjointed syntax must be regarded with suspicion.

24. ἐπιμένειν τῇ σαρκὶ] not ’to

abide in,’ but ’to abide by the flesh,’ to cling to this present life, to take it with all its inconveniences. This is the common construction of ἐπιμένειν in St Paul, Rom. vi. 1, xi. 22, 23, Col i. 23, 1 Tim. iv. 16. The insertion of ἐν weakens the force of the expression; besides that this preposition is not found with ἐπιμένειν elsewhere in St Paul, except in 1 Cor. xvi. 8 ἐπιμενῶ ἐν Ἐφίᾳ which is no parallel.

ἀναγκαιότερον] The comparative corresponds to the foregoing κρεῖσσον. Either alternative is in a manner necessary, as either is advantageous. But the balance of necessity (of obligation) is on one side, the balance of advantage on the other.

25. τοῦτο πεποιθὼς οἶδα] ‘of this

I am confidently persuaded, that etc.’; comp. Rom. xiv. 14 οἶδα καὶ πέπεισμαι …ὅτι κ.τ.λ., and Ephes. v. 5 τοῦτο γὰρ ἴστε γινώσκοντες ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος κ.τ.λ. The words are commonly taken, ‘being persuaded of this (that my life will be advantageous to you), I know that etc.’ οἶδα] not a prophetic inspiration, but a personal conviction: comp. ii. 24. The same word οἶδα is used Acts xx. 25, where he expresses his belief that he shall not see his Asiatic converts again. Viewed as infallible presentiments, the two are hardly reconcilable; for the one assumes, the other negatives, his release. The assurance here recorded was fulfilled (1 Tim. i. 3); while the presentiment there expressed was overruled by events (1 Tim. i. 3, 2 Tim. i. 15, 18, iv. 20).

παραμενῶ] is relative, while μενῶ is absolute. It denotes continuance in a certain place or with certain persons or in certain relations. Very frequently, as here, it takes a dative of the person, e.g. Plat. Apol. p. 39 F, Phæd. 115 D οὐκέτι ὑμῖν παραμενῶ, etc. The reading of the received text συμπαραμενῶ may be dismissed, as insufficiently supported. μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ may be translated ‘bide and abide.’ τῆς πίστεως] to be taken with both substantives. For χαρὰν τῆς πίστεως comp. Rom. xv. 13 πληρώσαι ὑμᾶς πάσης χαρᾶς καὶ εἰρήνης ἐν τῷ πιστεύειν. On joyfulness, as the key-note of this epistle, see the notes, i. 4, iv. 4. 26. ἵνα τὸ καύχημα κ.τ.λ.] ’that you may have more matter for boasting in me,’ not ’that I may have more matter for boasting in you,’ as it is sometimes taken. Either would accord with the Apostle’s language elsewhere, 2 Cor. i. 14 ὅτι καύχημα ὑμῶν ἐσμὲν καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ (comp. v. 12); but the former is the simpler interpretation of the words here. The words κουχᾶσθαι, καύχησις, καύχημα, link this epistle with the preceding group, where they occur very abundantly (see the introduction, p. 42 sq.). In the later epistles only one instance is found, Ephes. ii. 9. On the difference between καύχημα, καύχησις, see the note Gal. vi. 4. ἐν] repeated. The first denotes the sphere in which their pride lives; the second the object on which it rests. Compare Col. ii. 7 περισσεύοντες ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ.

παρουσίας πάλιν] For the position of πάλιν see the note on Gal. i. 13.

The synonymes ‘bishop’ and ‘presbyter.’

IT is a fact now generally recognised by theologians of all shades of the two opinion, that in the language of the New Testament the same officer in words synonymes. the Church is called indifferently ‘bishop’ (ἐπίσκοπος) and ’elder’ or ‘presbyter’ (πρεσβύτερος). The bearing of this fact on the origin and authority of the ’episcopate,’ as the term was understood later and as it is understood in the present day, will be considered in a dissertation at the end of this volume. At present it will be sufficient to establish the fact itself; but before doing so, it may be useful to trace the previous history of the two words.

Episcopus, ‘bishop,’ ‘overscer,’ was an official title among the Greeks. Meaning In Athenian language it was used especially to designate commissioners of ‘bishop’ appointed to regulate a new colony or acquisition, so that the Attic ‘bishop’ in heathen corresponded to the Spartan ‘harmest’. Thus the impostor, who intrudes writers upon the colonists in Aristophanes (Av. 1022), says ἐπίσκοπος ἦκω δεῦρο τῷ κυάμῃ λαχών. These officers are mentioned also in an inscription, Boeckh no. 73. The title however is not confined to Attic usage; it is the designation for instance of the inspectors whose business it was to report to the Indian kings (Arrian Ind. xii. 5); of the commissioner appointed by Mithridates to settle affairs in Ephesus (Appian Mithr. 48); of magistrates who regulated the sale of provisions under the Romans (Charisius in the Dig. l. 4. 18); and of certain officers in Rhodes whose functions are unknown (Ross. Inscr. Græc. Ined. fasc. III. nos. 275, 276).

In the LXX the word is common. In some places it signifies ‘inspectors, and in the superintendents, taskmasters,’ as 2 Kings xi. 19, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 12, 17, Is. LXX. lx. 17; in others it is a higher title. ‘captains’ or ‘presidents,’ Neh. xi. 9,

¹ Harpocration s. v. (ed. Dindorf. p. 129) quotes from Theophrastus, πολλῷ γὰρ κάλυψι κατὰ γὰρ τὴν τοῦ ὀνόματος θέσῃ, ὡς οἱ Λάκωνες ἁρμοστὰς φάσκοντες εἰς τὰς πόλεις πέμπειν, οὐκ ἐπισκόπους οὐδὲ φύλακας, ὡς Ἀθηναῖοι. See also Schol. on Arist. Av. l. 9, οἱ παρ’ Ἀθηναίων εἰς τὰς ἐπηκόους πόλεις ἐπισκέψασθαι τὰ παρ’ ἑκάστους πεμπόμενοι ἐπίσκοποι καὶ φύλακες ἐκαλοῦντο οὔς οἱ Λάκωνες ἁρμοστὰς ἔλεγεν.

² In these instances the ἐπίσκοποι seem to hold some office in connexion with a temple. In another inscription (Ross. Inscr. Græc. Ined. fasc. II. no. 198), found at Thera, the word again occurs; Διδόχθαι· ἀ[ποδε]ξαμένος τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τὸ μ[ὲν ἀρ]γύριον ἐγδανεῖσαι τὰς ἐπισκό[πος] Δίωνα καὶ Μελίππων, where among other dialectic forms the accusative plural in occurs. M. Wesch-

er in an article in the Revue Archéologique, p. 246 (Avril 1866), supposes the ἐπίσκοποι here to be officers of a club or confraternity (ἔρανος or θίασος), in which he is followed by Renan Les Apôtres p. 353. If their opinion be correct, this inscription presents a closer analogy to the Christian use of the term, than the instances given in the text. The context of the inscription however is not decisive, though this interpretation seems fairly probable: see below p. 194. There can be no reasonable doubt I imagine about the reading ἐπισκόπος; though Ross himself suggested ἐπισσόφος, because he found the word in another Thereon inscription (Boeckh no. 2448). In this latter inscription ἐπισσόφος is probably a mason’s blunder for ἐπισκόπος.

ἐπισκοπή.

14, 22. Of Antiochus Epiphanes we are told that when he determined to overthrow the worship of the one true God, he ‘appointed commissioners (ἐπισκόπους, bishops) over all the people,’ to see that his orders were obeyed (1 Macc. i. 51: comp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4; in 2 Macc. v. 22 the word is ἐπιστάτας). The feminine ἐπισκοπή, which is not a classical word, occurs very frequently in the LXX, denoting sometimes the work, sometimes the office, of an ἐπίσκοπος. Hence it passed into the language of the New Testament and of the Christian Church.

Thus beyond the fundamental idea of inspection, which lies at the root of the word ‘bishop,’ its usage suggests two subsidiary notions also; (1) Responsibility to a superior power; (2) The introduction of a new order of things.

The term presbyter or elder

The earlier history of the word presbyterus (elder, presbyter, or priest) is much more closely connected with its Christian sense. If the analogies of the ‘bishop’ are to be sought chiefly among heathen nations, the name and office of the ‘presbyter’ are essentially Jewish. Illustrations indeed might be found in almost all nations ancient or modern, in the γερουσία of Sparta for instance, in the ‘senatus’ of Rome, in the ‘signoria’ of Florence, or in the ‘aldermen’ of our own country and time, where the deliberative body originally took its name from the advanced age of its members. But among the chosen people we meet at every turn with presbyters or elders in Church and State from the earliest to the latest times. In the lifetime of the lawgiver, in the days of the judges, throughout the monarchy, during the captivity, after the return, and under the Roman domination, the ’elders’ appear as an integral part of the governing body of the country. But it is rather in a special religious development of the office, than in these national and civil presbyteries, that we are to look for the prototype of the Christian minister. Over every Jewish synagogue, whether at home or abroad, a council of ’elders’ presided¹. It was not unnatural therefore that, when the Christian synagogue took its place by the side of the Jewish, a similar organization should be adopted with such modifications as circumstances required; and thus the name familiar under the old dispensation was retained under the new.

transferred from the Synagogue to the Church.

Of the identity of the ‘bishop’ and ‘presbyter’ in the language of the apostolic age, the following evidence seems conclusive.

Identity of the two in the apostolic writings

(1) In the opening of this epistle St Paul salutes the ‘bishops’ and ‘deacons².’ Now it is incredible that he should recognise only the first

¹ See especially Vitringa de Synag. Vet. III. 1. c. 1, p. 613 sq.

² It may be worth while correcting a mistake which runs through the critical editions of the Greek Testament. Chrysostom is quoted as reading συνεπισκόπους in one word. His editors no doubt make him read so, but of this reading there is no trace in the context. After explaining that the terms deacon, presbyter, bishop, were originally convertible (οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τὸ παλαιὸν ἐκαλοῦντο ἐπίσκοποι καὶ διάκονοι Χριστοῦ καὶ οἱ ἐπίσκοποι πρεσβύτεροι), he illustrates this by the fact that even in his own day bishops often addressed a presbyter as a fellow-presbyter, a deacon as a fellow-deacon (ὅθεν καὶ νῦν πολλοὶ συμπρεσβυτέρῳ ἐπίσκοποι γράφουσι καὶ συνδιακόνῳ): but his language nowhere implies that he read συνεπισκόπους. The comment of Theodore of Mopsuestia again has been understood (see Tischendorf) as referring to and combating the reading συνεπισκόπους. This also is an error. After explaining the identity of and third order and pass over the second, though the second was absolutely essential to the existence of a church and formed the staple of its ministry. It seems therefore to follow of necessity that the ‘bishops’ are identical with the ‘presbyters.’ Whether or not the Philippian Church at this time possessed also a ‘bishop’ in the later sense of the term, is a question which must be reserved for the present.

(2) In the Acts (xx. 17) St Paul is represented as summoning to Miletus the ’elders’ or ‘presbyters’ of the Church of Ephesus. Yet in addressing them immediately after he appeals to them as ‘bishops’ or ‘overseers’ of the church (xx. 28).

(3) Similarly St Peter, appealing to the ‘presbyters’ of the churches addressed by him, in the same breath urges them to ‘fulfil the office of bishops’ (ἐπισκοποῦντες) with disinterested zeal (1 Pet. v. 1, 2).

(4) Again in the First Epistle to Timothy St Paul, after describing the qualifications for the office of a ‘bishop’ (iii. 1-7), goes on at once to say what is required of ‘deacons’ (iii. 8-13). He makes no mention of presbyters. The term ‘presbyter’ however is not unknown to him; for having occasion in a later passage to speak of Christian ministers he calls these officers no longer ‘bishops,’ but ‘presbyters’ (v. 17-19).

(5) The same identification appears still more plainly from the Apostle’s directions to Titus (i. 5-7); ‘That thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders in every city, as I appointed thee; if any one be blameless, the husband of one wife, having believing children who are not charged with riotousness or unruly; for a bishop (τὸν ἐπίσκοπον)¹ must be blameless etc.²’

(6) Nor is it only in the apostolic writings that this identity is found, and in Clement of Rome.

bishops and presbyters Theodore adds, προσεκτέον ὅτι τὸ σὺν ἐπισκόποις λέγει, οὐχ ὡς τινες ἐνόμισαν ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς σὺν πρεσβυτέροις γράφειν εἰώθαμεν· οὐ γὰρ πρὸς τὸ ἑαυτοῦ πρόσωπον εἶπεν τὸ σὺν, ἵνα ᾖ σὺν ἐπισκόποις ἡμῶν· ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐν Φιλίπποις ἁγίοις, σὺν τοῖς αὐτῷ ἐπισκόποις τε καὶ διακόνοις: ‘It must be observed that when he says with the bishops, it is not, as some have thought, a parallel to our practice of writing ’together with the elders’ (i.e. of associating the elders with themselves in the superscription, as for instance Polycarp does in writing to the Philippians): ‘for he does not use the word with in reference to himself, meaning with our bishops, but in reference to all the saints that are at Philippi, i.e. with the bishops and deacons that are there.’ Here I have substituted σὺν πρεσβυτέροις for συμπρεσβυτέροις, as the context seems to require, and corrected the corrupt ᾖ ἴσημπον into ᾖ σὺν with the Latin. The Latin version of Theodore however (Raban. Maur. vi. p. 479, ed. Migne) mistakes and confuses his meaning. The interpretation which Theodore is combating appears in the Ambrosian Hilary; ‘Cum episcopis et diaconibus: hoc est, cum Paulo et Timotheo, qui utique episcopi erant: simul significavit et diaconos qui ministrabant el. Ad plebem enim scribit: nam si episcopis scriberet et diaconibus, ad personas eorum scriberet; et loci ipsius episcopo scribeudum erat, non duobus vel tribus, sicut et ad Titum et Timotheum.’ See below, p. 230.

¹ In τὸν ἐπίσκοπον the definite article denotes the type, as in 2 Cor. xii. 12 τὰ σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστολοῦ, Joh. x. 11 ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός: see the notes on Gal. iii. 20.

² The identity of the two titles in the New Testament is recognised by the Peshito Syriac Version, which commonly translates ἐπίσκοπος by kashisho, i.e. presbyter or elder: see Wichelhaus de Vers. Syr. Ant. p. 109.

PHIL.

St Clement of Rome wrote probably in the last decade of the first century and in his language the terms are still convertible. Speaking of the Apostles he says that ‘preaching in every country and city (κατὰ χώρας καὶ κατὰ πόλεις) they appointed their first-fruits, having tested them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of them that should believe (μελλόντων πιστεύειν)’ § 42. A little later, referring to the disorganised state of the Corinthian Church, he adds, ‘Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife concerning the authority (ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος) of the bishopric’…’ We shall incur no slight guilt if we eject from the bishopric those who have presented the offerings (δῶρα) unblameably and holily. Blessed are the presbyters who have gone before, whose departure was crowned with fruit and mature (οἵτινες ἔγκαρπον καὶ τελείαν ἔσχον τὴν ἀνάλυσιν)’ § 44.

Different usage in Ignatius and Polycarp.

This is the last instance of identification. With the opening of a second century a new phraseology begins. In the epistles of Ignatius the terms are used in their more modern sense. In his letter to Polycarp (§ 6) he writes: ‘Give heed to the bishop, that God also may give heed to you. I am devoted (ἀντίψυχον ἐγώ) to those who are obedient to the bishop, to presbyters, to deacons (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, πρεσβυτέροις, διακόνοις).’ The bishop is always singled out by this writer, as the chief officer of the Church¹. So about the same time Polycarp, writing to the Philippians, gives directions to the deacons (§ 5) and the presbyters (§ 6). He also begins his letter, ‘Polycarp and the presbyters that are with him.’ With this form of address may be coupled the fact that the writer is distinctly called ‘bishop of Smyrna’ by Ignatius (Polyc. init.).

The identity proved by Jerome.

Towards the close of the second century the original application of the term ‘bishop’ seems to have passed not only out of use, but almost out of memory. So perhaps we may account for the explanation which Irenæus gives of the incident at Miletus (Acts xx. 17, 28). ‘Having called together the bishops and presbyters who were from Ephesus and the other neighbouring cities².’ But in the fourth century, when the fathers of the Church began to examine the apostolic records with a more critical eye, they at once detected the fact. No one states it more clearly than Jerome. ‘Among the ancients,’ he says, ‘bishops and presbyters are the same, for the one is a term of dignity, the other of age³.’ ‘The Apostle plainly shows,’ he writes in another place, ’that presbyters are the same as bishops… It is proved most clearly that bishops and presbyters are the same⁴.’ Again in a third passage he says ‘If any one thinks the opinion

¹ Besides the passages quoted in the text see Polyc. 5, Ephes. 2. All these passages are found in the Syriac. The shorter Greek terms with references to the bishop as chief officer of the Church.

² Iren. iii. 14. 2. His explanation of the incident has been charged with dishonesty, but I know of nothing to justify such a charge. It would appear a very natural solution of a difficulty, if the writer had only an indistinct knowledge of the altered value of the term. At all events the same account has been given by writers who lived in a more critical age; e.g. Potter, Church Government c. iii. p. 118.

³ Epist. lxix (i. p. 414 sq., ed. Vallarsi).

⁴ Epist. exlvi (i. p. 1081) ‘Quum Apostolus perspicue doceat eodem esse presbyteros quos episcopos’…’ manifestissime comprobatur eundem esse episcopum atque presbyterum.’ that the bishops and presbyters are the same, to be not the view of the Scriptures but my own, let him study the words of the apostle to the Philippians, and in support of his view he alleges the scriptural proofs at great length. But, though more full than other writers, he is hardly and recognised by more explicit. Of his predecessors the Ambrosian Hilary had discerned earlier and the same truth. Of his contemporaries and successors, Chrysostom, Pelagius, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, all acknowledge it. Thus in every one of the extant commentaries on the epistles containing the crucial passages, whether Greek or Latin, before the close of the fifth century, this identity is affirmed. In the succeeding ages bishops and popes accept the verdict of St Jerome without question. Even late in the mediæval period, and at the era of the reformation, the justice of his criticism or the sanction of his name carries the general suffrages of theologians.

The meaning of ‘prætorium’ in i. 13.

The word ‘prætorium’ signifies properly (1) ‘The general’s tent,’ ’the common head-quarters in a camp.’ From this it gets other derived meanings: (2) ‘The residence of a governor or prince,’ e.g. Acts xxiii. 35 ἐν τῷ πραιτωρίᾳ τοῦ Ἡρώδου (A.V. ‘judgment hall’), Mark xv. 16 ἀπήγαγον αὐτὸν ἔσω τῆς αὐλῆς ὁ ἴστιν πραιτώριον, Acta Thomas § 3 πραιτώρια Βασιλικά, Juv. Sat. x. 161 ‘sedet ad prætoria regis,’ Tertull. ad Scap. § 3 ‘solus in prætorio suo etc.’ (3) ‘Any spacious villa or palace’; Juv. Sat. i. 75 ‘criminibus debent hortos prætoria mensas,’ Sueton. Tiber. 39 ‘juxta Terracinam in prætorio cui spelunæ nomen erat incœnante eo’ (comp. Octav. 72, Calig. 37), Epict. Dies. iii. 22. 47 οὐ πραιτωρίδιον ἀλλὰ γῆ μόνον κ.τ.λ.

So much for the word generally. It remains to enquire, what sense it would probably bear, when used by a person writing from Rome and speaking of the cause which he advocated as becoming known ‘in the whole of the prætorium.’ Several answers have been given to this question.

(1) ‘The imperial residence on the Palatine.’ So our English Version, (1) The following the Greek commentators. Thus Chrysostom, ‘They still (τέως) called the palace by this name.’ Similarly Theodore of Mopsuestia,

¹ Ad Tit. i. 5 (vii. p. 695).

² On Ephes. iv. 11. But he is hardly consistent with himself. On 1 Tim. iii. 8 he recognises the identity less distinctly; on Phil. i. 1 (see above, p. 97, note) he ignores it; while on Tit. i. 7 he passes over the subject without a word.

³ Chrysostom on Phil. i. 1 (on 1 Tim. iii. 8, Tit. i. 7, he is not so clear); Pelagius on Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 12, Tit. i. 7;

Theodore of Mopsuestia on Phil. i. 1, Tit. i. 7, and especially on 1 Tim. iii. (where the matter is fully discussed); Theodoret on Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 1 sq., Tit. i. 7, following closely in the steps of Theodore. See also Ammonius on Acts xx. 28 in Cramer’s Catena, p. 337.

⁴ Later authorities are given in Gieseler Kirchengesch. 1. pp. 105, 106.

⁵ In Raban. Maur. Op. vi. p. 482 &

7-2

Objection to this meaning.

No instance of this sense.

‘What we are in the habit of calling the palace, he calls the prætorium.’ Theodoret giving the same meaning adds, ‘It is probable that the palace was so called at that time¹.’ This interpretation, which has the advantage of illustrating the reference to ‘Cæsær’s household’ at the close of the epistle, is thus ably advocated by Dean Merivale²; “In the provinces the emperor was known, not as Princeps, but as Imperator. In Judæa, governed more immediately by him through the imperial procurators, he would be more exclusively regarded as a military chief. The soldier, to whom the Apostle was attached with a chain, would speak of him as his general. When Paul asked the centurion in charge of him, ‘Where shall I be confined at Rome?’, the answer would be, ‘In the prætorium’ or the quarters of the general. When led, as perhaps he was, before the emperor’s tribunal, if he asked the attending guard, ‘Where am I?’, again they would reply, ‘In the prætorium.’ The emperor was protected in his palace by a body-guard, lodged in its courts and standing sentry at its gates; and accordingly they received the name of prætorians.”

It is hardly probable however that in the early ages of the empire the feelings of Roman citizens would be thus outraged by the adoption of a term which implied that they were under a military despotism. In the days of the republic the consuls were required to lay down their ‘imperium’ without the walls and to appear in the city as civilians. And under the early Cæsars the fiction of the republic was carefully guarded, though the reality had ceased to exist. If it be urged that the name was confined to the soldiers (as Dean Merivale seems to suggest), it is difficult to conceive why St Paul after several months’ residence at least in Rome, during which he must have mixed with various classes of men, should have singled out this exceptional term, especially when writing to distant correspondents.

But whatever may be said of the a priori probability, it is a fatal objection that not a single instance of this usage has been produced. The language of the Greek fathers quoted above shows that though they assumed the word must have had this meaning at an earlier date, it was certainly not so when they wrote. While ‘prætorium’ is a frequent designation of splendid villas, whether of the emperors or others, away from Rome, the imperial residence on the Palatine is not once so called³. Indeed the word seems to have suggested to a Roman the idea of a country seat. Thus when Tacitus and Suetonius are relating the same event, the one uses ‘villa,’ the other ‘prætorium,’ to describe the scene of the occurrence⁴. Hence Forcellini with right appreciation defines the word, ‘ædes elegantiores ornatioresque in agris exstructæ et villa quæque ¹ His words are τὰ βασιλεία γὰρ

πραιτώριον προσγόρευσει· εἰκός δὲ ὅτι καὶ οὕτως κατ’ ἐκείνον ὠνομάξετο τὴν καιρὸν ἀρχὴν γὰρ εἶχεν ἡ ῥωμαϊκὴ δύναστεια.

² History of the Romans vi. p. 268.

³ In Phlegon de Longœu. § 4 ἐκ Σα-

βίνων ἀπὸ πραιτωρίον παλλαντιανῶ, a

palace of the emperor in the Sabine territory is meant. Παλλαντιανός here is explained ‘imperial’ ‘Cæsarean’ by

Perizonius de Prætor. p. 252, as if connected with παλάτιον (comp. Dion Cass.

lii. 16 quoted above in the text); but, like horti Pallantiani, the name is doubtless derived from its former owner Pallas; see

Friedländer Sittengesch. Roms 1. p. 98.

⁴ Tac. Ann. iv. 59, Suet. Tiber. 39.

minime rustica vel villae pars nobilior et cultior ubi domini, rusticari cum libet, morantur.’ In Rome itself a ‘prætorium’ would not have been tolerated¹.

(2) The ‘prætorium’ is not the imperial palace itself, but the prætorium barracks attached thereto. This interpretation is open to many of the objections urged against the former. Moreover it is equally destitute of authority. In a passage of Dion Cassius indeed (liii. 16) there seems to be mention of a ‘prætorium’ on the Palatine; καλείται δὲ τὰ βασιλεία παλάτιον…ὅτι ἓν τε τῷ παλατίῳ ὁ Καῖσαρ ᾤκει καὶ ἐκεῖ τὸ στρατήγιον εἶχε. Here στρατήγιον is doubtless a rendering of the Latin ‘prætorium’; but the sense is hardly local. As this passage stands alone, the words would appear to mean simply that the emperor was surrounded by his body-guards and kept state as a military commander. This language, though it would probably have been avoided by a contemporary, was not in itself inappropriate when applied to Augustus, of whom Dion is speaking, before the prætorium camp was built, and when the barracks attached to the palace were still the head-quarters of the prætorium guards². At all events, if ‘prætorium’ ever had this sense, it can hardly have been meant by St Paul here; for the expression ’throughout the prætorium,’ in connexion with the context, would be wholly out of place in reference to a space so limited.

(2) The barracks on the Palatine.

(3) The great camp of the prætorium soldiers is so designated. Tiberius concentrated the cohorts previously scattered up and down the city (Tac. Ann. iv. 2) and established them outside the Collino gate at the North East of the city in a permanent camp, whose ramparts can be traced at the present day, being embedded in the later walls of Aurelian. If ‘prætorium’ here has a local sense, no other place could be so fitly designated; for as this camp was without the walls, the term so applied would give no offence. But this meaning again lacks external support. It might indeed be argued that as the Greek equivalent to ‘præfectus prætorio’ is στρατοπεδάρχης, ’the commander of the camp,’ the camp itself would be designated ‘prætorium’; but, as a question of fact, no decisive instance of this sense is produced. The camp is sometimes called ‘castra prætoria’ (Plin. N. II. iii. 9), sometimes ‘castra prætorianorum’ (Tac. Hist. i. 3), once at least ‘castra prætori’ (i.e. prætorii, Orell. Inscr. 21); but never ‘prætorium.’

(3) The Prætorium camp.

As all attempts to give a local sense to ‘prætorium’ thus fail for want of evidence, it remains to discover some other suitable meaning, which is not open to this objection.

(4) Prætorium signifies not a place, but a body of men. It is used for instance of a council of war, the officers who met in the general’s tent: e.g. Liv. xxvi. 15, xxx. 5. But more frequently it denotes the prætorium guards.

¹ On the other hand away from Rome the residence of the emperor’s representative is frequently so called; e.g. at Cologne (Orell. 3197), at Munda (ib. 3303).

² See Perizonius p. 230. It must be remembered that Dion Cassius wrote about two centuries after the event. For this sense of στρατήγιον comp. Tac. Ann. iii. 33 ‘duorum egressus coli, duo esse prætoria,’ where a complaint is made of the pomp maintained by the wives of provincial governors.

regiments, the imperial guards. This in fact is the common use of the term. It is found in ‘castra prætorii’ already quoted and probably also in ‘præfectus prætorio.’ It occurs also in such phrases as ‘veteranus ex prætorio’ (Tac. Hist. ii. 11, Suet. Nero 9, Orell. Inscr. 123), ‘missus ex prætorio’ (Orell. no. 1644, note), ’lectus in prætorio’ (Orell. no. 941; comp. nos. 3589, 6806, 6817). A guardman was said to serve ‘in prætorio,’ a soldier of the line ‘in legione’ (Orell. nos. 3547, 5286, 5291). If St Paul seeing a new face among his guards asked how he came to be there, the answer would be ‘I have been promoted to the prætorium’; if he enquired after an old face which he missed, he might be told ‘He has been discharged from the prætorium.’ In this sense and this alone can it be safely affirmed that he would hear the word ‘prætorium’ used daily. The following passages will further illustrate this meaning: Plin. N. H. xxv. 2 ‘Nuper cujusdam militantis in prætorio mater vidit in quiete…in Lacetania res gerebatur, Hispaniæ proxima parte’: Tac. Hist. i. 20 ‘Exauctorati per eos dies tribuni, e prætorio Antonius Taurus et Antonius Naso, ex urbanis cohortibus Æmilius Pacensis, e vigiliis Julius Fronto’; ib. iv. 46 ‘Militiam et stipendia orant…igitur in prætorium accepti’: Joseph. Ant. xix. 3. 1 οἱ περὶ τὸ στρατηγικὸν καλούμενον ὅπερ ἐστὶ τῆς στρατιᾶς καθαρώτατον, i. e. ’the prætorium, which is the flower of the army’: Dosith. Hadr. Sent. § 2 αἰτοῦντός τινος ἵνα στρατεύηται, Ἀνδριανὸς εἶπεν· Ποῦ θέλεις στρατεύεσθαι; ἐκεῖνον λέγοντος Εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον, Ἀδριανὸς ἐξήτασεν· Ποῖον μήκος ἔχεις; λέγοντος ἐκεῖνον Πέντε πόδας καὶ ἡμῖον, Ἀδριανὸς εἶπεν· Ἐν τοσοῦτῳ εἰς τὴν πολιτικὴν στρατεύου, καὶ ἐὰν καλὸς στρατιώτης ἔσῃ τρίτῳ ὀψωνίῳ δυνήσῃ εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον μεταβῆναι’; Mission Archèol. de Macédoine no. 130 (p. 325) Τι. Κλαύδιον οὐτρακὸν στρατευσάμενον ἐν πραιτωρίῳ, no. 131 (p. 326) Τι. Κλαύδιος Ῥούφος οὐτρακὸς ἐκ πραιτωρίου.

This sense to be adopted.

This sense is in all respects appropriate. It forms a fit introduction to the words καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν which follow. It is explained by St Paul’s position as an imperial prisoner in charge of the prefect of the prætorians. And lastly it avoids any conflict with St Luke’s statement that the Apostle dwelt in ‘his own hired house’: for it is silent about the locality.

¹ See also Plin. N. H. vii. 19, Orell. no. 3477. On the meaning of the word prætorium see especially ‘Perizonium Hubero Disquisitio de Prætorio, etc. (Franeq. 1690),’ a 12mo volume containing more than 900 pages. Huber maintained that by ‘prætorium’ in Phil. i. 13 must be understood the palace or the audience-chamber therein. Perizonius, whose refutation of his adversary is complete, explained it of the prætorian cohorts or the prætorian camp. If he had omitted this second alternative, his work would in my judgment have been entirely satisfactory: though I must confess to having once taken it to mean the camp; Journal of Class. and Sacr. Phil. no. x. p. 58. Almost all recent commentators on the Philippians occupy themselves in discussing the possible local senses of ‘prætorium,’ barely, if at all, alluding to the only meaning which is really well supported and meets all the requirements of the case. Of recent writers on St Paul two only, so far as I have noticed, Block (Eint. in das N. T. p. 433) and apparently Ewald (Sendschreiben etc. p. 441), take what seems to be the correct view, but even they do not explain their reasons. On this account I have entered into the question more fully than its absolute importance deserves.

² This difficulty indeed is very slight, if it be interpreted of the camp; for the camp was large and might perhaps have

The following account, relating to a contemporary of St Paul, who also spent some time in Rome under military custody, is abridged from Josephus (Ant. xviii. 6. 5 sq.). As throwing light on the condition of a prisoner under such circumstances, it may fitly close this investigation.

Herod Agrippa, then a young man and resident in Rome, contracted an intimate friendship with Caius. On one occasion, when the two were driving together, Agrippa was overheard praying that Tiberius would resign the empire to make way for his friend who was ‘in all respects more worthy.’ Some time after, the charioteer, having been dismissed by Agrippa and bearing a grudge against him, reported his words to Tiberius. So Agrippa was consigned to Macro, the prefect of the prætorians, to be put in chains. Hereupon Antonia, the sister-in-law of Tiberius, who had a kindly feeling for the Jewish prince as a friend of her grandson Caius, contained houses or rooms routed by prisoners: see above, p. 9 sq. But if the palace or the Palatine barracks were meant, St Luke’s statement would not be so easily explained. Wieseler indeed (Chronol. p. 403, note 3), who pronounces in favour of the Palatine barracks, adduces the instances of Drusus and Agrippa in support of his view. But both cases break down on examination. (1) Drusus, it is true, was imprisoned in the palace; Tac. Ann. vi. 23, Sect. Tiber. 54. But this is no parallel to the case of St Paul. Drusus, as a member of the imperial family, would naturally be confined within the precincts of the imperial residence. Moreover, as Tiberius had designs on his nephew’s life, secrecy was absolutely necessary for his plans. Nor indeed could one, who might at any moment become the focus of a revolution, be safely entrusted to the keeping of the camp away from the emperor’s personal cognisance. (2) Wieseler misunderstands the incidents relating to Agrippa, whose imprisonment is wholly unconnected with the Palatine. When Tiberius ordered him to be put under arrest, he was at the emperor’s Tusculan villa (§ 6). From thence he was conveyed to the camp, where we find him still confined at the accession of Caius, which led to his removal and release (§ 10). Wieseler’s mistake is twofold. First; he explains τοῦ βασιλείου as referring to the palace at Rome; though Josephus lays the scene of the arrest at Tusculanum (Τιβέριος ἐκ τῶν Καπριῶν εἰς Τουσκουλατὸν παραγί-νεται). For the existence of such palaces at Tusculum see Strabo v. p. 239 δεχόμενοι βασιλείων κατασκευάς ἐκπρεπεστάται. Secondly; he boldly translates στρατόπεδον by ‘prætorium,’ understanding thereby the Palatine barracks; though these barracks were in no sense a camp and were never so called. Building upon these two false suppositions, he makes the Palatine the scene of both his arrest and his imprisonment. Caractacus also, like Agrippa, appears to have been imprisoned in the prætorian camp, Tac. Ann. xii. 36. And, if these royal captives were not retained on the Palatine, it is very improbable that an exception should be made in the case of a humble prisoner like St Paul, whose case would not appear to differ from many hundreds likewise awaiting the decision of Cæsar.

It will appear from the account relating to Agrippa, given in the text, that this prince was confined in the camp during the reign of Tiberius; but that on the accession of Caius he was removed to a house of his own, though still under military custody. The notices in the Acts suggest that St Paul’s captivity resembled this latter condition of Agrippa, and that he did not reside actually within the camp. A Roman tradition is perhaps preserved in the notice of the Roman Hilary (Ambrosiaster) in his prologue to the Ephesians; ‘In custodia sub fidejussore intelligitur degisse manens extra castra in conductu suo.’ In Acts xxviii. 16 some xss (Greek and Latin) read ἐξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, ’extra castra.’

Death of

Tiberius.

grieving at his misfortune, and yet not daring to intercede with the emperor, spoke to Macro on his behalf. Her entreaties prevailed. The prefect took care that the soldiers appointed to guard him should not be over severe, and that the centurion to whom he was bound should be a man of humane disposition. He was permitted to take a bath every day; free access was granted to his freedmen and his friends; and other indulgences were allowed him. Accordingly his friend Silas and his freedmen, Marsyas and Stocheus, were constant in their attendance: they brought him food that was palatable to him; they smuggled in clothes under pretence of selling them; they made his bed every night with the aid of the soldiers, who had received orders to this effect from Macro.

In this way six months rolled by and Tiberius died. On hearing of the emperor’s death, Marsyas ran in hot haste to Agrippa to tell him the good news. He found the prince on the threshold, going out to the baths, and making signs to him said in Hebrew, ‘The lion’s dead.’ The centurion in command noticed the hurry of the messenger and the satisfaction with which his words were received. His curiosity was excited. At first an evasive answer was returned to his question; but as the man had been friendly disposed, Agrippa at length told him. The centurion shared his prisoner’s joy, unfastened his chain, and served up dinner to him. But while they sat at table, and the wine was flowing freely, contrary tidings arrived. Tiberius was alive and would return to Rome in a few days. The centurion who had committed himself so grievously was furious at this announcement. He rudely pushed Agrippa off the couch, and threatened him with the loss of his head, as a penalty for his lying report. Agrippa was again put in chains, and the rigour of his confinement increased. So he passed the night in great discomfort. But the next day the report of the emperor’s death was confirmed. And soon after a letter arrived from Caius to Piso the prefect of the city, directing the removal of Agrippa from the camp to the house where he had lived before he was imprisoned.

Release of

Agrippa.

This relieved and reassured him. Though he was still guarded and watched, yet less restraint was put upon his movements (φυλακή μὲν καὶ τήρησις ἦν, μετὰ μέντοι ἄνεσθαι τῆς εἰς τὴν δίαιταν). When the new emperor arrived in Rome, his first impulse was to release Agrippa at once: but Antonia represented to him that this indecent haste would be regarded as an outrage on his predecessor’s memory. So after waiting a few days to save appearances, he sent for Agrippa, placed the royal diadem on his head, gave him the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias, and removing his iron fetter (ἀλύσει) invested him with a golden chain of the same weight.

Philippians 1:27

27 Μόνον ἀξίως τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ Χριστοῦ πολιτεύεσθε, ἵνα εἴτε ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν ὑμᾶς εἴτε ἀπὼν ἀκούω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν ὅτι στήκετε ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι, μιᾷ ψυχῇ

27. ἀπὼν ἀκούσω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν.

27—30. ‘But under all circumstances do your duty as good citizens of a heavenly kingdom; act worthily of the Gospel of Christ. So that whether I come among you and see with my own eyes, or stay away and obtain tidings from others, I may learn that you maintain your ground bravely and resolutely, acting by one inspiration; that with united aims and interests you are fighting all in the ranks of the Faith on the side of the Gospel; and that no assault of your antagonists makes you waver: for this will be a sure omen to them of utter defeat, to you of life and safety: an omen, I say, sent by God Himself; for it is His grace, His privilege bestowed upon you, that for Christ—yea, that ye should not only believe on Him, but also should suffer for Him. For ye have entered the same lists, ye are engaged in the same struggle, in which you saw me contending then at Philippi, in which you hear of my contending now in Rome.’

27. Μόνον] ‘Only,’ i.e. ‘whatever may happen, whether I visit you again or visit you not’: see Gal. ii. 10, v. 13, vi. 12, 2 Thess. ii. 7.

πολιτεύεσθε] ‘perform your duties as citizens.’ The metaphor of the heavenly citizenship occurs again, iii. 20 ἡμῶν τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει, and Ephes. ii. 19 συνπολίται τῶν ἁγίων. See the note on iii. 20. It was natural that, dwelling in the metropolis of the empire, St Paul should use this illustration. The metaphor moreover would speak forcibly to his correspondents; for Philippi was a Roman colony, and the Apostle had himself obtained satisfaction, while in this place, by declaring himself a Roman citizen: Acts xvi. 12, 37, 38. Though the word πολιτεύεσθαι is used very loosely at a later date, at this time it seems always to refer to public duties devolving on a man as a member of a body: so Acts xxiii. 1 πάσῃ συνειδήσει ἀγαθῇ πεπολίτευμα τῷ Θεῷ κ.τ.λ., where St Paul had been accused of violating the laws and customs of the people and so subverting the theocratic constitution; Joseph. Vit. § 2 ἠρξάμην πολιτεύεσθαι τῇ Φαρισαίων αἱρέσει κατακολουθῶν, for the Pharisees were a political as well as a religious party. The opposite to πολιτεύεσθαι is ἰδιωτεύειν, e.g. Eschin. Timarch. p. 27.

The phrase ἀξίως πολιτεύεσθαι is adopted in Clem. Rom. § 21. Polycarp also, writing to these same Philippians (§ 5), combines it very happily with another expression in St Paul (2 Tim. ii. 12), ἐὰν πολιτευσώμεθα ἀξίως αὐτοῦ, καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν αὐτῷ, ‘If we perform our duties under Him as simple citizens, He will promote us to a share of His sovereignty.’ ἵνα εἴτε ἐλθὼν κ.τ.λ.] The sentence is somewhat irregular. It would have run more smoothly ἵνα, εἴτε ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν, εἴτε ἀπὼν καὶ ἀκούων, μάθω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν. For εἴτε, εἴτε, with participles, comp. e.g. 2 Cor. v. 9 εἴτε ἐνδημοῦντες εἴτε ἐκδημοῦντες. On this plan the sentence is begun: but in the second clause the symmetry is lost and the participle (ἀκούω) exchanged for a finite verb (ἀκούω), so that in place of a general word applying to both participial clauses (e.g. μάθω) is substituted a special one (ἀκούω) referring to the second clause only.

στήκετε] ‘stand firm,’ ‘hold your ground.’ For the metaphor see Ephes. vi. 13 ἵνα δυνηθῆτε ἀντιστήναι ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ πονηρᾷ, καὶ ἅπαντα κατεργασάμενοι στήναι στήτε οὖν, περιζωσά-

Philippians 1:28-29

συναθλοῦντες τῇ πίστει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ²⁸καὶ μὴ πτυρόμενοι ἐν μηδενὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀντικειμένων· ἥτις ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς ἔνδειξις ἀπωλείας, ὑμῶν δὲ σωτηρίας, καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ Θεοῦ· ²⁹ὅτι ὑμῖν ἐχαρίσθη τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μενοι κ.τ.λ. In the form στήκω the

idea of firmness or uprightness is prominent: see the note on Gal. v. 1. In a later passage the Apostle compares the Christian life to the Greek stadium (iii. 14). Here the metaphor seems to be drawn rather from the combats of the Roman amphitheatre. Like criminals or captives, the believers are condemned to fight for their lives: against them are arrayed the ranks of worldliness and sin: only unflinching courage and steady combination can win the victory against such odds: comp. 1 Cor. iv. 9 ὁ Θεὸς ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἰσχάτους ἀπέδειξεν ὡς ἐπιθανατίους, ὅτι θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ κ.τ.λ.

ἐνὶ πνεύματι] differs from μὴ ψυχῇ. The spirit, the principle of the higher life, is distinguished from the soul, the seat of the affections, passions, etc. For this distinction of πνεῦμα and ψυχὴ see the notes on 1 Thess. v. 23. For ἐν πνεῦμα comp. Ephes. iv. 4,

Clem. Rom. 46, Hermas Sim. ix. 13.

συναθλοῦντες τῇ πίστει] ‘striving in concert with the faith.’ Comp. Mart. Ign. § 3 παρεκάλει συναθλεῖν τῇ αὐτοῦ προθέσει, Ignat. Polyc. § 6 συγκοπιάτε ἀλλήλους, συναθλεῖτε. Thus ἡ πίστις is here objective, ’the faith,’ ’the teaching of the Gospel’; see the notes on

Gal. iii. 23. For this idea of association with the faith, thus personified and regarded as a moral agent, compare

1 Cor. xiii. 6 συγχαίρει δὲ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, 2 Tim. i. 8 συγκακοπάθησον τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, 3 Joh. 8 συνεργοὶ γινώμεθα τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. The other construction, which detaches τῇ πίστει from the preposition in συναθλοῦντες and translates it ‘for the faith,’ seems harsh and improbable. 28. μὴ πτυρόμενοι] ’not blenching,’ ’not startled’: comp. Clem. Hom. ii. 39 πτύραντες ἀμαθεῖς ὄχλους, M. Anton. viii. 45, Polyc. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24. The metaphor is from a timid horse

(πτοεῖν); comp. Plut. Mor. p. 800 ο μήτε ὄψει μήτε φωνῇ πτυρόμενος ὥσπερ θηρίον ὑποπτον, Vit. Fab. 3 ἐντρόμου τοῦ ἵππου γενομένου καὶ πτυρέντος. Though apparently not an Attic word, it seems to have been used in other dialects from the earliest times, e.g. Hippocr. de Morb. Mul. 1. p. 600 ἡ δεδίσεται καὶ πτύρηται.

ἥτις] ‘seeing that it,’ i.e. ‘your fearlessness when menaced with persecution’; by attraction with ἔνδειξις: comp. Ephes. iii. 13 αἰτοῦμαι μὴ ἐγκακεῖν ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσίν μου ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἥτις ἐστὶν δόξα ὑμῶν, and see Winer § xxiv. p. 209. St Paul uses very similar language in writing to the other great church of Macedonia, 2 Thess. i. 47. In this sentence the received text presents two variations: (1) For ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς it reads αὐτοῖς μὲν ἐστιν: (2) For ὑμῶν it has ὑμῖν. These are obviously corrections for the sake of balancing the clauses and bringing out the contrast.

τοῦτο ἀπὸ Θεοῦ] referring to ἔνδειξις. It is a direct indication from God. The Christian gladiator does not anxiously await the signal of life or death from the fickle crowd (Juv. Sat. iii. 36 ‘Munera nunc edunt et verso pollice vulgi quem libet occidunt populariter’). The great ἀγωνοθέτης Himself has given him a sure token of deliverance. 29. ἐχαρίσθη] ‘God has granted you the high privilege of suffering for Christ; this is the surest sign, that He looks upon you with favour.’ See the note on i. 7.

τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ] i.e. πάσχειν. The