Philippians 2

Philippians 2:4

δοξίαν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ ἀλλήλους ἠγούμενοι ὑπερέχοντας ἑαυτῶν, ⁴μὴ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι σκοποῦντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων ἕκαστοι.

4. 5. μὴ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστος σκοποῦντες ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων. Ἕκαστοι τοῦτο φρονεῖτε κ.τ.λ.

impediments to an universal, diffusive, unconditional charity are the exaltation of party and the exaltation of self. Both these are condemned here; the first in κατ’ ἐριθείαν, the second in κατὰ κενοδοξίαν. The μηδὲ κατὰ κενοδοξίαν of the older MS distinguishes and emphasizes the two false motives more strongly than the ᾖ κενοδοξίαν of the received text.

κενοδοξίαν] ‘vain-glory, personal vanity.’ See the note on Gal. v. 26. τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ] ‘your loveliness of mind.’ Though a common word in the New Testament, ταπεινοφροσύνη seems not to occur earlier. Even the adjective ταπεινόφρων and the verb ταπεινοφρονεῖν, though occurring once each in the LXX (Prov. xxix. 23, Ps. cxxx. 2), appear not to be found in classical Greek before the Christian era. In heathen writers indeed ταπεινός has almost always a bad meaning, ‘grovelling,’ ‘abject.’ In Aristotle (i) for instance (Eth. Endem. iii. 3) ταπεινός is associated with ἀνδραποδώδης; in Plato (Legg. iv. p. 774 c) with ἀνελεύθερος; in Arrian (Epict. i. 3) with ἀγεννής. To this however some few exceptions are found, especially in Plato and the Platonists; see Neander Church Hist. i. p. 26 (Eng. Tr.). On the other hand, St Paul once uses ταπεινοφροσύνη in disparagement. Col. ii. 18. It was one great result of the life of Christ (on which St Paul dwells here) to raise ‘humility’ to its proper level; and, if not fresh coined for this purpose, the word ταπεινοφροσύνη now first became current through the influence of Christian ethics. On its moral and religious significance see Neander Planting i. p. 483 (Eng. Tr.). ἀλλήλους κ.τ.λ.] i.e. ’each thinking the other better.’ See esp. Rom. xii. 10 τῇ τιμῇ ἀλλήλους προηγούμενοι.

4. 5. These verses exhibit several various readings. The received text has σκοπεῖτε for σκοποῦντες, and φρονείσθω for φρονεῖτε, also inserting γὰρ after τοῦτο. All these variations may be at once dismissed, as they have not sufficient support and are evident alterations to relieve the grammar of the sentence. But others still remain, where it is more difficult to decide. In ver. 4, at the first occurrence of the word, there is about equal authority for ἕκαστος and ἕκαστοι; at its second occurrence, the weight of evidence is very decidedly in favour of ἕκαστοι as against ἕκαστος. On the grammar it should be remarked; (1) That the plural of ἕκαστος, though common elsewhere, does not occur again either in the New Testament (for in Rev. vi. 11 it is certainly a false reading) or, as would appear, in the LXX. (2) That we should expect either τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι or τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἕκαστος; but this consideration is not very weighty, for irregularities sometimes occur; and as tὰ ἑαυτῶν precedes ἕκαστος, the latter might be looked upon as an afterthought inserted parenthetically. (3) That St Paul can hardly have written ἕκαστος in the first clause and ἕκαστοι in the second, intending the clauses as correlative; and therefore if we retain ἕκαστος in the first case, it will be necessary to detach the following ἕκαστοι, and join it on with the next sentence. This view seems to have been taken by some older expositors and translators; and I have given it as an alternative reading. Whether the probabilities (independently of the evidence) are in favour of ἕκαστος or ἕκα-

Philippians 2:5-6

⁵Τοῦτο φρονεῖτε ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ᵃὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγήσατο τὸ

στοι in the first case, it is difficult to say. The plural ἕκαστοι would mean ’each and all.’ σκοποῦντες] ‘regarding as your aim (σκοπός).’ For this sense of σκοπεῖν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ, ’to consult one’s own interests,’ comp. Eur. El. 1114, Thuc. vi. 12, and other passages quoted by Wetstein. For other instances of participles used where imperatives might have been expected, see Rom. xii. 9, Heb. xiii. 5.

ἀλλὰ καὶ] ‘but also,’ i.e. let them look beyond their own interests to those of others.

ἕκαστοι] for the repetition of the word compare 1 Cor. vii. 17.

5—11. ‘Reflect in your own minds the mind of Christ Jesus. Be humble, as He also was humble. Though existing before the worlds in the Eternal Godhead, yet He did not cling with avidity to the prerogatives of His divine majesty, did not ambitiously display His equality with God; but divested Himself of the glories of heaven, and took upon Him the nature of a servant, assuming the likeness of men. Nor was this all. Having thus appeared among men in the fashion of a man, He humbled Himself yet more, and carried out His obedience even to dying. Nor did He die by a common death: He was crucified, as the lowest malefactor is crucified. But as was His humility, so also was His exaltation. God raised Him to a preeminent height, and gave Him a title and a dignity far above all dignities and titles else. For to the name and majesty of Jesus all created things in heaven and earth and hell shall pay homage on bended knee; and every tongue with praise and thanksgiving shall declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, and in and for Him shall glorify God the Father.’

5. ἐν ὑμῖν] ‘in yourselves,’ i.e. ‘in your hearts,’ as Matt. iii. 9 μὴ δόξητε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, ix. 3 εἶπαν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς (explained by ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν which follows), ix. 21 etc. For ὑμῖν, where the New Testament writers generally have ἑαυτοῖς and classical authors ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς, compare Matt. vi. 19 μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς; and see A. Buttmann, p. 97. These slight difficulties, together with the irregularity of construction mentioned in the next note, have doubtless led to the substitution of φρονεῖσθα for φρονεῖτε in the received text.

ὁ καὶ κ.τ.λ.] sc. ἐφρονεῖτο. The regular construction would have been ὁ καὶ Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἐφρόνει ἐν ἑαυτῷ.

6. ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ] ‘in the form of God.’ On the meaning of μορφῇ and its distinction from σχῆμα see the detached note at the end of this chapter. Though μορφῇ is not the same as φύσις or οὐσία, yet the possession of the μορφῇ involves participation in the οὐσία also: for μορφῇ implies not the external accidents but the essential attributes. Similar to this, though not so decisive, are the expressions used elsewhere of the divinity of the Son, εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ 2 Cor. iv. 4, Col. i. 15, and χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ Heb. i. 3. Similar also is the term which St John has adopted to express this truth, ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ.

ὑπάρχων] The word denotes ‘prior existence,’ but not necessarily ’eternal existence.’ The latter idea however follows in the present instance from the conception of the divinity of Christ which the context supposes. The phrase ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων is thus an exact counterpart to ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν κ.τ.λ., John i. 1. The idea corresponding to ὑπάρχων is expressed in other terms elsewhere; Col. i. 15, 17 πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως, αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων, Heb. i. 8, 10, John viii. 58,

Philippians 2:7

III

εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, Ἰάλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου

xvii. 24, and Apoc. i. 17, iii. 14.

οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο] ‘yet did not regard it as a prize, a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards.’ The more usual form of the word is ἁρπαγμα, which properly signifies simply ‘a piece of plunder,’ but especially with such verbs as ἡγεῖσθαι, ποιεῖσθαι, νομίζεεν, etc., is employed like ἔρμαιον, εὕρημα, to denote ‘a highly-prized possession, an unexpected gain’: as Plut. Mor. p. 330 D οὐδὲ ὥσπερ ἁρπαγμα καὶ λάφυρον εὐτυχίας ἀνελπίστου σπαράξαι καὶ ἀνωσύρασθαι διανοηθεῖς, Heliod. vii. 20 οὐχ ἁρπαγμα οὐδὲ ἔρμαιον ἡγεῖται τὸ πρᾶγμα, ib. viii. 7 ἁρπαγμα τὸ ῥηθὲν ἐποιήσατο ἡ Ἀρσάκη, Titus Bostr. c. Manich. i. 2 ἁρπαγμα ψευδῶς τὸ ἀναγκαῖον τῆς φύσεως ἡγεῖται, Euseb. H. E. viii. 12 τὸν θάνατον ἁρπαγμα θέμενοι, Vit. Const. ii. 31 οἷον ἁρπαγμά τι τὴν ἐπάνοδον ποιησάμενοι.

It appears then from these instances that ἁρπαγμα ἡγεῖσθαι frequently signifies nothing more than ’to clutch greedily,’ ‘prize highly,’ ’to set store by;’ the idea of plunder or robbery having passed out of sight. The form ἁρπαγμὸς however presents greater difficulty; for neither analogy nor usage is decisive as to its meaning: (1) The termination -μὸς indeed denotes primarily the process, so that ἁρπαγμὸς would be ‘an act of plundering.’ But as a matter of fact substances in -μὸς are frequently used to describe a concrete thing, e.g. θεσμὸς, χρησμὸς, φραγμὸς, etc. (see Buttmann, Ausf. Sprachl. § 119. 23 (II. p. 399); with which compare the English ‘seizure, capture,’ and the like): so that the form is no impediment to the sense adopted above. (2) And again the particular word ἁρπαγμὸς occurs so rarely that usage cannot be considered decisive. In Plut. Mor. p. 12 A τὸν ἐκ Κρήτης καλούμενον ἁρπαγμόν, the only instance of its occurrence in any classical writer (for though it appears as a various reading for ἁρπαγὴ in Pausan. i. 20. 2, the authority is too slight to deserve consideration), it seems certainly to denote the act. On the other hand in Euseb. Comm. in Luc. vi. (Mai, Nov. Patr. Bibl. IV. p. 165) ὁ Πέτρος δὲ ἁρπαγμὸν τὸν διὰ σταυροῦ θάνατον ἐποιεῖτο διὰ τὰς σωτηρίους ἐλπίδας (a reference which I owe to a friend), in Cyril. Alex. de Ador. I. p. 25 (ed. Aubert.) οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν τὴν παραίτησιν ὡς ἐξ ἀδρανοῦς καὶ ὑδαρεστέρας ἐποιεῖτο φρενός (speaking of Lot’s importunity when the angels declined his offer of hospitality), and in a late anonymous writer in the Catena Possini on Mark x. 42 τῷ δείξαι ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἁρπαγμὸς ἡ τιμή, τῶν ἐθνῶν γὰρ τὸ τοιοῦτον, it is equivalent to ἁρπαγμα. Under these circumstances we may, in choosing between the two senses of ἁρπαγμὸς, fairly assign to it here the one which best suits the context.

The meaning adopted above satisfies this condition: ‘Though He pre-existed in the form of God, yet He did not look upon equality with God as a prize which must not slip from His grasp, but He emptied Himself, divested Himself, taking upon Him the form of a slave.’ The idea is the same as in 2 Cor. viii. 9 δι’ ἱμὸς ἑπτώχευσεν πλούσιος ὤν. The other rendering (adopted by the A.V.), ’thought it not robbery to be equal with God,’ disconnects this clause from its context. The objections to this latter interpretation will be considered more at length in the detached note at the end of the chapter.

τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ] ’to be on an equality with God.’ For this use of ἴσα as a predicate, comp. Job xi. 12 βροτὸς δὲ γεννητὸς γυναικὸς ἴσα ὄνῳ ἐρημίτη. δι’ ὅμοια in Thucyd. i. 25 δυνάμει ὄντες… ὅμοια τοῖς Ἑλλήνων πλουσιωτάτοις: see Jelf, Gramm. § 382. The examples of the mere adverbial

Philippians 2:8

λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος, 8 καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτόν, γενόμενος

use of ἴσα accumulated by commentators do not throw much light on the meaning here. Between the two expressions ἴσος εἶναι and ἴσα εἶναι no other distinction can be drawn, except that the former refers rather to the person, the latter to the attributes. In the present instance ἴσα Θεῷ expresses better the Catholic doctrine of the Person of Christ, than ἴσος Θεῷ; for the latter would seem to divide the Godhead. It is not the statement either of the Lord Himself or of the evangelist, but the complaint of the Jews, that He ‘made Himself ἴσον τῷ Θεῷ (John v. 18).’

In the letter of the synod of Ancyra, directed against the Sabellianism of Marcellus, attention is called to the absence of the article with Θεὸς hero and above (ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ); καθὼν οὕτε μορφῇ οὔτ’ ἐν μορφῇ; ἐστι τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ, οὔτε ἴσα ἐστὶ τῷ Θεῷ ἀλλὰ Θεῷ, οὔτε οὐθεντικῶς ὡς ὁ πατήρ (Epiphan. Hær. lxxiii. 9, p. 855 Petar.). The object of this comment, whether right or wrong, is apparently to distinguish between Θεὸς God absolutely and ὁ Θεὸς God the Father; but the editors generally after Petau substitute ἀλλὰ Θεός, ἀλλὰ Θεός, for ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ Θεῷ, thus disregarding the MS and confusing the sense.

7. ἀλλὰ ἑαυτόν] ‘So far from this: He divested Himself,’ not of His divine nature, for this was impossible, but ‘of the glories, the prerogatives, of Deity. This He did by taking upon Him the form of a servant.’ The emphatic position of ἑαυτὸν points to the humiliation of our Lord as voluntary, self-imposed.

ἐκίνωσεν] ’emptied, stripped Himself’ of the insignia of majesty.

μορφὴν δούλον λαβών] ‘by taking the form of a slave.’ The action of λαβών is coincident in time with the action of ἐκίνωσεν, as e.g. Ephes.

i. 9: comp. Plat. Men. p. 92 σ’ εὐεργίτησον φράσας, and see Hermann on Viger no. 224, Bernhardy Griech. Synt. p. 383. By ‘form’ is meant not the external semblance only (σχῆμα of the following verse), but the characteristic attributes, as in ver. 6. For ἄνθρωπος the stronger word δούλος is substituted: He, who is Master (κύριος) of all, became the slave of all. Comp. Matt. xx. 27, 28, Mark x. 44, 45.

This text was made the starting-point of certain mystic speculations by the early sect of the Sethians; Hippol. Hær. v. 19, x. 11.

ἐν ὁμοιώματι] Unlike μορφή, this word does not imply the reality of our Lord’s humanity: see Trench N. T. Syn. § xv. ‘Forma (μορφή) dicit quiddam absolutum; similitudo (ὁμοίωμα) dicit relationem ad alia ejusdem conditionis; habitus (σχῆμα) refertur ad aspectum et sensum,’ is Bengel’s distinction. Thus ὁμοίωμα stands midway between μορφή and σχῆμα. The plural ἀνθρώπων is used; for Christ, as the second Adam, represents not the individual man, but the human race; Rom. v. 15, 1 Cor. xv. 45-47.

γενόμενος] like λαβών is opposed to the foregoing ὑπάρχων (ver. 6), and marks the assumption of the new upon the old.

8. ‘Nor was this His lowest degradation. He not only became a man, but He was treated as the meanest of men. He died the death of a criminal slave.’ σχήματι κ.τ.λ.] The former verse dwells on the contrast between what He was from the beginning and what He became afterwards: hence λαβών (not ἔχων), ὁμοίωμα (not μορφή), γενόμενος (not ὧν), all words expressive of change. In the present the opposition is between what He is in Himself, and what He appeared in the eyes of men:

Philippians 2:9

ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου, θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ· 9 διὸ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα

hence σχήματι (for ὁμαιώματι or μορφή), εὑρεθείς (for γενόμενος or ὑπάρχων), ὡς ἄνθρωπος (for ἄνθρωπος), all expressions implying external semblance. ‘He hath no form nor comeliness: there is no beauty that we should desire him: he was despised and we esteemed him not’ (Is. liii. 2, 3). For σχήματι εὑρεθείς κ.τ.λ. compare Test. xii Patr. Zab. 9 ὄψεσθε Θεὸν ἐν σχήματι ἀνθρώπου, Benj. 10 ἐπὶ γῆς φανέντα ἐν μορφῇ ἀνθρώπου [ταπεινώσεως].

ὑπήκοος] 8c. τῷ Θεῷ: comp. ver. 9, διὸ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς κ.τ.λ. On the ὑπακοή of Christ comp. Rom. v. 19, Hebr. v. 8.

θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ] ‘I said death, but it was no common death. It was a death which involved not intense suffering only but intense shame also: a death reserved for malefactors and slaves: a death on which the Mosaic law has uttered a curse (Deut. xxi. 23), and which even Gentiles consider the most foul and cruel of all punishments (Cic. Verr. v. 64); which has been ever after to the Jews a stumblingblock and to the Greeks foolishness.’ Compare Heb. xii. 2 ὑπέμεινεν σταυρὸν αἰσχύνης καταφρονήσας, and see Galatians p. 152 sq. The contrast of his own position must have deepened St Paul’s sense of his Master’s humiliation. As a Roman citizen he could under no circumstances suffer such degradation; and accordingly, if we may accept the tradition, while St Peter died on the cross, he himself was executed by the sword: see Tertull. Scorp. 15, and comp. Ep. Gall. in Euseb. H. R. v. 1, § 12.

9. διό] In consequence of this voluntary humiliation, in fulfilment of the divine law which He Himself enunciated, ὁ ταπεινῶν ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται (Luke xiv. 11, xviii. 14).

διὸ καὶ] is a frequent collocation of particles in the New Testament with various shades of meaning. Here the καὶ implies reciprocation.

ὑπερύψωσεν] The word is found several times in the LXX, but apparently does not occur in classical writers.

ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ] ‘game to Him, the Son of Man.’ Ὑπερύψωσεν and ἐχαρίσατο are used in reference to the subordinate position voluntarily assumed by the Son of God.

τὸ ὄνομα] ’the name, i.e. the title and dignity,’ comp. Ephes. i. 21 ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ κυριότητος καὶ παντὸς ὀνόματος ὀνομαζομένου, Heb. i. 4 ὡς διαφοροῦτερον παρ’ αὐτοὺς κεκληρον ὄνομα. If St Paul were referring to any one term, Κύριος would best explain the reference; for it occurs in the context ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, ver. 11. But here, as in the passages quoted, we should probably look to a very common Hebrew sense of ’name,’ not meaning a definite appellation but denoting office, rank, dignity. In this case the use of the ‘Name of God’ in the Old Testament to denote the Divine Presence or the Divine Majesty, more especially as the object of adoration and praise, will suggest the true meaning: since the context dwells on the honour and worship henceforth offered to Him on whom ’the name’ has been conferred. ‘To praise the name, to bless the name, to fear the name, of God’ are frequent expressions in the Old Testament. See especially Gesenius Thesaur. p. 1432, s. v. DC, where he defines ’the name of God,’ ‘Deus quatenus ab hominibus invocatur, celebratur.’ Philo in a remarkable passage (among other titles assigned to our Lord in the Apostolic writings) gives ’the Name of God’ as a designation of the ‘Word’: καὶ ἂν μηδὲν μέντοι τυγχάγῃ τις ἀξιόχρεως ὡν υἱὸς Θεοῦ προσαγορεύεσθαι, σπουδάζετω κοσμεῖσθαι κατὰ τὸν πρωτόγονον αὐτοῦ

PHIL.

Philippians 2:10

τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα, ¹οἶνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν Γόνη κάμψη ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθολόγον, τὸν ἄγγελον πρεσβύτατον, ὡς ἀρχάγγελον πολυώνυμον ὑπάρχοντα καὶ γὰρ ἀρχὴ καὶ ὄνομα Θεοῦ καὶ λόγος

καὶ ὁ κατ’ εἰκόνα ἄνθρωπος καὶ ὁρῶν Ἰσραὴλ προσαγορεύεται (de Conf. Ling. § 28, p. 427 M). St Paul’s idea here seems to be the same; for the parallel remains unaffected by the fact that the Word was not revealed to Philo as an incarnate Person. Somewhat different in expression, though similar in meaning, is St John’s language, Rev. xix. 13. The reading τὸ ὄνομα (for which the received text has ὄνομα without the article) is unquestionably correct, both as having the support of the oldest MSS, and as giving a much fuller meaning. For other instances where τὸ ὄνομα is used absolutely, comp. Acts v. 41 κατηξιώθησαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἀτιμασθῆναι, Ignat. Eph. 3 δίδεμαι ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι, Philad. 10 δοξάσαι τὸ ὄνομα. In all these cases transcribers or translators have stumbled at the expression and interpolated words to explain it. The same motive will account for the omission of the article here.

10. This passage is modelled on

Isaiah xlv. 23 ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ ἐξομολογήσεται πᾶσα γλῶσσα τῷ

Θεῷ (80 Alex., but Vat. has καὶ ὁμείται π. γλ. τὸν Θεόν, and Sin. καὶ ὀμείται π. γλ. τὸν Κύριον), the text being modified to suit St Paul’s application to the Son. In Rom. xiv. 10, 11, on the other hand, the same text is directly quoted: πάντες γὰρ παραστησόμεθα τῷ βήματι τοῦ Θεοῦ (v. l. τοῦ Χριστοῦ) γέγραπται γάρ, Ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει Κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει κ.τ.λ.; the introductory words however, Ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει Κύριος, being substituted for κατ’ ἐμαυτοῦ ὀμνῶν of the prophet. In the passage in the Romans then, if the reading τοῦ Χριστοῦ were adopted, Κύριος would refer naturally to our Lord, and thus it would serve to illustrate the application of the text here; but the balance of authority is decidedly in favour of τοῦ Θεοῦ, which is doubtless correct; the other reading having been introduced from 2 Cor. v. 10, where the words τὸ βῆμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ occur.

Yet even without the countenance which would thus have been obtained from Rom. xiv. 11, it seems clear from the context that ’the name of Jesus’ is not only the medium but the object of adoration. The motive of the passage (as shown by the last verse) is to declare the honour paid to Jesus; and that the individual expressions suggest this interpretation will appear from the following note.

ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι] ‘in the name,’ i.e. the majesty, the manifestation to man, as an object of worship and praise. It is not ’the name Jesus,’ but ’the name of Jesus.’ The name here must be the same with the name in the preceding verse. And the personal name Jesus cannot there be meant; for the bestowal of the name is represented as following upon the humiliation and death of the Son of Man. If such had been the meaning, the words should have run, not ‘He bestowed on Him the name etc,’ but ‘He exalted the name borne by Him’; for, though eminently significant in His case and thus prophetic of His glorious office (Matt. i. 21), it was the personal name of many others besides. That the bending of the knee is an act of reverence to Jesus, and not only to God through Him, will appear from the following considerations; (1) The parallel clause describes an act of reverence paid directly to the Son as its object, the ultimate aim however being the glory of the Father, πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς κ.τ.λ. (2) The construction ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψη in this sense is supported by many analogous instances where direct adoration is meant: e.g. Ps. lxiii.

Philippians 2:11-12

νίων, “καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα εξομολογῆσται ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ πατρὸς.

“Ὥστε, ἀγαπητοί μου, καθὼς πάντοτε ὑπηκούσατε,

5 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἀρῶ τὰς χεῖράς μου, Ps. xlv. 10 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἐξομολογησόμεθα, Ps. cv. 3 ἐπαινέσθε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί τῷ ἁγίῳ αὐτοῦ, 1 Kings viii. 44 προσεύξονται ἐν ὀνόματί Κυρίου, besides the very frequent expression ἐπικαλεῖσθαι ἐν ὀνόματί Κυρίου (or Θεοῦ) 1 Kings xviii. 24, 25, 26, 2 Kings v. 11, Ps. xx. 8, exvi. 17, 2 Chron. xxviii. 15.

τῶν ἐπουρανίων κ.τ.λ.] ‘all creation, all things whatsoever and wheresoever they be.’ The whole universe, whether animate or inanimate, bends the knee in homage and raises its voice in praise: see especially Rev. v. 13 καὶ πᾶν κτίσμα δ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ ὑποκάτω τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης [ἀ] ἔστιν καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς πάντα, καὶ ἤκουσα λέγοντας τῷ καθήμενῳ κ.τ.λ.; and comp. Ephes. i. 20-22. So in like manner St Paul represents ‘all creation’ as awaiting the redemption of Christ, Rom. viii. 22. Compare Ignat. Trall. 9 βλεπώντων τῶν ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ ὑποχθονίων, Polyc. Phil. 2 ᾧ ὑπετάγη τὰ πάντα ἐπουράνια καὶ ἐπίγεια. It would seem therefore that the adjectives here are neuter; and any limitation to intelligent beings, while it detracts from the universality of the homage, is not required by the expressions. The personification of universal nature offering its praise and homage to its Creator in the 148th Psalm will serve to illustrate St Paul’s meaning here. If this view be correct, all endeavours to explain the three words of different classes of intelligent beings; as Christians, Jews, heathens; angels, men, devils; the angels, the living, the dead; souls of the blessed, men on earth, souls in purgatory, etc., are out of place.

11. ἐξομολογήσεται] ‘proclaim with thanksgiving.’ In itself ἐξομολογεῖσθαι is simply ’to declare or confess openly or plainly.’ But as its secondary sense ’to offer praise or thanksgiving’ has almost entirely supplanted its primary meaning in the LXX, where it is of frequent occurrence, and as moreover it has this secondary sense in the very passage of Isaiah which St Paul adapts, the idea of praise or thanksgiving ought probably not to be excluded here. Compare the construction ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι πάτερ ὅτι, Matt. xi. 25, Luke x. 21. The authorities are divided between ἐξομολογήσεται and ἐξομολογήσεται. In a doubtful case I have given the preference to the latter, as transcribers would be tempted to substitute the conjunctive to conform to κάμψη. The future is justified by such passages as Rev. xxii. 14 ἵνα ἔσται…καὶ εἰσέλθωσιν; see Winer § xli. p. 360 sq.

Κύριος Ἰησοῦς] See Acts ii. 36 καὶ Κύριον αὐτὸν καὶ Χριστὸν ὁ Θεὸς ἐποίησεν, τοῦτον τὸν Ἰησοῦν ὃν ὑμεῖς ἐσταιρώσατε, Rom. x. 9 ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς ἐν τῷ στόματί σου Κύριον Ἰησοῦν, i.e. ‘confess Jesus to be Lord,’ where the other reading ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς is a paraphrase; comp. 1 Cor. xii. 3.

12. 13. ‘Therefore, my beloved, having the example of Christ’s humility to guide you, the example of Christ’s exaltation to encourage you, as ye have always been obedient hitherto, so continue. Do not look to my presence to stimulate you. Labour earnestly not only at times when I am with you, but now when I am far away. With a nervous and trembling anxiety work out your salvation for yourselves, For yourselves, did I say? Nay, ye are not alone. It is God working in you from first to last: God that inspires the earliest impulse, and God that directs the final achievement: for such is His good pleasure.’ ὑπηκούσατε ‘were obedient,’ i.e. to God, not to St Paul himself. Ὑπακοή

8-2

[11. 13

μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου μόνον, ἀλλὰ νῦν πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ μου, μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου τὴν ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν κατεργάζεσθε· ¹³Θεὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν ὑπὲρ τῆς is most frequently so used in the New Testament of submission to the Gospel, e.g. Rom. i. 5, xv. 18, xvi. 19, 26, 2 Cor. vii. 15, x. 5, 6. It here refers back to the example of Christ, who

Himself ‘showed obedience’ (ὑπήκοος γενόμενος ver. 8).

μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ κ.τ.λ.] ‘do not, as though my presence prompted you, work out in my presence only etc.’ The sentence is a fusion of two ideas, μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου κατεργάζεσθε, and μὴ ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου μόνον κατεργάζεσθε, ‘do not be energetic because I am present,’ and ‘do not be energetic only when I am present.’ The pleonastic ὡς lays stress on the sentiment or motive of the agent: compare Rom. ix. 32, 2 Cor. ii. 17, Philem. 14.

φόβου καὶ τρόμου] i.e. a nervous and trembling anxiety to do right. Such at least seems to be the meaning of the phrase in St Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 15, Ephes. vi. 5: comp. 1 Cor. ii. 3. The words occur together frequently in the LXX, where however they have a sterner import: Gen. ix. 2, Exod. xv. 16, Deut. ii. 25, xi. 25, Ps. liv. 5, Is. xix. 16.

ἑαυτῶν] The word is emphatic in reference both to what goes before and to what follows. ‘Do not depend on me, but on yourselves,’ ‘When you depend on yourselves, you depend on God.’

κατεργάζεσθε] ‘work out,’ as e.g.

Xen. Mem. iv. 2.7 πλειόνων περὶ ταῦτα πραγματευομένων ἐλάττους οἱ κατεργαζόμενοι γίγνονται. It is a common

word in St Paul.

13. γάρ] This verse supplies at once the stimulus to and the corrective of the precept in the preceding: ‘Work, for God works with you’: and ‘The good is not your own doing, but God’s.’ ἐνεργῶν] ‘works mightily, works effectively.’ The preposition of the compound is unconnected with the ἐν οἱ ἐν ὑμῖν (‘in your hearts’). See the notes on Gal. ii. 8.

καὶ τὸ θέλειν κ.τ.λ.] ’not less the will, the first impulse, than the work, the actual performance.’ ‘Nos ergo volunus, sed Deus in nobis operatur et velle; nos ergo operamur, sed Deus in nobis operatur et operari,’ Augustin. de Don. Perser. 33 (x. p. 838, ed. 1.cn.). It was not sufficient to say Θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν, lest he should seem to limit the part of God to the actual working: this activity of God comprises τὸ θέλειν as well as τὸ ἐνεργεῖν. The θέλειν and the ἐνεργεῖν correspond respectively to the ‘gratia præveniens’ and the ‘gratia cooperans’ of a later theology.

ὑπὲρ τῆς κ.τ.λ.] ‘in fulfilment of His benevolent purpose’; for God ‘will have all men to be saved’ (1 Tim. ii. 4). The words should therefore be connected with Θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν, not with καὶ τὸ θέλειν κ.τ.λ.; for this latter connexion would introduce an idea alien to the context. On εὐδοκία see the note i. 15.

14-16. ‘Be ye not like Israel of old. Never give way to discontent and murmuring, to questioning and unbelief. So live that you call forth no censure from others, that you keep your own consciences single and pure. Show yourselves blameless children of God amidst a crooked and perverse generation. For you are set in this world as luminaries in the firmament. Hold out to others the word of life. That so, when Christ shall come to judge all our works, I may be able to boast of your faith, and to show

Philippians 2:14-16

εὐδοκίας. ¹⁴πάντα ποιεῖτε χωρὶς γογγυσμῶν καὶ διαλογισμῶν, ¹⁵ἵνα γένησθε ἄμεμπτοι καὶ ἀκέραιοι, τέκνα Θεοῦ ἄμωσα μέσον Γενεᾶς ἐκολιᾶς καὶ Διεστραμμένη, ἐν οἷς φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες ἐν κόσμῳ, ¹⁶λόγον

that my race has not been run in vain, that my struggles have indeed been crowned with success.’

14. γογγυσμῶν] ‘murmurings.’ The word is constantly used in the LXX of Israel in the wilderness: compare 1 Cor. x. 10 μηδὲ γογγύζετε καθάπερ τινὲς αὐτῶν ἐγόγγυσαν. The same reference to the Israelites, which is directly expressed in the passage just quoted, seems to have been present to the Apostle’s mind here; for in the next verse he quotes from the song of Moses. For γογγυσμὸς the Athenians used τονθορυσμὸς: the former however occurs in the oldest Ionic writers (see Lobeck Phryn. p. 358). This is one of many instances of the exceptional character of the Attic dialect: see above on πτυρόμενοι i. 28 and Galatians vi. 6, and p. 92 sq.

διαλογισμῶν] This word in the New Testament means sometimes ‘inward questionings,’ sometimes ‘disputes, discussion’; for there is no sufficient ground for denying it this second meaning: see 1 Tim. ii. 8. Here it seems to have the former sense. As γογγυσμὸς is the moral, so διαλογισμὸς is the intellectual rebellion against God.

15. γένησθε] ‘may approve yourselves’: better supported than the other reading ἦτε.

ἀκέραιοι] ‘pure, sincere,’ literally ‘unmixed,’ ‘unadulterated’ (from κεράννυμι); for the word is used of pure wine (Athen. ii. 45 ε), of unalloyed metal (Plut. Mor. 1154 π), and the like. Comp. Philo Leg. ad Cai. § 42, p. 594 μ τὴν χάριν διδούς ἔδωκεν οὐκ ἀκέραιον ἀλλ’ ἀναμίξας αὐτῇ δίος ἀργαλεώτερον. The stress laid in the New Testament on simplicity of character appears in this as in many other words:

ἀπλοῦς, εἰλικρινῆς, δίψυχος etc. Of the two words here used, the former (ἄμεμπτοι) relates to the judgment of others, while the latter (ἀκέραιοι) describes the intrinsic character.

τέκνα Θεοῦ κ.τ.λ.] A direct contrast to the Israelites in the desert, who in the song of Moses are described as οὐκ αὐτῇ τέκνα (i.e. no children of God) μωμητά, γενεὰ σκολιὰ καὶ διεστραμμένη (Deut. xxxii. 5, LXX): comp. Lukeix. 41.

ἄμωμα] Both forms ἄμωμος and ἀμώμητος are equally common. Here the weight of evidence is in favour of the former, though there is some authority for the latter: in 2 Pet. iii. 14 on the other hand, ἀμώμητοι has much stronger support than ἄμωμοι.

μέσον] For this adverbial use see Steph. Thes. (ed. Hase and Dindorf), s. v. p. 824. The received text substitutes ἐν μέσῳ.

διεστραμμένης] ‘distorted,’ a stronger word than σκολιάς: comp. Arrian Epict. iii. 6. 8 οἱ μὴ παντάπασι διεστραμμένοι τῶν ἀνθρώπων (comp. i. 29. 3). It corresponds to a strong, reduplicated form in the Hebrew מִתְלַחֵל.

φαίνεσθε] ‘ye appear,’ not ‘ye shine’ (φαίνετε) as the A. V. The same error is made in Matt. xxiv. 27, Rev. xviii. 23. On the other hand in Matt. ii. 7 τοῦ φαινομένου ἀστέρος, it is correctly rendered ‘appeared.’ φαίνεσθε here should be taken as an indicative, not an imperative.

ὡς φωστῆρες] ‘as luminaries.’ The word is used almost exclusively of the heavenly bodies (except when it is metaphorical (as e.g. Gen. i. 14, 16 (where it is a rendering of חָאוּר)), Reclus. xliii. 7, Orac. Sibyll. ii. 186, 200, iii. 88, etc. Comp. Dan. xii. 3 (LXX) φαινόσιν ὡς φωστῆρες τοῦ οὐρα-

Philippians 2:17

ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες, εἰς καύχημα ἐμοὶ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα. Ἦλλὰ εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ νοῦ, Wisd. xiii. 2 φωστῆρας οὐρανοῦ πρυτάνεις κόσμου. The word occurs only once again in the N. T., Rev. xxi. 11, where also it should be translated ’luminary.’ ἐν κόσμῳ] To be taken not with φωστῆρες alone (as the passage of Wisdom just quoted might suggest), but with φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες. For in the former case κόσμῳ must signify the material world as distinguished from the moral world. But this is hardly possible in the language of the New Testament: for though κόσμος sometimes refers to external nature, yet as it much more frequently has a moral significance, it cannot well, unless so defined by the context, signify the former to the exclusion of the latter. It is therefore used here in the same sense as in John iii. 19 τὸ φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον καὶ ἠγάπησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον τὸ σκότος κ.τ.λ.: comp. i. 9, 10, ix. 5, xii. 46, etc.

16. ἐπέχοντες] The foregoing clause ἐν οἷς φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες ἐν κόσμῳ should probably be taken as parenthetical, so that ἐπέχοντες is attached to ἵνα γένησθε κ.τ.λ. For this sense of ἐπέχειν ’to hold out’ see Hom. II. ix. 489, xxii. 494, Ar. Nub. 1382, etc. (οἶνον, κοπύλην), Pausan. i. 33. 7, Plut. Mor. 265 A, 263 F (μαστόν, θηλήν, γάλα). If therefore we are to look for any metaphor in ἐπέχοντες, it would most naturally be that of offering food or wine. At all events it seems wholly unconnected with the preceding image in φωστῆρες.

εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ‘against the

day of Christ,’ as i. 10; comp. i. 6. ‘The day of Christ’ is a phrase peculiar to this epistle. More commonly it is ’the day of the Lord.’ For this reference to the great judgment in connexion with his ministerial labours compare 1 Cor. iii. 12, 13, iv. 3—5, and esp. 2 Cor. i. 14.

εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον’ as Gal. ii. 2. This passage is quoted Polyc. Phil. § 9 οὗτοι πάντες οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον: compare 2 Tim. iv. 7.

ἐκοπίασα] Probably a continuation of the same metaphor, referring to the training for the athletic games: compare 1 Cor. ix. 24—27. At least κοπιάν is elsewhere associated with τρέχειν in the same way: Anthol. III. p. 166 πίνε καὶ εὐφραίνου· τί γὰρ αὔριον, ἡ τί τὸ μέλλον, οὐδεὶς γινώσκει· μὴ τρέχε, μὴ κοπία, Ignat. Polyc. 6 συγκοπιάτε ἀλλήλους, συναθλείτε, συντρέχετε.

17, 18. ‘I spoke of my severe laboars for the Gospel. I am ready even to die in the same cause. If I am required to pour out my life-blood as a libation over the sacrificial offering of your faith, I rejoice myself and I congratulate you all therein. Yea in like manner I ask you also to rejoice and to congratulate me.’

Thus the particles ἀλλὰ εἰ καὶ will refer to the preceding ἔδραμον, ἐκοπίασα. Most recent commentators explain the connexion in a very harsh and artificial way. Assuming that St Paul had before mentioned his anticipation of living till the advent of Christ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ (ver. 16), they suppose that he now suggests the alternative of his dying before. But in fact no such anticipation was expressed: for his work would be equally tested at ’the day of Christ,’ whether he were alive or dead when that day came. The faint expectation, which in i. 6, 10 (where the same phrase occurs) is suggested by the context, finds no expression here. On εἰ καὶ as distinguished from καὶ εἰ see the note on Gal. i. 8. σπένδομαι] As his death actually approaches, he says ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπέν-

Philippians 2:18

τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, χαίρω καὶ συγχαίρω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν· ¹⁸ τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ καὶ ὑμεῖς χαίρετε καὶ συγχαίρετέ μοι. δομαι 2 Tim. iv. 6. Comp. Ignat. Rom. 2 πλέον μοι μὴ παράσχησθε τοῦ σπονδισδήναι Θεῷ, ὡς ἔτι θυσιαστήριον ἑτοιμόν ἐστιν, uttered under similar circumstances. It is a striking coincidence, that St Paul’s great heathen contemporary Seneca, whose name tradition has linked with his own, is reported to have used a similar metaphor when on the point of death: Tac. Ann. xv. 64 ‘respergens proximos servorum, addita voce libare se liquorem illum Jovi liberatori’: compare the account of Thrasea, Ann. xvi. 35. The present tense σπένδομαι places the hypothesis vividly before the eyes: but it does not, as generally explained, refer to present dangers, as though the process were actually begun: comp. e.g. Matt. xii. 26, xviii. 8, 9, etc.

ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ] The general import of the metaphor is clear; but it has been questioned whether the reference is to heathen libations or to Jewish drink-offerings. The preposition (ἐπὶ) seems hardly conclusive. Even if it be true that the drink-offerings of the Jews were always poured around and not upon the altar (Joseph. Ant. iii. 9. 4 σπένδοσι περὶ τὸν βωμὸν τὸν οἶνον; see Ewald Alterth. p. 37 sq. 2te ausg.), yet the LXX certainly uses the preposition ‘upon’ to describe them: Levit. v. 11 οὐκ ἐπιχεεῖ ἐπ’ αὐτὸ ἔλαιον, Num. xxviii. 24 ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀλοκαυτώματος τοῦ διὰ παντὸς ποιήσεις τὴν σπονδὴν αὐτοῦ. Nor need ἐπὶ with the dative necessarily be translated ‘upon,’ but may mean ‘accompanying.’ On the other hand, as St Paul is writing to converted heathens, a reference to heathen sacrifice is more appropriate (comp. 2 Cor. ii. 14); while owing to the greater prominence of the libation in heathen rites the metaphor would be more expressive. For the appropriateness of the preposition in this case see Hom. Il. xi. 775 σπένδων αἴθοπα οἶνον ἐπ’ αἴθομίνοις ἱεροῖσιν, Arrian Alex. vi. 19 σπείσας ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ τὴν φιάλην κ.τ.λ., and the common word ἐπισπένδειν. Tho

‘sacrifice’ (θυσία) here is the victim, not the act.

λειτουργία] This word has passed through the following meanings: (1) A civil service, a state-burden, especially in the technical language of Athenian law: (2) A function or office of any kind, as of the bodily organs, e.g. the mouth, Arist. Part. An. ii. 3: (3) Sacerdotal ministration especially, whether among the Jews (as Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21, and commonly in the LXX), or among heathen nations (as Diod. Sic. i. 21, where it is used of the Kgyptian priesthood): (4) The eucharistic services; and thence more generally (5) Set forms of divine worship. As the word is applied most frequently in the Bible to sacerdotal functions, it should probably be taken here as supplementing the idea of θυσία. Thus St Paul’s language expresses the fundamental idea of the Christian Church, in which an universal priesthood has supplanted the exclusive ministrations of a select tribe or class: see 1 Pet. ii. 5 ἱεράτευμα ἅγιον ἀνενέγκαι πνευματικὸς θυσίας. The Philippians are the priests; their faith (or their good works springing from their faith) is the sacrifice: St Paul’s life-blood the accompanying libation. Commentators have much confused the image by representing St Paul himself as the sacrificer. συγχαίρω] ‘I congratulate,’ not ‘I rejoice with.’ As joy is enjoined on the Philippians in the second clause, it must not be assumed on their part in the first. For this sense of συγχαίρειν ’to congratulate,’ where reciprocation on the part of the person appealed to is not so much presupposed as invited, see e.g. Plut. Mor. 231 B συγχαίρω τῇ πόλει τριακοσίους κρείττονάς μουπολίτας ἐχούσῃ, Polyb. xxix. 7. 4,

Philippians 2:19-21

¹⁹ Ἐλπίζω δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Τιμόθεόν ταχέως πέμψαι ὑμῖν, ἵνα κἀγὼ εὐψυχῶ γνοὺς τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν. ²⁰ οὐδένα γὰρ ἔχω ἰσόψυχον, ὅστις γνησίως τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν μεριμνήσει· ²¹ οἱ πάντες γὰρ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ζητοῦσιν, οὐ τὰ Barnab. 1 μᾶλλον συγχαίρω ἑμαυτῷ,

etc.

18. τὸ δὴ αὐτό] in the same way, i.e. τὴν αὐτὴν χορὰν χαίρετε; as Matt.

xxvii. 44 τὸ δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ οἱ λῃσταί…ὠνειδιζον αὐτόν. The accusative defines the character rather than the object of the action, so that ταὐτὰ χαίρειν (Demosth. de Cor. p. 323) is ’to have the same joys.’ For the poetical use of χαίρειν and similar words with an accusative of the object see Valcknaer on Eur. Hipp. 1335.

καὶ ὑμεῖς χαίρετε] We are reminded of the messenger who brought the tidings of the battle of Marathon, expiring on the first threshold with these words on his lips, χαίρετε καὶ χαίρομεν, Plut. Mor. p. 347 c. See the note on iv. 4.

19—24. ‘But though absent myself,

I hope in the Lord to send Timotheus shortly to you. This I purpose not for your sakes only but for my own also; that hearing how you fare, I may take heart. I have chosen him, for I have no other messenger at hand who can compare with him, none other who will show the same lively and instinctive interest in your welfare. For all pursue their own selfish aims, reckless of the will of Christ. But the credentials of Timotheus are before you: you know how he has been tested by long experience, how as a son with a father he has laboured with me in the service of the Gospel. Him therefore I hope to send without delay, when I see what turn my affairs will take. At the same time I trust in the Lord, that I shall visit you before long in person.’

19. Ἐλπίζω δὲ] This is connected in thought with ver. 12. ‘I urged the duty of self-reliance during my absence. Yet I do not intend to leave you without guidance. I purpose sending Timotheus directly, and I hope to visit you myself before long.’ Recent commentators seem to agree in taking ἐλπίζω δὲ as opposite to the fear expressed in the foregoing εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι; but the possibility of his own death and the intention of sending Timotheus do not stand in any sort of opposition.

ἐν Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ] So above i. 14

and below ii. 24. The same idea is expressed still more explicitly i. 8 ἐν σπλάγχναις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. The Christian is a part of Christ, a member of His body. His every thought and word and deed proceeds from Christ, as the centre of volition. Thus he loves in the Lord, he hopes in the Lord, he boasts in the Lord, he labours in the Lord, etc. He has one guiding principle in acting and in forbearing to act, μόνον ἐν Κυρίῳ (1 Cor. vii. 39). κἀγὼ εὐψυχῶ] ‘I also may take courage.’ Comp. ver. 27 οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐμέ. The guidance of the Philippians was one object of Timothy’s mission; St Paul’s comfort was another. While εὐψυχοί, εὐψυχία, are not uncommon, the verb εὐψυχεῖν seems not to occur in classical writers, though the imperative εὐψύχει appears frequently on epitaphs: see

Jacobs Anthol. xii. p. 304. In Pollux iii. 28 εὐψυχεῖν is given as a synonymo for θαρσεῖν. Comp. Hermas

Vis. i. 2.

20. οὐδένα γάρ] This condemnation must be limited to the persons available for such a mission. See the introduction, p. 36.

ἰσόψυχον] ’like-minded,’ not with

St Paul himself, as it is generally taken, but with Timotheus. Otherwise the words would have been οὐδένα γάρ

Philippians 2:22-23

Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ²²τὴν δὲ δοκιμὴν αὐτοῦ γινώσκετε, ὅτι ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον σὺν ἐμοὶ ἐδούλευσεν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον. ²³τοῦτον μὲν οὖν ἐλπίζω πέμψαι, ὡς ἂν ἀφίᾶω τὰ περὶ 21. οὐ τὰ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ.

ἄλλον or οὐδένα γὰρ πλὴν τούτου. The word ἰσόψυχος is extremely rare. It occurs in Æsch. Agam. 1470 (1446)

where it has much the same sense as here. In Ps. liv. 14 ἄνθρωπε ἰσόψυχε it is a rendering of כִּי־כֹּה ‘as my price,’ i. e. ‘quem mihi æquiparabam, quem diligebam ut me ipsum’ (Gescu.), being thus equivalent to ἀντίψυχε. ὅστις, ‘such that he.’ See Gal. iv. 24 (note), 26, v. 19.

γνησίως] i. e. as a birth-right, as an instinct derived from his spiritual parcentage: see esp. [Demosth.] c. Neær. p. 1353 τοὺς φύσετε πολίτας καὶ γνησίως μετέχοντας τῆς πόλεως, Epitaph. p. 1390 τοὺς μὲν…πολίτας προσαγορευομένους ὁμοίους εἶναι τοῖς εἰσποιήτοις τῶν παίδων, τούτους δὲ γνησίους γόψῃ τῆς πατρίδος πολίτας εἶναι. Timotheus was neither a supposititious (νόθος) nor an adopted (εἰσποιητος) son, but, as St Paul calls him elsewhere, γνήσιος τέκνον ἐν πίστει (1 Tim. i. 2, comp. Tit. i. 4); comp. Hippol. Har. vi. 20 Ἰσίδωρος ὁ Βασιλείδου παῖς γνήσιος ‘his father’s own son.’ He recognised this filial relationship (ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον ver. 22); he inherited all the interests and affections of his spiritual father. This, I suppose, is Chrysostom’s meaning, when he explains it touτέστι πατρικῶς (compare πατρικῇ φιλία, ἔχθρα etc.). Comp. Heb. xii. 8 ἄρα νόθοι καὶ οὐχ υἱοί ἐστι.

21. οἱ πάντες] ‘one and all,’ ‘all without exception.’ For the force of the article with πάντες, πάντα, see Bernhardy vi. p. 320, Jelf § 454.

22. δοκιμὴν] ‘approved character,’ as in 2 Cor. ii. 9, ix. 13, and probably Rom. v. 4. See Fritzsche Rom. I. p. 259. γινώσκετε] ‘ye recogniss,’ ‘ye remember and acknowledge.’ Timotheus was personally well known to the

Philippians; see the note i. 1.

ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον] This is often explained by understanding σὺν with πατρὶ from the following clause σὺν ἐμοί; see Jelf § 650. Instances of such omissions however occur chiefly though not always in poetry, and are found mostly in clauses connected by conjunctions (ἡ, καὶ, etc.). The preposition is omitted here, because the exact form of the sentence was not yet decided in the writer’s mind when the first words were written; see Winer § I. p. 525, § Ixiii. p. 722. For this testimony to Timotheus compare 1 Cor. iv. 17 ὃς ἐστὶν μου τέκνεν ἀγαπητὸν καὶ πιστὸν ἐν Κυρίῳ, xvi. 10 τὸ γὰρ ἔργον Κυρίου ἐργάζεται ὡς κἀγώ.

23. τούτον μὲν οὖν] ‘him then,’ the clause being answered by πέποιθα δὲ ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς ἐλεύσομαι (ver. 24), while ἐξαυτῆς is matched by ταχέως. ὡς ἂν…ἐξαυτῆς] ‘at once when.’ For ὡς ἂν temporal comp. Rom. xv. 24,

1 Cor. xi. 34.

ἀφίᾶω] So ἀφορῶντες Heb. xii. 2.

If any weight is to be attached to the agreement of the older MSS, the aspirated form (ἀφίᾶω for ἀπίᾶω) must be read here. In Acts ii. 7 (οὐχ or οὐχὶ ἰδοὺ) and in Acts iv. 29 (ἔφιδε) they are divided. In the three principal MSS of the LXX, so far as I have noticed, the following instances of aspirates in compounds of εἶδον occur: Gen. xvi. 13, ἐφίᾶων A; Gen. xxxi. 49, ἐφίᾶοι A; Ps. xxx. 8, ἐφίεσθαι A; Ps. xci. 12, ἐφίεσθαι A; Ps. cxi. 8, ἐφίδη N; Jer. xxxi. 19, ἐφίδε N; Jonah iv. 5, ἀφίεσθαι N; 1 Mac. iii. 59, ἐφίδειν N A; 2 Macc. i. 27, ἐφίεσθαι (for ἐπιδε imper.) A; 2 Macc. viii. 2, ἐφίδειν (ἐφίδι) A; Deut. xxvi. 15, καθίδε B; Judith vi. 19, καθεῖδε (for κατίδε) A. It must be remembered that in the Vatican MS

Philippians 2:24-25

ἐμέ, ἐξαντῆς· ²⁴πέποιθα δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς ταχέως ἐλεύσομαι [πρὸς ὑμᾶς]. ²⁵ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην Ἐπαφρόδιτον τὸν ἀδελφὸν καὶ συνεργὸν καὶ συνατρατιώτην μου, ὑμῶν δὲ ἀπόστολον καὶ λειτουργὸν τῆς

almost all the book of Genesis is lost and that the Sinaitic contains less than half of the Old Testament. The collations of other MSS in Holmes’ and Parsons’ LXX supply many additional examples both in these and other passages. Similarly ἐλπίς is sometimes preceded by an aspirate (ἀφελπίζοντες Luke vi. 35, ἐφ’ ἐλπίδι, Rom. viii. 20, 1 Cor. ix. 10, ἀφελπικῶς Hermas Vis. iii. 12); when naturalised in Coptic it is always so written, and we frequently find Helpis is a proper name in Latin. In both cases the anomaly is supported by inscriptions: ΕΦΕΙΔΕ Boeckh no. 3333; ΗΕΛΗΙΔΑ no. 170; the latter being as old as the 5th century B.C. The aspirates are doubtless to be explained as remnants of the digamma, which both these words possessed: see Curtius Griech. Etym. pp. 217, 238 (2nd ed.). It is less easy to account for οὐχ ὄψεσθε Luke xvii. 22, οὐχ ἄλιγος Acts xii. 18 (in which passages however the aspirate is not well supported), though there are some indications that ὄπτωμαι had a digamma. On οὐχ Ἰουδαικῶς, Gal. ii. 14, see the note there.

24. With St Paul’s language here compare 1 Cor. iv. 17, 19, ἔπεμψα ὑμῖν Τιμόθεον ὃς ἐστὶν μου τέκνον κ.τ.λ. ἐλεύσομαι δὲ ταχέως πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐὰν ὁ Κύριος θελήσῃ.

ταχέως] If the view taken in the introduction (p. 31 sq.) of the date of this epistle be correct, St Paul’s release was delayed longer than he at this time expected. We have a choice between supposing him disappointed in the anticipation expressed here or in the anticipation implied in the injunction to Philemon (ver. 22).

25–30. ‘Meanwhile, though I purpose sending Timotheus shortly, though

I trust myself to visit you before very long, I have thought it necessary to despatch Epaphroditus to you at once; Epaphroditus, whom you commissioned as your delegate to minister to my needs, in whom I have found a brother and a fellow-labourer and a comrade in arms. I have sent him, because he longed earnestly to see you and was very anxious and troubled that you had heard of his illness. Nor was the report unfounded. He was indeed so ill that we despaired of his life. But God spared him in His mercy; mercy not to him only but to myself also, that I might not be weighed down by a fresh burden of sorrow. For this reason I have been the more eager to send him, that your cheerfulness may be restored by seeing him in health, and that my sorrow may be lightened by sympathy with your joy. Receive him therefore in the Lord with all gladness, and hold such men in honour; for in his devotion to the work, he was brought to death’s door, hazarding his life, that he might make up by his zeal and diligence the lack of your personal services to supplement your charitable gift.’

25. ἀναγκαῖον κ.τ.λ.] The same expression occurs 2 Cor. ix. 5. ἡγησάμην is here the epistolary aorist, like ἔπεμψα (ver. 28); for Epaphroditus seems to have been the bearer of the letter. See the introduction p. 37 and the note on Gal. vi. 11.

‘Ἐπαφρόδιτον] On Epaphroditus see the introduction p. 61 sq. He is not mentioned except in this epistle. The name (corresponding in meaning to the Latin ‘venustus’) was extremely common in the Roman period. It was assumed by the dictator Sylla himself in

Philippians 2:26-27

χρείας μου, πέμψαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ²⁶ἐπειδὴ ἐπιποθῶν ἦν πάντας ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἀδημονῶν, διότι ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἠσθένησεν. ²⁷καὶ γὰρ ἠσθένησεν παραπλήσιον θανάτῳ· ἀλλὰ writing to the Greeks (Λεύκιος Κορνήλιος Σύλλας Ἐπαφρόδιτος, Plut. Syll. 34; comp. Appian. Civ. i. 97). It was

borne by a freedman of Augustus

(Dion Cass. li. 11, 13); by a favourite of Nero, likewise a freedman (Tac. Ann. xv. 55 etc.); by a grammarian of Chæroneia residing at Rome during this last emperor’s reign (Suidas s. v.); by a patron of literature (possibly the same with one of those already mentioned) who encouraged Josephus

(Antiq. proem. 2, Vit. 76). The name occurs very frequently in inscriptions both Greek and Latin, whether at full length Epaphroditus, or in its contracted form Epaphras.

ἀδελφὸν κ.τ.λ.] The three words are arranged in an ascending scale; common sympathy, common work, common danger and toil and suffering. Συνστρατιώτης occurs again Philem. 2. The metaphor is naturally very common: see esp. 2 Cor. x. 3, 4, 1 Tim. i. 18, 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4.

ὑμῶν δι] This prominent position is given to ὑμῶν, both to contrast it with the immediately preceding μου, and to bind together the words following; for ἀπόστολον καὶ λειτουργὸν τῆς χρείας μου form one idea, ‘a messenger sent to minister to my need.’ Epaphroditus was the bearer of the contributions from Philippi (iv. 18), which just below are designated λειτουργία (ver. 30): comp. Rom. xv. 27 ἐν τοῖς σαρκικοῖς λειτουργήσαι αὐτοῖς. For this sense of ἀπόστολος, ‘a delegate or messenger of a church,’ see 2 Cor. viii. 23 ἀπόστολοι ἐκκλησιῶν. The interpretation which makes Epaphroditus an apostle or bishop of Philippi will be considered in the Dissertation on the Christian Ministry.

τῆς χρείας μου] as iv. 16; comp.

Acts xx. 34, Rom. xii. 13.

26. ἐπιποθῶν] ’eagerly longing after’: see the note on i. 8. Here the expression is still further intensified by the substitution of ἐπιποθῶν ἦν for ἐπιπόθει. While the external evidence for and against ἰδεῖν is very evenly balanced, the language seems to gain in force by the omission. It may have been added because ἐπιποθεῖν ἰδεῖν was a well-remembered expression in St Paul; Rom. i. 11, 1 Thess. iii. 6, 2 Tim. i. 4.

ἀδημονῶν] ‘distressed.’ The word is used in connexion with ἀπορεῖν, ἰλιγγιᾶν (Plato Themt. p. 175 D), with ξενοπαθεῖν (Plut. Mor. 601 C), and the like. It describes the confused, restless, half-distracted state, which is produced by physical derangement, or by mental distress, as grief, shame, disappointment, etc. For its sense here comp. Dion. Hal. A. R. i. 56 ἀδημονοῦντι τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ παρεικότι τὸ σῶμα ὑπὸ λύπης. The derivation of ἀδημονεῖν suggested by Buttmann (Lexil. p. 29), from ἀδημος ‘away from home’ and so ‘beside oneself’ (in which however he seems not to have been aware that he was anticipated by Photius Lex. p. 9: see Steph. Thes. s. v.), is almost universally accepted. But to say nothing else, the form of the word is a serious obstacle; and Lobeck, Pathol. pp. 160, 238, is probably right in returning to the older derivation ἀδήμων, ἀδήσαι. In this case the primary idea of the word will be loathing and discontent. The word occurs in Symmachus, Ps. cxv. 2 (ἐν τῇ ἐκστάσει Lxx), Ps. lx. 2 (ἀκηδιάσαι Lxx), Eccl. vii. 16 (ἐκπλαγῆς Lxx); and in Aquila, Job xviii. 20 (ἐστέναξαν Lxx).

27. καὶ γὰρ] ‘for indeed.’ The καὶ implies that the previous ἠσθένησεν understates the case.

Philippians 2:28-30

ὁ Θεὸς ἠλέησεν αὐτόν, οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐμέ, ἵνα μὴ λύπην ἐπὶ λύπην σχῶ. ²⁸ σπουδαιοτέρως οὖν ἔπεμψα αὐτόν, ἵνα ἰδόντες αὐτὸν πάλιν χαρῆτε, κἀγὼ ἀλυπότερος ὦ. ²⁹ προσδέχεσθε οὖν αὐτὸν ἐν Κυρίῳ μετὰ πάσης χαρᾶς, καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους ἐντίμους ἔχετε, ³⁰ ὅτι

ἐπὶ λύπην] So all the best copies, while the received text reads ἐπὶ λύπη. In such cases the dative is more common in classical authors, but the accusative is supported by several passages in the LXX, e.g. Ezech. vii. 26 ἀγγελία ἐπὶ ἀγγελίαν, Ps. lxviii. 28 ἀνομίαν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν, Is. xxviii. 10 (where both constructions are combined) θλίψιν ἐπὶ θλίψιν, ἐλπίδα ἐπ’ ἐλπίδι. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 2, and see A. Buttmann p. 291.

28. σπουδαιοτέρως] ‘with increased eagerness’ on account of this circumstance: see for the comparative Winer § xxxv. p. 304, and compare the note on περισσοτέρως i. 14.

ἔπεμψα] i.e. with the letter, as in Ephes. vi. 22, Col. iv. 8, Philom. 11, and perhaps also 2 Cor. ix. 3. On this aorist see above, ver. 25.

πάλιν χαρῆτε] ‘may recover your cheerfulness,’ which had been marred by the news of Epaphroditus’ illness: for the order suggests the connexion of πάλιν with χαρῆτε rather than with ἰδόντες.

ἀλυπότερος ὦ] ‘my sorrow may be lessened.’ The expression is purposely substituted for πάλιν χαρῶ, for a prior sorrow will still remain unremoved; comp. ver. 27 λύπην ἐπὶ λύπην.

29. προσδέχεσθε κ.τ.λ.] Comp. Rom. xvi. 2.

30. τὸ ἔργον] Comp. Acts xv. 38 Παῦλος δὲ ἠξίου τὸν ἀποστάντα ἀπ’ αὐτῶν ἀπὸ Παμφυλίας καὶ μὴ συνελθόντα αὐτοῖς εἰς τὸ ἔργον, μὴ συνπαραλαμβάνειν τοῦτον, where we seem to have St Paul’s very words. So too Ignat. Ephes. 14 οὐ γὰρ ἐπαγγελίας τὸ ἔργον, Rom. 3 οὐ πεισμονῆς τὸ ἔργον ἀλλὰ μεγέθους ἐστὶν ὁ χριστιανισμός.

Thus τὸ ἔργον is used absolutely, like ἡ ὁδός, τὸ θέλημα, τὸ ὄνομα (see on ver. 9), etc. Though one only of the oldest was has τὸ ἔργον alone, this must be the correct reading. The others add Κυρίου, Χριστοῦ, τοῦ Κυρίου, τοῦ Χριστοῦ, or τοῦ Θεοῦ, of which the two first are highly supported; but the authorities, being very evenly divided, neutralise each other. All alike are insertions to explain τὸ ἔργον.

παραβολευσάμενος] ‘having gambled with his life.’ From παραβάλλεσθαι, to throw down a stake, to make a venture (e.g. Polyb. ii. 94. 4 οὐδαμῶς κρίνων ἐκκυβεύειν οὐδὲ παραβάλλεσθαι τοῖς ὅλοις) comes παράβολος, ‘gambling, rash, reckless,’ whence παραβολεύεσθαι ’to play the gambler,’ formed on the analogy of ἀσωτεύεσθαι, διαλεκτικεύεσθαι, περπερεύεσθαι, πονηρεύεσθαι, ’to play the spendthrift, quibbler, braggart, scoundrel, etc.’: see Lobeck Phryn. p. 67. With the use here compare the ecclesiastical sense of parabolani, brotherhoods who at the risk of their lives nursed the sick and buried the dead. For the expression compare Diod. Sic. iii. 35 ἔκριναν παραβολέσθαι ταῖς ψυχαῖς, Hom. II. ix. 322 αἰεὶ ἐμὴν ψυχὴν παραβαλλόμενος. While παραβάλλεσθαι takes either an accusative or a dative of the thing staked, παραβολεύεσθαι from its nature can have only the latter. The original meaning of the English word ‘hazard’ is the same, ‘a game of chance’: see for the derivation Diez Etymol. Worterb. der Rom. Spr. p. 33 s. v. azzardo, E. Müller Etym. Worterb. der Eng. Spr. s. v. No one who has felt the nervous vigour of St Paul’s style will hesitate between παρα-