CHAPTER II

Summary of Chapter 2

Verses 1–18

Paul, the Humble Cross-bearer

by an appeal to a fourfold incentive exhorting the Philippians to live the life of oneness, lowliness, and helpfulness,

after the example of Christ Jesus,

and to shine as lights in the midst of a wicked world, thereby filling the hearts of Paul and of themselves with joy.

2:1–4 The Stirring Appeal with fourfold incentive and threefold directive.

2:5–11 The Example of Christ.

2:12–18 Shining lights producing mutual joy.

2:1–4

2 1 If therefore (there is) any encouragement in Christ, if any persuasive appeal springing from love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercy and compassion, 2 make full (the measure of) my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, with souls united setting your minds on unity; 3 (doing) nothing from selfish ambition or from empty conceit, but in humble-mindedness each counting the other better than himself, 4 each looking not (only) to his own interests but also to the interests of others.

A new section begins here, in which Paul reveals himself as ready to be poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial offering of the faith of the Philippians (see verse 17). Accordingly, he appears here as the Humble Cross-bearer, and his very humility is shown in this, that he focusses attention not on himself but away from himself, on Christ, the unique Cross-bearer (verses 5–11).

But though this is indeed a new section, it is closely connected with that which precedes. In the closing paragraph of Chapter 1 the apostle had expressed the ardent wish that he might learn that the Philippians “are standing firm in one spirit, with one soul striving side by side for the faith of the gospel” (verse 27). In the present section (2:1–11) he re-emphasizes the necessity of oneness among the brothers, a quality that is possible only then when there is true lowliness of mind and helpfulness of disposition.

Verses 1–4 are in the nature of a stirring appeal. The intensity of this appeal or plea would seem to indicate that there was among the Philippians, at least among some of them, a measure of personal strife, perhaps for ecclesiastical honor or preferment.

I. The Humble Cross-bearer’s Stirring Appeal

A. Its Fourfold Incentive

1. If then (there is) any encouragement in Christ, if any persuasive appeal springing from love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercy and compassion.…

To be sure, the church of Philippi was characterized by many excellent qualities. Paul calls its members, “my brothers, beloved and longed for, my joy and crown” (Phil. 4:1). Warmly he praises them for their fellowship in the gospel and for their generosity (Phil. 1:5; 4:10, 14–18). But, as is often the case, the “domestic affairs” of the church were not entirely as ideal as were the “foreign affairs.” There was some trouble on the Home front. Did some of the members see too much of each other? Were they getting on each other’s nerves? Were some beginning to exaggerate the weaknesses and to minimize the virtues of other church-members? At any rate, not only Abraham (Gen. 13:7, 8) and James (James 3:16) were acquainted with the disastrous results of disunion, but so was also Paul (Rom. 13:13; I Cor. 3:3; Gal. 5:20; I Tim. 6:4). Brothers attacking or even just belittling each other make a sorry spectacle before the world. Their inner spiritual growth is retarded and their witness to the world is weakened.

This evil often results from inconsistency. On the one hand men will give glowing accounts of the blessings which they have received since they became Christians and of their spiritual experiences. On the other hand, among some of them the fruits of gratitude for all these favors are not particularly impressive in one area; namely, at home. Accordingly, the main thrust of what the apostle is saying is this: If then you receive any help or encouragement or comfort⁷² from your vital union with Christ, and if the love of Christ toward you does at all provide you with an incentive for action; if, moreover, you are at all rejoicing in the marvelous Spirit-fellowship, ⁷³ and if you have any⁷⁴ experience of the tender mercy and compassion⁷⁵ of Christ, then prove your gratitude for all this by loving your brothers and sisters at home! (that is what the threefold directive amounts to, as will become clear). All true Christian activity begins at home, as the Gadarene demoniac discovered (Mark 5:18–20).

Note: Paul says “If,” not as if he doubts whether the condition is really true, but simply to emphasize that when the condition is present, the conclusion should also be present. One might translate, “If then (there is) any encouragement in Christ, as there surely is, if any persuasive appeal springing from love, as there surely is, … make full (the measure of) my joy.”

B. Its Threefold Directive

2–4. The conclusion is a very natural one: “If then to any extent you have all these experiences and share in these benefits, then …” and here follows the threefold directive. Not really three directives, but a threefold directive: essentially the command is one, yet three graces, very closely related can be distinguished. The three are:

Verse 2: oneness

Verse 3: lowliness (of mind or disposition)

Verse 4: helpfulness

Paul says, make full (the measure of) my joy. The manner in which he thus prefaces the threefold directive is touching. There was joy in the heart of the apostle (Phil. 1:4; 4:10). The Philippians, because of their many virtues, had been a source of this joy. But its measure was not yet full. A higher degree of oneness, lowliness, and helpfulness on the Home Front can supply what is still lacking in Paul’s cup of joy. While none of the Philippians would have been able to claim perfection in these virtues, in the case of some the lack was rather noticeable (see on 4:2). This is Paul’s deep concern. Not speedy release from prison but the spiritual progress of the Philippians — of all of them — is his chief desire. This shows how big-hearted he is.

(1) Oneness

Paul continues … by being of the same mind, having the same love, with souls united setting your minds on unity.⁷⁶ Read what has been said with respect to the general theme of oneness or harmony (see on Phil. 1:27, 28). The mind or inner disposition is basic. This fundamental attitude will reveal itself by having the same love (for God in Christ, hence for fellow-members, with emphasis on the latter in the present connection), and by setting their minds on the one, that is, on oneness or unity.

Note that according to the context the oneness for which Paul pleads is of a distinctly spiritual nature. It is a oneness in disposition, love, and aim (see also N.T.C. on John 17:21). It is the oneness set forth so strikingly in Ps. 133.

(2) Lowliness

Oneness cannot be achieved without lowliness, that is humility. Hence, Paul continues: (doing)⁷⁷ nothing from selfish ambition or from empty conceit. If everyone is constantly thinking of himself alone, how can unity ever be brought about? The Philippians must not be actuated by unholy rivalry, by selfish motives, craving honor and prestige for themselves, like certain preachers in Rome (see on Phil. 1:17, where the identical word — selfish ambition — is used). Selfish ambition and empty conceit (cf. Gal. 5:26) go together, for “the emptier the head the louder the boast.” As often so here also Paul balances a negative with a positive formulation of the same idea. Thus, the thought advances to: but in humble-mindedness each counting the other better than himself. The word used in the original and here rendered humble-mindedness or lowliness (of disposition) was by non-Christians used in an evil sense (cowardliness, meanness; see Josephus, Jewish War IV.494; Epictetus III.24.56). When grace changes the heart, submission out of fear changes to submission out of love, and true humility is born. By Paul this virtue is associated with those of tenderheartedness, kindness, forbearance, longsuffering, meekness (Acts 20:19; Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:12). It is the happy condition which arises when in a church each member counts the other to be better than himself. Thus the members, filled with tender affection, will be outdoing one another in showing honor (Rom. 12:10).

But is not this rule impracticable? How can a man who knows that he is industrious regard the rather lazy fellow-member as being better than himself? The answer will probably be somewhat along this line:

a. The rule does not mean that one must consider every fellow-member to be in every respect wiser, abler, and nobler than he is himself.

b. As a general principle the rule certainly should control our lives, for while to a certain extent (never completely, see Psalm 139:23, 24; Jer. 17:9) a Christian is able to scrutinize his own motives (I Cor. 11:28, 31), and knows that they are not always good or unmixed, which knowledge leads him at times to utter the prayer, “O Lord, forgive my good deeds!” he has no right to regard as evil the motives of his brothers and sisters in the Lord. Unless a consistently wicked pattern is clearly evident in the life of one who has with his mouth confessed the Lord, that individual’s outwardly good deeds must be ascribed to good and never to evil motives. On this basis it clearly follows that a truly humble child of God, who has learned to know himself sufficiently so that at times he utters the cry of the publican (Luke 18:13), or of Paul (Rom. 7:24), will regard others to be indeed better than himself. And not only better but in certain respects abler, for the Lord has distributed his gifts (I Cor. 12). There is generally something, of value to the kingdom, which the brother or sister can do better than you or I.

It is easy to see that when this spirit of genuine mutual regard and appreciation is fostered, unity will result. True Christianity is still the best answer to the question. “How can I win friends and influence people?” And the ecumenicity which it proclaims is the only kind that is really worthwhile.

It is probably not too bold an assertion to say that Paul himself had grown in this grace of humble-mindedness. He who during his third missionary journey called himself “the least of the apostles” (I Cor. 15:9), styled himself “the very least of all saints” during his first Roman imprisonment (Eph. 3:8), and a little later, during the period that intervened between his first and second Roman imprisonments, climaxed these humble self-descriptions by designating himself “chief of sinners” (I Tim. 1:15).

It took a humble cross-bearer to urge humble-mindedness. Is not Paul’s humility also one of the reasons why even in the midst of his imprisonment, facing a verdict, he was filled with joy? The man who has learned to view himself as a great sinner before God appreciates God’s saving grace, and thanks God even in the midst of his tears.

(3) Helpfulness

The apostle concludes this paragraph by adding Each looking not (only) to his own interests but also to the interests of others.

This follows from the immediately preceding. If one regards the brother very highly, he will wish to look to his interests in order to help him in every possible way. The apostle surely implies that a believer should look to his own interests. But he should obey the command, “You must love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 19:19), a commandment which receives added stress when the neighbor is a brother in Christ (John 13:34; Gal. 6:10). The more one realizes how fervently Christ loved the brother, and went all out to save him, the more he will wish to advance that brother’s interests. Thus, too, true unity will be promoted, and before the world the glorious fellowship will begin to stand out in all its beauty, as a mighty testimony.⁷⁸

2:5–11

5 In your inner being continue to set your mind on this, which (is) also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though existing in the form of God, did not count his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God something to cling to, 7 but emptied himself, as he took on the form of a servant, and became like human beings. 8 So, recognized in fashion as a human being, he humbled himself and became obedient even to the extent of death; yes, death by a cross.

9 Therefore God raised him to the loftiest heights and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is Lord.

By means of a fourfold incentive Paul has urged the Philippians to be obedient to the threefold directive, namely, that they should manifest to one another the spirit of oneness, lowliness, and helpfulness (Phil. 2:1–4). In order to underscore this exhortation and to indicate the source of the strength needed to live up to it, he now points to the example of Christ, who with a view to saving others renounced himself, and thus attained to glory.

John Calvin has given an excellent summary of the present paragraph and has indicated its proper divisions into two parts or “members,” (a. verses 5–8; b. verses 9–11) and the reason for both and for each. Says he: “The humility to which he had exhorted them in words, he now commends to them by the example of Christ. There are, however, two members, in the first of which he invites us to imitate Christ because this is the rule of life; in the second he allures us to it because this is the road by which we attain true glory.”⁷⁹

II. The Example of Christ

Who with a View to Saving Others Renounced Himself

2:5–8

A. Invitation to Imitate Christ because this is the rule of life

5. Says Paul, In your inner being continue to set your mind on this, which (is) also in Christ Jesus.⁸⁰ The apostle desires that the Philippians keep on cherishing the disposition described in verses 1–4, a disposition that also characterizes Christ Jesus. This admonition is in line with many similar rules that urge us to follow the example of him who is the Anointed Savior. To be sure, there is an area in which Christ cannot be our example. We cannot copy his redemptive acts. We cannot suffer and die vicariously. It was he, he alone, who was able to satisfy the divine justice and bring his people to glory. But with the help of God we can and should copy the spirit that was basic to these acts. The attitude of self-renunciation with a view to helping others should be present and should grow in the life of each disciple. And that obviously is the point here (see verses 1–4). Oneness, lowliness, and helpfulness were manifested by our Savior (John 10:30; Matt. 11:29; 20:28). These should characterize his disciples also. In that sense there is truth in those simple lines:

“Oh, dearly, dearly has he loved,

And we must love him too;

And trust in his redeeming blood,

And try his works to do.”

Other passages which bring out the idea that Jesus is our Example are such as the following: Matt. 11:29; John 13:12–17; 13:34; 21:19; I Cor. 11:1; I Thess. 1:6, I Peter 2:21–23; I John 2:6. It is exactly because Jesus is our Lord that he can be our Example. If he is not our Example, faith is barren, orthodoxy dead.

6, 7a. Accordingly, the apostle continues: who, though⁸¹ existing⁸² in the form of God. … But what is meant by existing in God’s form? In the paragraph under study two words — morphe (μορφή), that is, form, and schema (σχῆμα), that is, fashion — occur in close connection: “existing in the form of God … recognized in fashion as a human being.⁸³ Now this very transition from form to fashion would seem to point to a difference in meaning.⁸⁴ Besides, from several New Testament passages in which one or the other or both of these words occur, generally as component elements in verbs, it is evident that in these given contexts morphe or form refers to the inner, essential, and abiding nature of a person or thing, while schema or fashion points to his or its external, accidental, and fleeting bearing or appearance.⁸⁵

What Paul is saying then, here in Phil. 2:6, is that Christ Jesus had always been (and always continues to be) God by nature, the express image of the Deity. The specific character of the Godhead as this is expressed in all the divine attributes was and is his eternally. Cf. Col. 1:15, 17 (also John 1:1; 8:58; 17:24).

This thought is in harmony with what the apostle teaches elsewhere: II Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15; 2:9 (and cf. Heb. 1:3).

A closely related question, namely, “Is Paul speaking here in Phil. 2:5–8 about the pre-incarnate or about the incarnate Christ?” is not difficult to answer. The two must not be separated. The One who in his pre-incarnate state exists in a manner equal to God is the same divine Person who in his incarnate state becomes obedient even to the extent of death, yes, death by a cross. Naturally, in order to show the greatness of our Lord’s sacrifice, the apostle’s starting-point is the Christ in his pre-incarnate state. Then follows of necessity Christ in his incarnate state. This strongly reminds one of II Cor. 8:9, “Though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor.” One might compare this transition to what is found in the Gospel of John, Chapter 1:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was God. He himself was in the beginning face to face with God … And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us as in a tent, and we beheld his glory.”

Thus, though existing in the form of God, he did not count his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God⁸⁶ something to cling to⁸⁷ but emptied himself.

He did not regard it as something that must not slip from his grasp. On the contrary, he … and here follow the two words that have given rise to much discussion and dispute: emptied himself.⁸⁸

The question is: of what did Christ Jesus empty himself? Surely not of his existence “in the form of God.” He never ceased to be the Possessor of the divine nature. “He could not do without his deity in his state of humiliation.… Even in the midst of his death he had to be the mighty God, in order by his death to conquer death” (R. C. H. Lenski).⁸⁹

The text reads as follows:

“Christ Jesus … though existing in the form of God, did not count his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God something to cling to, but emptied himself.”

The natural inference is that Christ emptied himself of his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God.⁹⁰

On the basis of Scripture we can particularize as follows:

(1) He gave up his favorable relation to the divine law

While he was still in heaven no burden of guilt rested upon him. But at his incarnation he took this burden upon himself and began to carry it away (John 1:29). And so he, the spotlessly righteous One, who never committed any sin at all, “was made to be sin in our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in him” (II Cor. 5:21). This is basic to all the rest.

(2) He gave up his riches

“… because for your sake he became poor, though being rich, in order that you through his poverty might become rich” (II Cor. 8:9).

He gave up everything, even himself, his very life (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 10:11). So poor was he that he was constantly borrowing: a place for his birth (and what a place!), a house to sleep in, a boat to preach from, an animal to ride on, a room in which to institute the Lord’s Supper, and finally a tomb to be buried in. Moreover, he took upon himself a debt, a very heavy debt. His debt, voluntarily assumed, was the heaviest that was ever incurred by anyone (Isa. 53:6). One so deeply in debt is surely poor!

(3) He gave up his heavenly glory

Very keenly did he feel this. That is why, in the night before his crucifixion, out of the very depths of his great heart he uttered the prayer: “And now Father, glorify thou me in thine own presence with the glory which I had with thee before the world existed” (John 17:4).

From the infinite sweep of eternal delight in the very presence of his Father he willingly descended into this realm of misery, in order to pitch his tent for a while among sinful men. He, before whom the seraphim covered their faces (Isa. 6:1–3; John 12:41), the Object of most solemn adoration, voluntarily descended to the realm where he was “despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief” (Isa. 53:3).

(4) He gave up his independent exercise of authority

In fact, he became a servant, the servant, and “even though he was a Son, learned obedience by what he suffered” (Heb. 5:8). He said: “I do not seek my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (John 5:30; cf. 5:19; 14:24).

Impatiently we voice an objection, namely, “But if Christ Jesus actually gave up his favorable relation to the divine law, riches, glory, and independent exercise of authority, how could he still be God?”

The answer must be that he, who was and is and ever remains the Son of God, laid aside all these things not with reference to his divine nature but with reference to his human nature, which he voluntarily took upon himself and in which he suffered all these indignities.

In his Commentary on this passage Calvin reasons as follows: It was the Son of God himself who emptied himself, though he did it only with reference to his human nature. This great Reformer uses the illustration: “Man is mortal.” Here the word “Man” refers to man himself, man in his entirety, yet man’s mortality is ascribed to the body only, not to the soul.

Further than this we cannot go. We stand before an adorable mystery, a mystery of power, wisdom, and love!

7b. It has become clear by this time that the clause, “He emptied himself” derives its meaning not only from the words which immediately precede it (namely, “he did not count his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God something to cling to”) but also from those that follow, namely, as he took on the form of a servant. In fact, this clause, “he emptied himself,” “includes all the details of humiliation which follow, and is defined by these” (Vincent). In the likeness of a human being taking on the form of a servant, so that he was recognized in looks and manners as a human being, humbling himself and thus becoming obedient to the extent of death; yes, death by a cross — all this is included in “he emptied himself.” When he laid aside his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God, he in that very act took upon himself its very opposite (that is, as to his human nature).

The type of reasoning which we have here in verses 6–8 is not at all similar to that which goes on in the mind of a child who is building with blocks, each block being a unit in itself, separate from all the rest. On the contrary, it is telescopic reasoning: the various sections of the telescope, present from the start, are gradually drawn out or extended so that we see them.

Hence, he emptied himself by taking the form of a servant. “He emptied himself by taking something to himself” (Müller). Moreover, when he became a servant, he was not play-acting. On the contrary, in his inner nature (the human nature, of course) he became a servant, for we read, “He took on the form of a servant.” (Read what was said previously with respect to the meaning of the word form in distinction from fashion.) This is great news. It is, in fact, astounding. He, the sovereign Master of all, becomes servant of all. And yet, he remains Master. The text cannot mean that “he exchanged the form of God for the form of a servant,” as is so often asserted.⁹¹ He took the form of servant while he retained the form of God! It is exactly that which makes our salvation possible and achieves it.

It was, moreover, the form of a servant — and not that of a slave — which he took upon himself. From the very beginning of his incarnation he was the thoroughly consecrated, wise and willing servant pictured by Isaiah (42:1–9; 49:1–9a; 50:4–11; and 52:13–53:12), the spontaneously acting servant who resolutely fulfills his mission, so that with reference to him Jehovah said: “Behold, my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delights.”

The passage under study has as its starting-point the very beginning of this servant-career, the point where Christ took the form of a servant. But it implies, of course, that he remained servant to the very end of that career. Of his earthly mission it has been truly said, “The only person in the world who had the right to assert his rights waived them” (Wuest). It was Christ Jesus who said, “I am in the midst of you as one that serves” (Luke 22:27). In the very act of being servant to men (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45), he was accomplishing his mission as servant of Jehovah. We see him, Jesus, the Lord of glory … with a towel around his waist, pouring water into a basin, washing the feet of his disciples, and then saying to them:

“Do you know what I have done to you? You call me Teacher and Lord, and you say (this) correctly, for (that is what) I am. If therefore, I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash each other’s feet, for I have given you an example, in order that just as I did to you, so also you should do” (John 13:12–15).

And that is exactly Paul’s point. He is saying to the Philippians and to us, “Follow the example of your Lord” (see verse 5).

Never did any servant serve with more unswerving loyalty, unwavering devotion, and unquestioning obedience than did this one.⁹²

Paul continues, and became like human beings (or more literally, “in the likeness of human beings having become”). When Christ took the form of a servant, he, who from all eternity had the divine nature and who continues to have it unto all eternity, took upon himself the human nature. Accordingly, the divine Person of the Christ now has two natures, the divine and the human (John 1:1, 14; Gal. 4:4; I Tim. 3:16). But he assumed that human nature not in the condition in which Adam had it before the fall, nor in the condition in which Christ himself now has it in heaven, nor in the condition in which he will reveal it on the day of his glorious return, but in its fallen and therefore weakened condition, burdened with “the results” of sin (Isa. 53:2).

Surely, that human nature was real, and in so far just like that of other human beings (Heb 2:17). But though it was real, it differed in two respects from that of other men:

(1) His, and only his, human nature from its very conception was joined in personal union with the divine nature (John 1:1, 14); and

(2) Though it was burdened with the results of sin (hence, subject to death), it was not sinful in itself. Therefore this passage “in the likeness of human beings having become,” and the similar one, “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3) must be read in the light of Heb. 4:15, “One who was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” There was likeness, similarity. There was no absolute, unqualified identity.

8 Paul continues, So, recognized in fashion as a human being.

When Jesus had come into the flesh, how did men regard him? What did they find him to be? The answer is: in their estimation he was a human being, just like themselves in ever so many respects:

Had they come into this world through the natural process of birth? So had he (Luke 2:7). (The mystery of the virgin-birth they did not fathom.)

Had they been wrapped in swaddling clothes (cf. Ezek. 16:4)? So had he (Luke 2:7).

Had they grown up? So had he (Luke 1:80).

Did they have brothers and sisters? So did he (Matt. 13:56).

Had they learned a trade? So had he (Mark 6:3).

Were they at times hungry, thirsty, weary, asleep? So was he (Matt. 4:2; John 4:6, 7; Mark 4:38).

Were they ever grieved or angry? So was he (Mark 3:5).

Did they weep at times? So did he (John 11:35).

Did they rejoice, for example, at weddings? He too attended a wedding (John 2:1, 2).

Were they destined to die? So was he, though in his case that death was physical, eternal, voluntary, and vicarious (John 10:11), and this they did not understand.

In his entire fashion, therefore, he was recognized as a human being. He had the looks and outward bearing of men. His way of dress, customs and manners resembled those of his contemporaries.

To a considerable extent they were right in so regarding him. Accordingly, it, is open to doubt whether the following very familiar lines really tell the truth:

“The cattle are lowing, the Baby awakes,

But little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes.”

Should it not he assumed that a normal baby cries at times, but that in the case of Jesus this crying, too, like everything else, was “without sin”?

Better are the words composed by Susanne C. Umlauf, of which I shall quote only two stanzas:

“Hast thou been hungry, child of mine?

I, too, have needed bread;

For forty days I tasted naught

Till by thy angels fed.

Hast thou been thirsty? On the cross

I suffered thirst for thee;

I’ve promised to supply thy need,

My child, come unto me.

“When thou art sad and tears fall fast

My heart goes out to thee,

For I wept o’er Jerusalem —

The place so dear to me:

And when I came to Lazarus’ tomb

I wept — my heart was sore;

I’ll comfort thee when thou dost weep,

Till sorrows all are o’er.”

But though they were right in recognizing his humanity, they were wrong in two respects: they rejected a. his sinless humanity and b. his deity. And so, though his entire life, particularly also his mighty words and acts, implied the command, “Veiled in flesh the godhead see!” yet, by and large, they disavowed his claims and hated him all the more because of them (John 1:11, 5:18, 12:37). They heaped scorn upon him, so that “he was despised and rejected of men” (Isa. 53:3).

The amazing fact is, however, that “when he was reviled, he reviled not again” (I Peter 2:23), but he humbled himself. (For the meaning of the concept humblemindedness see on verse 3.) From the very beginning of his incarnation he bowed himself under the yoke. Implied in this act of humbling himself is: and became obedient, namely, to God the Father, as verse 9 clearly indicates (note, “Therefore God,” etc.). Moreover, his obedience knew no bounds: even to the extent of death. In that death he, functioning both as Priest and Guilt-offering, gave himself as an expiatory sacrifice for sin (Isa. 53:10). Hence, this death was not just an ordinary death. Says Paul, yes death by a cross.

Such a death was very painful.

It has been well said that the person who was crucified “died a thousand deaths.”

It was also very shameful.

Compelling the condemned person to carry his own cross, expelling him from the city to a place “outside the gate,” and there executing him by means of a death which, as we learn from Cicero, was considered the death of a slave (Actio in Verrem. i. 5, 66; Oratio pro P. Quinto viii. 4), was surely shameful. See John 19:31; I Cor. 1:23. “Let the very name of the cross be far removed not only from the body of a Roman citizen, but even from his thoughts, his eyes, his ears” (Cicero, Pro Rabirio 5). Hence, being a Roman, Paul, even should he after all he sentenced to die, would in all probability not have to die such a shameful death! Did he think of that when, with reference to his Master’s death, he wrote, “yes, death by a cross”?

It was accursed.

“He that is hanged is accursed of God” (Deut. 21:23). And if this was true even with respect to a dead body, how much more with reference to a living person! Christ Jesus humbled himself, becoming obedient to a death whereby he vicariously bore the curse of God (Gal. 3:13). See also N.T.C. on John, Vol. II, pp. 425–427.

Thus, while he was hanging on that cross, from below Satan and all his hosts assailed him; from round about men heaped scorn upon him; from above God dropped upon him the pallor of darkness, symbol of the curse; and from within there arose the bitter cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Into this hell, the hell of Calvary, Christ descended.

The underlying thought of verses 5–8 is this: Surely, if Christ Jesus humbled himself so very deeply, you Philippians should be constantly willing to humble yourselves in your own small way. Surely, if he became obedient to the extent of death, yes death by a cross, you should become increasingly obedient to the divine directions, and should accordingly strive more and more to achieve in your lives the spirit of your Master, that is, the spirit of oneness, lowliness, and helpfulness, which is pleasing to God.

Note the chiastic (that is, the crisscross) Parallelism:

B. Invitation to Imitate Christ because this is the road by which we attain to glory

9. The glorious reward which Christ Jesus received is described as follows: Therefore God raised him to the loftiest heights. He who humbled himself was exalted. The same rule which he had himself laid down for others was now applied in his own case. For this rule see Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14; and cf. Luke 1:52; James 4:10; and I Peter 5:6. It was “because of the suffering of death” that his reward was given to him (Heb. 2:9; cf. Heb. 1:3; 12:2). Yet, there is a difference between his exaltation and ours. To be sure, he, too, was exalted. The very same verb which applies to his followers (II Cor. 11:7) is used at times with respect to him (John 3:14b; 8:28; 12:32, 34; Acts 2:33; 5:31). But in the present passage a verb is used which in the New Testament occurs only in this one instance and is here applied only to him, namely, the verb “super-exalted.” God the Father elevated the Son in a transcendently glorious manner. He raised him to the loftiest heights.⁹³ Do believers go to heaven? See Psalm 73:24, 25; John 17:24; II Cor. 5:8; Heb. 12:18–24. The Mediator “passed through the heavens” (Heb. 4:14), “was lifted high above the heavens” (Heb. 7:26), and even “ascended far above all the heavens” (Eph. 4:10). His super-exaltation means that he received the place of honor and majesty and is accordingly “seated at the right hand of Gods throne” (Mark 16:19; Acts 2:33; 5:31, Rom. 8:34; Heb. 1:3, 12:2), “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named not only in this age but also in that which is to come” (Eph. 1:20–22). Resurrection, ascension, coronation (“session” at God’s right hand), all these are implied and included in the statement, “God raised him to the loftiest heights” (verse 9). Moreover, before the sentence is finished the final step in Christ’s exaltation is also described (verses 10 and 11), the consummation of his glory when on the day of his coming every knee shall bend before him and every tongue shall proclaim his lordship.

All this happened (and with respect to the last step will happen) in fulfilment of prophecy: Gen. 3:15; II Sam. 7:13; Psalm 2:7–9; 8; 47:5; 68:17–19; 72; 110:1; 118:22, 23; Isa. 9:6, 7; 53:10–12; Micah 5:2; Zech. 9:9, 10; cf. Luke 24:26; Rev. 1:7.

The exaltation is the reversal of the humiliation. He who stood condemned in relation to the divine law (because of the sin of the world which rested on him) has exchanged this penal for the righteous relation to the law. He who was poor has become rich. He who was rejected has been accepted (Rev. 12:5, 10). He who learned obedience has entered upon the actual administration of the power and authority committed to him.

As king, having by his death, resurrection, and ascension achieved and displayed his triumph over his enemies, he now holds in his hands the reins of the universe, and rules all things in the interest of his church (Eph. 1:22, 23). As prophet he through his Spirit leads his own in all the truth. And as priest (High-priest according to the order of Melchizedek) he, on the basis of his accomplished atonement, not only intercedes but actually lives forever to make intercession for those who draw near to God through him (Heb. 7:25).

Though it was the person of the Mediator upon whom these honors were conferred, it was of course the human nature in which the exaltation itself took place, since the divine nature is not capable of either humiliation or exaltation. But these two natures, though ever distinct, are never separate. The human nature is so very closely linked with the divine that though it never becomes divine, it shares in the glory of the divine. Therefore Christ’s assumption of glory is in a sense also resumption of glory. There is no real conflict between Phil. 2:9 and John 17:5.

Paul continues: and bestowed on him the name that is above every name. God the Father bestowed on him (literally, he graciously, that is whole-heartedly, granted to him) the name (thus according to the best reading, not merely a name). The apostle does not as yet fully tell us what that name is. He does say, however, that it is the name which excels that of every creature in the entire universe.

10. The purpose of the exaltation is: in order that in the name of Jesus, that is, not in the name “Jesus” but in the full name with which Jesus is now rewarded and which he now bears — a name which trembles on Paul’s lips but which even now he does not yet fully mention but reserves as a climax — every knee should bend, of those⁹⁴ in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth. At his return in glory Jesus will be worshiped by “the whole body of created intelligent beings in all the departments of the universe” (M. R. Vincent). Angels and redeemed human beings will do this joyfully; the damned will do it ruefully, remorsefully (not penitently), see Rev. 6:12–17. But so great will be his glory that all will feel impelled to render homage to him (cf. Isa. 45:23; Rom. 14:11; I Cor. 15:24; Eph. 1:20–22; Heb. 2:8; Rev. 5:13).

Note the three classes of created intelligent beings:

(1) those in heaven: the cherubim and seraphim, yes all the ten thousand times ten thousand good angels, including archangels; also, of course, all redeemed human beings who have departed from this earthly life (Eph. 1:21; 3:10; I Peter 3:22; Rev. 4:8–11; 5:8–12).

(2) those on earth: all human beings on earth (I Cor. 15:40).

(3) those under the earth: all the damned in hell, both human beings and the evil angels or demons (for if the adjective heavenly refers, among others, to the good angels, then its antonym, which literally means under-earthly, a word occurring only here in the New Testament, in all probability includes the evil angels).⁹⁵

11. Finally Paul arrives at the climax for which he has been preparing. Now at last he actually completes the mention of the name which is above every name: and that every tongue should confess⁹⁶ to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is Lord.⁹⁷ Cf. Isa. 45:23; Rom. 14:11. Not only will all make obeisance but in doing so they will also openly acknowledge and proclaim the sovereign lordship of Jesus. They will confess that JESUS CHRIST (is) LORD, ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ.

The solemnity with which the apostle utters this full name, deserves special attention. To him and to others in the early church this fact was one of tremendous significance, namely, that the humble “servant” Jesus had even now been crowned with glory and honor and as the great Conqueror is even now celebrating his triumph and actively ruling all things in the interest of his people. This was the paramount confession of the very early church, which longed for the day when the marvelous fact would be acknowledged by all. It must have imparted sweet comfort to Paul, the prisoner awaiting a verdict! It must have strengthened the Philippians in all their struggles and afflictions. Not the earthly emperor but Jesus Christ is the real Ruler! In order to appreciate somewhat the intense feeling and enthusiasm of the apostles when they thought of Jesus Christ as LORD (ΚΥΡΙΟΣ) one should note such passages as the following:

Peter

“Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified” (Acts 2:86).

Paul

“If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9).

“No one can say, `Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit” (I Cor. 12:3).

“Maranatha” (meaning, “Our Lord, come!”) (I Cor. 16:22).

John

“These will war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings” (Rev. 17:14).

“And on his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Rev. 19:16).

This name meant very, very much to Paul and to sincere believers everywhere, because a name, as then understood, was not as with us merely a convenient means of distinguishing one individual from another. On the contrary, in biblical usage the name is intimately associated with the person who bears it and is frequently that person himself as he reveals himself. It expresses that person’s character, reputation, dignity, work, power, or his peculiar position in the divine economy. Hence, often the name keeps pace with the person. Abram becomes Abraham. Sarai develops into Sarah. Jacob changes to Israel. Solomon receives the name Jedidiah. Simon is called Cephas, that is, Peter. See Gen. 17:5, 15; 32:28; II Sam. 12:25; John 1:42. Sometimes the old name is not wholly dropped. Sometimes it is.

Now this applies also to the glorious name Jesus Christ … Lord. It is not just a word or title, a kind of signal for knees to start bowing and for tongues to start shouting. It is not at (the mere mention of) the name but in the name that great things begin to happen. Phil. 2:9–11 means, accordingly, that by virtue of the power and majesty of Jesus Christ and the recognition of him as Lord every knee will bend and every tongue will proclaim him.⁹⁸

Though now the proclamation of Christ’s name, the open avowal of his sovereign majesty, is muffled on earth, but echoed forth in heaven, one day all creation shall bow to our Lord, as stated beautifully in the words of the Dutch Hymn (translated by Rev. W. Kuipers):

“One day all creation shall bow to our Lord;

E’en now, ’mong the angels his name is adored.

May we at his coming, with glorified throng,

Stand singing his praises in heaven’s great song:

‘Jesus, Jesus, Savior adored,

Of all men and angels forever the Lord.’ ”

Great, indeed, was the reward which Jesus received. But every reward must be to the glory of God, the Father (representing the Trinity). The glory of God is ever the goal, the final purpose, of all things. Hence, Paul, who accordingly loves doxologies and near-doxologies, and who breaks into them again and again (Rom. 9:5; 11:36; 16:27; Eph 1:3 ff.; 3:20; Phil. 4:20; I Tim. 1:17; 3:16; 6:15, 16; II Tim. 4:18; Titus 2:13, 14), also climaxes the present sentence with the words “to the glory of God the Father.”⁹⁹ By means of the universal proclamation of Jesus’ lordship the glory of God the Father, who raised him to the loftiest heights and gave him the most excellent name, will naturally be enhanced.¹⁰⁰ Cf. John 13:31, 32; 14:13; 17:1. Between the Father and the Son there exists a most intimate love-relationship. When the Son is glorified, the Father is glorified also, and vice versa; and when the Son is rejected the Father is rejected also, and vice versa. (In this connection see N.T.C. on John, Vol. II, p. 372, the diagram.)

Let the Philippians then continue to set their mind on Christ. Let them copy his example. Let them do this because this is the rule of life and because both for Christ and for his followers it is the road to that true glory by which God himself is glorified.

2:12–18

12 So then, may beloved, even as you have always obeyed, so, not as in my presence only but now much more in my absence, with fear and trembling continue to work out your own salvation; 13 for it is God who is working in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

14 Practise doing all things without mutterings and argumentations, 15 that you may become blameless and guileless, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you are shining as stars in the universe, 16 holding forth the word of life, (which will be) for me something to be proud of with a view to the day of Christ, (as indicating) that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. 17 In fact, even if I am to be poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I rejoice, and I rejoice with you all; 18 and in the same manner do you also rejoice, and rejoice with me.

III. Shining Lights Producing Mutual Joy

2:12, 13

A. Work Out Your Own Salvation

(1) The Exhortation

12. So then, my beloved. This establishes the connection between verses 12–18 and verses 1–11, especially 5–11. In fact, the connection goes back even farther, for there is a close parallel between 2:12 and 1:27 (as will be shown). Very tenderly Paul addresses the Philippians as “my beloved.” He means, “You whom Christ loves and I also love, with a love that is deepseated, thorough-going, intelligent, and purposeful.”

By saying “So then” or “Therefore,” the apostle means:

a Since Christ Jesus by means of his unrestricted, voluntary obedience gave you an example (verse 5–8); and

b since the reward which he received shows that there are great things in store for those who follow this example (verses 9–11); and finally,

c since this highly exalted divine and human Mediator imparts strength from heaven to all who trust in him and yearn so to live as he would have them live (implied in verses 9–11), therefore, etc.

The apostle continues his tactful procedure as follows: even as you have always obeyed. By and large the members of the Philippian church have always hearkened to the demands of God as expressed in the gospel (cf. Rom. 10:16; II Thess. 1:8), to Christian teaching and admonition (Rom. 6:17; II Thess. 3:14). Yet, there was danger. There was a tendency to lean too heavily on Paul, that is, on his physical presence with the church at Philippi. These people were overcome with an emotion bordering on nostalgia when they revived in their memory the events that had transpired when Paul had been personally present with them, enabling them to listen to his very voice, and to go directly to him with their problems. Similarly, at present they can hardly wait until, in God’s good pleasure, Paul will be with them again. —Now, in such an attitude there is much that is beautiful and to be appreciated. Yet, it is not altogether healthy. The Philippians must learn to lean completely on God, not just mostly on God and partly on Paul’s physical presence with them. That Paul was keenly aware of this weakness is clear from the fact that he has hinted it once before. Note the aforementioned parallel between 1:27 and 2:12:

1:27	2:12
“Only continue to exercise your citizenship in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit,” etc.	“So then, my beloved, even as you have always obeyed, so, not as in my presence only but now much more in my absence, with fear and trembling continue to work out your own salvation.¹⁰¹

The obedience of the Philippians must not be motivated by,¹⁰² and last only as long as, Paul’s presence among them. On the contrary, his very absence must impress upon them the fact that now more than ever they must take the initiative. Now especially they must exert themselves, for now they are on their own; not, to be sure, as far as God is concerned, but as far as Paul is concerned. They must now work out “their own salvation.” that is, they must work it out apart from the assistance of Paul. Yes, they must work it out, that is, carry it to its conclusion, thoroughly digest it, and apply it to day-by-day living. They must strive to produce in their lives all the fruits of the Spirit (the entire long list enumerated in Gal. 5:22, 23!). They must aim at nothing less than spiritual and moral perfection.

In such a context we do not go amiss when we say that the tense of the verb indicates that Paul has in mind continuous, sustained, strenuous effort: “Continue to work out.” Believers are not saved at one stroke. Their salvation is a process (Luke 13:23; Acts 2:47; II Cor. 2:15). It is a process in which they themselves, far from remaining passive or dormant, take a very active part. It is a pursuit, a following after, a pressing on, a contest, fight, race (see on Phil. 3:12; also Rom. 14:19; I Cor. 9:24–27; I Tim. 6:12).

Putting forth such a constant and sustained effort is not easy. It is a battle on three fronts, a warfare against the tremendously strong and wily combination of the world, the flesh, and the devil. It will mean making full use of every God-appointed means to defeat the evil and bring out the good within them (“within them” because God placed it there!).

It is one thing to shout, “Do all to the glory of God,” but it is quite a different thing to carry this out in practice.

It is one thing to pray “as we have forgiven our debtors,” but it is not so easy really to forgive.

It is one thing to display a beautiful plaque saying,

but it is something else again actually to recognize him as Head by submitting every important question to him in prayer and by obeying his every command.

It is one thing to assert very piously, “God’s sovereignty is the ultimate principle for faith and practice,” but it is far more difficult to submit trustfully to this sovereign will when a dear one is growing gradually weaker and finally dies. Thus one could continue. In fact, so very difficult is the task that is here laid upon the Philippians, that, left to their own resources, they can no more fulfil it than the invalid described in John 5 could get up and walk. Yet Jesus told the latter, “Get up, pick up your mat, and walk.” And in substance he tells the Philippians that they must consider working out their own salvation to be their life’s task. Note: their salvation, here with emphasis on that aspect of salvation which is called sanctification. (For the rest, see N.T.C. on I Tim. 1:15 for the meaning of the term Salvation as used by Paul.)

Because this task is so vital it must be performed “with fear and trembling.” This phrase, because of its importance, even precedes the verb which it modifies. We read, “With fear and trembling continue to work out your own salvation.”

“With fear and trembling” (cf. I Cor. 2:3; II Cor. 7:15; Eph. 6:5). Meaning:

NOT in the spirit of:	BUT in the spirit of:
half-heartedness, the divided mind (I Kings 18:21)	wholeheartedness, singleness of purpose (Ps. 119:10, 34)
disrespect and disdain (Acts 17:18)	reverence and awe, being afraid to offend God in any way (Gen. 39:9; Heb. 12:28)
trust in self (Matt. 26:33)	trust in God (II Chron. 20:12)
self-righteousness (Luke 18:11)	humility (Luke 18:13)

(2) The Incentive for heeding it

13. Such fear and trembling does not spell despair. Quite the contrary. Encouragingly Paul says, as it were, You, Philippians, must continue to work out your own salvation, and you can do it, for it is God who is working in you. Were it not for the fact that God is working in you, you Philippians would not be able to work out your own salvation. Illustrations:

The toaster cannot produce toast unless it is “connected,” so that its nichrome wire is heated by the electricity from the electric power house. The electric iron is useless unless the plug of the iron has been pushed into the wall outlet. There will be no light in the room at night unless electricity flows through the tungsten wire within the light-bulb, each end of this wire being in contact with wires coming from the source of electric energy. The garden-rose cannot gladden human hearts with its beauty and fragrance unless it derives its strength from the sun. Best of all, “As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in me” (John 15:4).

So here also. Only then can and do the Philippians work out their own salvation when they remain in living contact with their God. It is exactly because God began a good work in them — are they not the “beloved” ones? — and because he who began that good work will also carry it toward completion (Phil. 1:6), that the Philippians, as “co-workers with God” (cf. I Cor. 3:9), can carry this salvation to its conclusion. Not only at the beginning but at every point in the process salvation is from God (John 1:12; 15:5b; I Cor. 15:10; Eph. 2:8; Phil. 1:6, 28, 29; 3:9, 12; especially 4:13). “We are God’s workmanship,” his creation, his “poem.” He has made us what we are. By means of his Spirit working in the hearts of his people (Phil. 1:19), applying to these hearts the means of grace and all the experiences of life, God is the great and constant, the effective Worker, the Energizer,¹⁰³ operating in the lives of the Philippians, bringing about in them both to will and to work. Note: not only to work but even to will, that is, to resolve and desire:

“’Tis not that I did choose thee,

For, Lord, that could not be;

This heart would still refuse thee,

Hadst thou not chosen me.

Thou from the sin that stained me

Hast cleansed and set me free;

Of old thou didst ordain me,

That I should live for thee.”

(Josiah Conder)

The impotent man whose story is related in John 5 was unable to walk. Yet, at the word of Jesus he gets up, picks up his mat, and starts walking. That which he cannot do in his own strength, he can, must, and does do in the strength of the Lord.

As to willing and working, the facts are exactly as stated in The Canons of Dort III and IV, articles 11 and 12: “He infuses new qualities into the will, which though heretofore dead he quickens; from being evil, disobedient, and refractory, he renders it good, obedient, and pliable; actuates and strengthens it, that like a good tree, it may bring forth the fruits of good actions.… Whereupon the will thus renewed, is not only actuated and influenced by God, but in consequence of this influence becomes itself active.”¹⁰⁴ Nowhere is the manner in which God operates within the heart of his child, enabling him to will and to work, more beautifully described than in Eph. 3:14–19.

It is comforting that the apostle adds for his good pleasure. It is for the sake of and with a view to the execution of God’s good pleasure that God, as the infinite Source of spiritual and moral energy for believers, causes them to work out their own salvation. “Causes them,” yet without in any way destroying their own responsibility and self-activity. Note, moreover, the word good pleasure. Says Dr. H. Bavinck (The Doctrine of God, English translation, p. 390), “Grace and salvation are the objects of God’s delight; but God does not delight in sin, neither has he pleasure in punishment.” This statement is in harmony with Scripture (Lam. 3:33; Ezek. 18:23; 33:11; Hos. 11:8; Eph. 1:5, 7, 9).

2:14–18

B. Thus You Will Be Shining Lights Producing Mutual Joy

14–16. Paul has been speaking about the necessity of obedience (verse 12) in the great task of working out salvation. But obedience may be of two kinds: grudging or voluntary. “On the outside I may be sitting down, but on the inside I am still standing up,” said the boy who after repeated admonitions to sit down and finally “obeyed,” fearing that otherwise he might be punished. Such grudging obedience is in reality no obedience at all. Example: rendering hospitality while you pity yourself (cf. I Peter 4:9). True religion is never merely external compliance. Hence, Paul continues, Practise doing all things without mutterings and argumentations. In the original “all things” heads the command; hence really. “All things practise doing without mutterings and argumentations.” All the dictates of God’s will must be obeyed cheerfully; in such a manner that the will of man does not rebel against them by means of discontented, undertone grumblings, nor his mind by means of perpetual ingenious disputatious. Cf. Exod. 4:1–13; 16:7–9, 12; Eccles. 7:29; Num. 17:5, 10; John 6:41–43, 52; I Cor. 10:10. Paul continues … that you may become blameless and guileless, “blameless” in the judgment of others, and “guileless” (literally “unmixed,” or “unadulterated,” that is, without any admixture of evil) in your own inner hearts and lives. Further, children of God without blemish. Note, “that you may become children of God.” But were they not even now children of God? The answer should probably be sought in this direction: One becomes a child (τέκνον) of God by regeneration, for a child of God is one who is begotten of God. But this is not the end. Regeneration is followed by sanctification.¹⁰⁵ Those who by virtue of regeneration (and partial sanctification) are children of God must endeavor to become children of God without fault or blame. And this in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation. The description of the worldly contemporaries and neighbors of the Philippians is borrowed from The Song of Moses (LXX Deut. 32:5). Close parallels are found in Matt. 12:39 (“evil and adulterous generation”); 17:17 (“faithless and perverse generation”); and Acts 2:40 (“crooked generation”). People who are crooked are “morally warped.” They cannot be trusted. They have arrived at this terrible condition by having turned and twisted themselves in different directions, but always away from the straight path pointed out by the law of God. They are spiritually perverted or distorted. Among whom, continues Paul, you, by your sanctified, blameless and guileless character, are shining as stars in the universe.¹⁰⁶ As the stars dispel physical darkness so believers banish spiritual and moral darkness. As the former illumine the firmament, so the latter enlighten the hearts and lives of men. Moreover,

“The spacious firmament on high,

With all the blue ethereal sky,

And spangled heavens, a shining frame,

Their great Original proclaim.”

(Addison — Ode.

The Spacious Firmament on High)

Similarly also believers, by being “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14, 16; cf. Eph. 5:8; I Thess. 5:5), are constantly proclaiming their Maker and Redeemer to a world lost in sin. They perform this glorious missionary-task by holding forth¹⁰⁷ the word of life, the gospel of salvation, not only as preached but also as practised. See John 6:68; Acts 5:20; Eph. 2:1; I John 1:1. Light and life go together. “In him was life. And the life was the light of men.” See N.T.C. on John 1:4. It is the life light of salvation.

Says Paul, Such spiritual shining among men, such holding forth the word of life, is that (which will be) for me something to be proud of with a view to (the) day of Christ. If the Philippians so conduct themselves in word and deed, then on the glorious day of Christ’s Return (see on Phil. 1:10) the apostle, far from being ashamed, will be able to point with pride to the Philippians, to their life and to their testimony. For him this will be a reason for exultation (see on Phil. 1:26). Says Paul, I can then be proud of your accomplishment (as indicating) that — looking back from the glorious day to the days of my ministry on earth — I did not run in vain or labor in vain. “Not for empty glory” did I exert myself so strenuously. Not for nothing did I run or labor. Here running is a metaphor taken from the foot-race in the stadium. Paul frequently employs such figures. See N.T.C. on the Pastoral Epistles, I Tim. 4:7, 8 and II Tim. 4:7, 8. Laboring indicates exerting oneself in exhausting toil. Paul, looking back, would be able to point to fruit upon his heavy missionary toil for Christ. Cf. Phil. 4:1; then also I Cor. 3:12, 13; 4:3–5; II Cor. 1:4; and I Thess. 2:19, 20.

17, 18. Accordingly, if the Philippians will continue to work out their own salvation, shining as stars, holding forth the word of life, then there will be every reason for joy. And this remains true even though sooner or later Paul himself should fall a victim to his labors for Christ. Says Paul, In fact, even if I am to be poured out¹⁰⁸ as a libation upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I rejoice. The pouring out of Paul’s blood is a reason for joy to him as long as it can be considered a drink-offering¹⁰⁹ which crowns the sacrificial offering¹¹⁰ brought by the Philippians. By this sacrificial offering which the Philippians must bring — and have already begun to bring (see Phil. 1:29) — is to be understood their Christian life and conduct, springing from faith. It is their faith in action in the midst of persecution and trial. If that offering is fully presented by the Philippians, then the apostle can truly rejoice, even in the face of death. He can be happy because it will have become evident that God has been willing to use him to bring the Philippians to their goal of the fully surrendered life. That surely would be an honor for Paul personally. He adds, and I rejoice with you all. He rejoices with them, because they will thus be fully experiencing the joys of redemption in Christ. And in the same manner do you also rejoice in the blessings of redemption, and rejoice with me, that is, in my having obtained the martyr’s crown as a result of my labor for you and for others like you.

So speaks Paul, the humble cross-bearer, humble even to the point of rejoicing at the thought that “some day he would be the lesser part of the sacrifice poured out upon the major part, the Philippians’ Christian testimony and service to God” (K. S. Wuest, Philippians in the Greek New Testament, p. 78).

Synthesis of 2:1–18

There is here a stirring appeal with a fourfold incentive to Christian living. Has not Christ given them his:

(1) encouragement

(2) love

(3) closeness (Spirit-fellowship)

(4) tender compassion?

Then let them exercise toward one another:

(1) oneness

(2) lowliness (humility)

(3) helpfulness.

That is the threefold directive.

In Christ this spirit has been beautifully exemplified. Let them therefore constantly turn their attention to him. If Christ Jesus humbled himself so deeply, Philippians should surely be willing to humble themselves in their own small way. If he became obedient to the extent of death by a cross, they in their own small way should be obedient to his directives. If he was rewarded, so will they be rewarded.

From all eternity Christ existed and continues to exist in the form of God. He is God. His deity cannot be diminished or shrunken in any way whatever. Yet, he emptied himself, not of his deity of course, for that were impossible, but of his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God. By taking on the form of a servant and becoming like human beings, he, in that human nature, became poor that we through his poverty might become rich.

As a reward for this humiliation, and following hard upon it, God the Father raised the Mediator to the loftiest heights, seating him at his right hand in the highest heaven, and bestowing on him the name that is above every name, in order that at his glorious Return all intelligent creatures — angels, men, demons may confess to the glory of God the Father that JESUS CHRIST is LORD.

A few propositions can be safely laid down:

(1) According to the clear teaching of this passage — note “Christ Jesus existing in the form of God” — Christ’s divine nature is immutable. Note how in this passage the present durative stands in sharp contrast with the aorists which follow it. Any theory which ascribes to the divine nature mutability and the ability to become temporal and spatial finds no support here. Christ’s divine nature will be what it has been from all eternity: fully divine.

(2) Exaltation clearly follows humiliation. It was because Christ became obedient even to the extent of death, yes death by a cross, that God raised him to the loftiest heights. The view which teaches that these two states coincided, so that Christ was exalted in his humiliation and humiliated in his exaltation, throws overboard the plain meaning of words, and cannot be regarded as being in accordance with sound principles of exegesis.

(3) Christ’s two natures, though united in his one person, are and ever remain clearly distinct. He who exists eternally as God took upon himself the human nature, and now has both. The rejection of the two-nature doctrine is in direct contradiction to the plain teaching of Phil. 2:5–11. Exegesis should never surrender to mere fancy, wild speculation. But even the most careful exegesis will be insufficient if it ignores the real reason why the apostle was led by the Holy Spirit to write this paragraph, namely, that we should pattern ourselves after the spirit of Christ who for our sake was willing to humble himself so deeply!

True, if one so conducts himself, persecution from the side of the kingdom of darkness is in store for him. Paul, accordingly, presents himself as humble cross-bearer, willing to be poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial offering of the faith of the Philippians. He urges the addressees: with fear and trembling to continue to work out their own salvation, this all the more in the absence of their leader (Paul). Let their incentive be that there is One who is working within them both to will and to work for his good pleasure. And let them do it from the heart, without complaining. Thus, as stars in the universe they, too, will shine in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, holding forth the word of life, that is, fulfiling their mission-task, so that Paul can rejoice in them, and this both now and on the day of Christ’s Return. “And in the same manner,” concludes Paul, “do you also rejoice, and rejoice with me.”

CHAPTER II (CONTINUED)

Summary of Chapter 2

Verses 19–30

Paul, the Thoughtful Administrator

promising to send Timothy to the Philippians as soon as his (Paul’s) own case has been decided,

and even now sending Epaphroditus back to them.

2:19–24 The contemplated mission of Timothy.

2:25–30 The authorized return of Epaphroditus.

2:19–24

I. The Contemplated Mission of Timothy

19 But I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, so that I also may be heartened by knowing your affairs. 20 For I have no one likeminded who will be genuinely interested in your welfare. 21 For they all look after their own affairs, not those of Jesus Christ. 22 But you know his proved worth, how as a child (serves) with (his) father, so he served with me in the gospel. 23 Him, then, I hope to send at once, that is, as soon as I can see (how) my affairs (will turn out). 24 But I trust in the Lord that I myself shall also come soon.

19. Paul, the joyful servant of Jesus Christ, the optimistic prisoner, the humble cross-bearer, is also the thoughtful administrator. Even from his prison in Rome he manages in a masterly fashion the spiritual terrain entrusted to his care, so that we marvel at his practical wisdom, gracious consideration of the needs and feelings of others, and delightful unselfishness. Are the Philippians anxious to receive a report about the verdict that is about to be pronounced regarding Paul? As soon as this decision is known, a messenger will be rushed to Philippi with the news. See verse 23. However, the apostle wants the Philippians to know that he is as concerned about them as they are about him. In fact, it is of importance to note that the first reason which he mentions for dispatching someone to Philippi is that he, Paul, may be brought up to date in his information concerning them. He writes, But — though it is possible that my blood will be poured out presently (implied in verses 17 and 18), yet — I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon. Although in this letter Paul never entirely dismisses from his mind the possibility of an unfavorable verdict (Phil. 1:20–23; 2:17, 18, 23), yet his expectation of an imminent acquittal and release predominates (Phil. 1:25, 26; 2:19; 2:24; cf. Philem. 22). He is full of hope. This hope is, of course, “in the Lord Jesus” (Phil. 1:8, 14; 2:24; 3:1). It is cherished in complete and humble subjection to him who alone is Lord, sovereign Ruler of all, the One with whom the apostle is living in intimate fellowship.

Now for this important mission of imparting information to the Philippians and (as here) obtaining news from them the apostle has selected no one less than Timothy. See on Phil. 1:1. And since hopefully this is to be a mission of good news and encouragement, Timothy will be sent not only to them but for them, in their interest.

Paul continues … so that I also may be heartened by knowing your affairs. Just as the apostle expects that the Philippians will be heartened by news from him, so he also expects to be refreshed in his soul when he receives Timothy’s report with reference to them.

Paul does not indicate the place where he, if released, hopes to meet Timothy again when the latter, having performed his task at Philippi, will make his report. Perhaps at Ephesus? See N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 39, 40.

20, 21. A description of Timothy’s unique fitness for his task follows: For I have no one likeminded who will be genuinely interested in your welfare. For detailed description of Timothy’s life and character see N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 33–36.

As far as temperament, disposition, and inclination were concerned, and this especially with a view to the present assignment, there was no one who could compare with Timothy.¹¹¹ There was no one with a heart like his. His was a fine, sympathetic, amiable spirit. It is as if Paul were saying, “You, Philippians, must not be disappointed if upon my release I cannot in person immediately come to see you. As soon as ever possible (see verse 23) I will dispatch Timothy. No one is better qualified and more favorably disposed. Already as a child he was an eager student of the sacred writings, a teachable and obedient son (II Tim. 3:15). As he grew up he was highly recommended by those who knew him best (Acts 16:2). Upon his conversion to the Christian faith he became my beloved and faithful child in the Lord (I Cor. 4:17), and a little later my special deputy and fellow-worker (Rom. 16:21), always ready to go wherever I sent him or to be left behind wherever I told him to remain (Rom. 16:21). To top it all, he is God’s minister in the gospel of Christ (I Thess. 3:2). And do not forget either that from the very founding of your church he has known you, and you have known him, for not only was he present when your church was established (Acts 16:11–40; I Thess. 2:2) but subsequently he has also visited you upon more than one occasion (Acts 19:21, 22; 20:3–6; II Cor. 1:1). He therefore is a natural. Yes, you can surely bank on it that he will be genuinely interested in your welfare (literally, in the things concerning you).”

But is it not true that upon his release Paul would like nothing better than to keep Timothy in his own immediate company? Was not Timothy the man whom Paul could least afford to spare? True, but in his mind and heart the apostle has already decided on this personal sacrifice. And this willingness always to subordinate his own immediate interests to those of the kingdom (see I Cor. 10:33) also explains, at least in part, why the apostle can use such strong language with respect to those who are of an opposite disposition. Surely, the names of others had occurred to him when he had decided that upon the publication of the verdict concerning himself someone must convey the news to Philippi. But a moment of reflection — or perhaps their excuses when approached on this subject — had convinced him that they were not qualified. Says Paul, For they all look after their own affairs, not those of Jesus Christ. Attempts have been made to tone down the sharpness of this judgment. This is hardly warranted. The words are simple and direct, whether read in the original or in translation. With many interpreters I believe, however, that they do not apply to absolutely every gospel-worker who was at this time in any way whatever associated with the apostle, but rather to those only who might be available at this particular juncture, and who might for a moment be regarded as qualified for a mission to Philippi.

The following facts must be borne in mind:

(1) Paul was not thinking of men like Luke and Aristarchus. These, though having been with him in Rome (Col. 4:10, 14; Philem. 24), were now no longer with him. Paul in writing Philippians cannot even send their greetings. The apostle is in the habit of sending his envoys to various stations, wherever they are needed. Thus later also, during his second and far more severe Roman imprisonment, he was not selfishly going to try to keep around him as many friends as possible, but was going to send Tychicus to Ephesus and also “Crescens to Galatia and Titus to Dalmatia” (II Tim. 4:10–12). Accordingly, here in Phil. 2:21, apostolic deputies absent on various missions must be subtracted from the number of those whom Paul judges so severely.

(2) The statement “For they all look after their own affairs, not those of Jesus Christ,” is, nevertheless, indicative of the keen disappointment which the apostle suffered. Now Phil. 1:15, 17 has already shown that not every gospel-worker in Rome was inspired by the highest motives. And this was not the only disappointment Paul was going to experience in his missionary labors in the great metropolis. For example, Demas, whose name is still mentioned in earlier epistles that belong to this imprisonment (Col. 4:10; Philem. 24), but who is no longer mentioned in Philippians (perhaps because he too was absent on some legitimate mission?), is going to prove a bitter disappointment (II Tim. 4:10). And then there is II Tim. 4:16, “At my first defense no one was at my side but all deserted me.” See N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 325–330. If this “first defense” is connected with the first imprisonment, as may well be the case, then in II Tim. 4:16 we would have a statement similar to that in the Philippian passage now under consideration. The very people from whom Paul had expected help during his trial had disappointed him. And so also, the very people whose names had momentarily occurred to Paul when the decision was made to send someone to Philippi, either had offered excuses or upon further reflection were simply dismissed from the apostles mind as spiritually unqualified because of their previous failures, inability to endure the trial of fire, and lack of genuine interest. In the light of such passages as Phil. 1:15, 17; II Tim. 4:10, 16, we are no longer surprised to read Phil. 2:21. Paul here graciously withholds the names of those who because of their evident selfishness were unfit for a mission to Philippi.

22. How altogether different was Timothy! Hence, Paul continues in the spirit of verse 20, But you know his proved worth. Timothy is no novice. To be sure, he is still young, perhaps in his middle thirties. See N.T.C. on I Tim. 4:12. But he is not inexperienced. “The crucible of affliction” was known to him. Yes, the life of this young Christian had been subjected to the searching eyes of God and had stood the test.¹¹² He had been “approved.” Timothy’s reliability was by now a well-established fact. “You know,” says Paul, how as a child (serves) with (his) father, so he served with me¹¹³ in the gospel. For the details, showing how the Philippians had become aware of this, see above on verse 20. Timothy’s association with Paul was like that of a child with his father, father and son being intensely interested in the same cause. Willingly, enthusiastically, the younger man had subjected himself, in filial attachment, to his spiritual father, for the latter’s aim was also his own. Timothy’s service was a thoroughly dedicated, spontaneous, loving ministry in the interest of and for the promotion of the gospel. See on 1:27. In order that God’s truth might be established in the hearts of men — including the Philippians — Timothy had been doing all in his power to lighten Paul’s heavy load.¹¹⁴

23, 24. After this brief aside on Timothy’s virtues the apostle resumes the thought of verse 19, the sending of Timothy: Him, then, I hope to send at once, that is, as soon as I can see (how) my affairs (will turn out). But I trust in the Lord that I myself also shall come soon. Once the verdict has been pronounced, the Philippians, far from being left in the dark, will be informed by no one less than beloved Timothy, who will carry the news to them without any delay. Will that verdict be condemnation or acquittal? Paul does not know for sure but is rather confident that it will be the latter. In any event his trust in the Lord remains unshaken. The best commentary on this underlying pendulation of thought with emphasis on hope of release and especially on complete trust in the Lord is found in Paul’s own words recorded in 1:19–26 and 2:17, 18 (see comments on these verses). Was the apostle released? And did he soon follow Timothy to Philippi? The answer must be that this was actually what happened. See N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 23–27 for detailed argument.

2:25–30

II. The Authorized Return of Epaphroditus

25 But I consider it necessary to send (back) to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, 26 for he has been longing for you all, and he has been distressed because you heard that he was sick. 27 And sick he was indeed, on the verge of death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but also on me, that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow. 28 Accordingly, I am sending him (back) the more eagerly in order that when you see him again you may rejoice and I may be less sorrowful. 29 So, extend to him a most joyful welcome in the Lord, and hold such men in honor, 30 because for the work of Christ he came to the brink of death, risking his life that he might supply what was lacking in your service to me.

25. Paul, the thoughtful administrator, now turns from Timothy to Epaphroditus. See Introduction, IV. Briefly the facts concerning him were the following:

(1) He was a spiritual leader in the church at Philippi.

(2) He had been commissioned by that church to bring a bounty to Paul, the prisoner, and to be his constant assistant and attendant.

(3) While engaged in this service he had become dangerously ill.

(4) His friends in Philippi had heard about this illness and had become alarmed, in turn. He learns about their anxiety.

(5) God graciously restores Epaphroditus.

(6) He yearns to return to the church which had delegated him, in order to allay its fears with respect to his health.

(7) Paul, in complete accord, sends him back to Philippi, bespeaks a cordial “Welcome home” for him, and in all probability makes him the bearer of this letter.

Now the fact of Epaphroditus’ authorized return, together with a brief description of the man, is found in verse 25; the reasons for his return are stated in verses 26–28; and the manner in which he should be received is indicated in verses 29, 30.

Says Paul: But I consider¹¹⁵ it necessary to send (back) to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need. Epaphroditus! His name¹¹⁶ means lovely, and a lovely person he was! Paul describes him first in his relation to himself, then in his relation to the church at Philippi. With respect to Paul he is my brother, fellow-worker, and fellow-soldier. The words are evidently arranged in an ascending scale. In common with every believer Epaphroditus is Paul’s brother, united with him in faith. He is a member of the same spiritual family, with God in Christ as Father. Paul is fond of this word brother, for it is a term of affection (cf. 4:1). It is no surprise, therefore, that in the present letter, written to his dearly-beloved Philippians, the famous prisoner uses it more often than in any other prison-epistle (1:12, 14; 2:25; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:1, 8, 21). But Epaphroditus is even more than Paul’s brother. He is united with him not only in faith but also in work, the work of the gospel; hence, fellow-worker, a title given elsewhere to such kingdom-laborers as Apollos, Aquila and Priscilla, Aristarchus, Clement, Mark, Onesimus, Philemon, Timothy, Titus, Tychicus, etc. Finally, Epaphroditus is united with Paul not only in faith and in work but also in battle. He is a fellow-soldier, a companion in arms. A worker must needs be a warrior, for in the work of the gospel one encounters many foes: Judaistic teachers, Greek and Roman mockers, emperor-worshippers, sensualists, the world rulers of this darkness, etc. Accordingly, on the part of every worker there must be prodigious exertion of energy against the foe, and unquestioning obedience to the Captain, in the full assurance of ultimate victory (cf. Philem. 2; II Tim. 2:3, 4; 4:7, 8). How Epaphroditus had fulfilled his commission as a worker and a soldier is explained in verse 30.

In relation to the church of Philippi Epaphroditus is called your messenger and minister to my need. The word messenger is literally apostle, but this term is here used in its widest sense,¹¹⁷ indicating someone who has been delegated by the church to carry out an assignment, an official representative through whom the church itself speaks and acts. In the present case the assignment was not only to bring to Paul the gift of the Philippian church but also to serve Paul in whichever way that service might be needed (note: minister to my need; cf. Phil. 4:16; Acts 20:34; Rom. 12:13); for example, as his personal attendant and as his missionary-assistant. Hence, Epaphroditus had been sent both to bring a gift and to be a gift from the Philippians to Paul. The very word used in the original for minister, namely leitourgos, indicates that the task of Epaphroditus was viewed as one in which he — and the church of Philippi through him — rendered official and sacred service, and this not only to Paul but to the cause of the gospel; hence, to God himself. The sending of Epaphroditus, with all that it implied, was a religious act, a true offering or sacrifice! Proof: see Phil. 2:17 (“sacrificial offering of your faith”) and 2:30, which use the cognate noun leitourgia; and also 4:18, which calls the gift which this messenger brought “a sacrifice, acceptable, well-pleasing to God.” Cf. also Rom. 15:16 and II Cor. 9:12.¹¹⁸

Epaphroditus had done whatever he was able to do. He had done it in the right spirit. Let no one criticize this worthy servant when he now returns to his church at Philippi. Let no one say, “How shameful for you to have acted contrary to the charge which we gave you, and to have deserted Paul at the very time when that honored prisoner, who is awaiting a life-or-death verdict needs you most.” Says Paul, as it were, “Bear in mind, Philippians, that Epaphroditus is returning to you because I myself consider it necessary to send him back to you.”

26–28. The reasons for the authorized return are now stated. These reasons are three and are closely intertwined. They concern him (Epaphroditus), you (Philippians), and myself (Paul):

(1) In order that the ardent wish of Epaphroditus may be satisfied (verses 26 and 27);

(2) In order that you may rejoice (verse 28a); and

(3) In order that I (Paul) may be less sorrowful (verse 28b).

Beginning with (1) Paul says, for he has been longing for you all, and he has been distressed because you heard that he was sick. This implies that word of the illness of Epaphroditus had reached Philippi, and that the report of Philippi’s resulting alarm had been brought back to Rome. The result for Epaphroditus was twofold:

First of all, he is worried over their worry! Severe distress of mind and heart, profound agony, overwhelms his soul. The word used in the original to express this disturbance (a word of uncertain derivation) is the one that is used in connection with the unspeakable anguish which Jesus experienced in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:37; Mark 14:33).

Secondly, his love for the church that had sent him becomes so overpowering that he yearns to see again the familiar faces of those whose sympathy is so real, and whose anxiety must be removed.

Now this anxiety of the Philippian church cannot be removed by stating that the report concerning the sickness of their beloved leader was unfounded or had been exaggerated. On the contrary; Paul continues: And sick he was indeed, on the verge of death.

The question is asked, “But why had not Paul, by means of a miracle or by means of prayer, prevented this illness, or at least quickly healed Epaphroditus, even long before his illness had taken such a grave turn?” The answer must be: first, that even in that charismatic era the apostles could not perform miracles whenever they felt so inclined. Their will was subject to God’s will. And as to prayer, even though this is indeed a mighty means of healing and often leads to recovery, it is no cure-all. It does not operate mechanically like pressing a button. It, too, is ever subject to God’s will, which is wiser than man’s desiring. And in this all-wise providence of God it has been determined that believers too at times become ill, sometimes gravely ill (Elisha, II Kings 13:14; Hezekiah, II Kings 20:1; Lazarus, John 11:1; Dorcas, Acts 9:37; Paul, Gal. 4:13; Timothy, I Tim. 5:23; Trophimus, II Tim. 4:20; and so also Epaphroditus, Phil. 2:25–27). Yes, they get sick and they even die! The passage, “With his stripes we are healed,” does not mean that believers have been exempted from the infirmities of the flesh, from grave illness or from death. But when believers are stricken, theirs is the comfort of such passages as Psalm 23; 27; 42; John 14:1–3; Rom. 8:35–39; Phil. 4:4–7; II Tim. 4:6–8; Heb. 4:16; 12:6, to mention only a few among many references.

Another question is, “What was the nature of Epaphroditus’ illness?” Many guesses have been made, but all that is really known is that it was in connection with the work of the Lord and more specifically in connection with his loving attendance upon and assistance to Paul that Epaphroditus had become sick (see verse 30). Was the illness a result of over-exertion? Had he been trying to do too much? Had this wonderful fellow-believer, worker, soldier, after a very difficult and exhausting journey exerted himself to the utmost in the work of attending to Paul’s every need, caring for believers in Rome, preaching to everyone willing to listen to the glorious gospel of the Crucified One, and doing all this amid great difficulty and personal danger, in a city whose multitudes paid homage not to Christ but to the emperor? At any rate, he had lost every bit of strength, and at last had been brought to death’s very door, so close to it that he could, as it were, touch it. For a while his life, humanly speaking, had been hanging by a thread. But then — in answer, to be sure, to the prayers of many — the experience of the author of Ps. 116 had become his also. Epaphroditus had been graciously restored to health. This surely is implied in the words which now follow: But God had mercy on him. God compassionated, pitied Epaphroditus!¹¹⁹ He had mercy on him, and, continues Paul, not only on him but on me also that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow, that is, sorrow that would have resulted from the death of Epaphroditus added to sorrow because of his grave illness.

God pitied both Epaphroditus and Paul! It is comforting to know that the heart of God is filled with mercy, that is, with lovingkindness and active pity. In Christ he is “touched with the feeling of our infirmities.”

“Mindful of our human frailty

Is the God in whom we trust;

He whose years are everlasting,

He remembers we are dust.

“Changeless is Jehovah’s mercy

Unto those who fear his name,

From eternity abiding

To eternity the same.”

The following are some of the beautiful passages in which this comforting doctrine is set forth or illustrated:¹²⁰

Gen. 39:21; Exod. 3:7; 20:6; Deut. 30:3; 33:27; II Sam. 7:15; 24:14; II Chron. 36:15; Neh. 1:5; Ps. 5:7; 23; 34:6; 36:5, 7; 81:10; 86:5; 89:28–34; 103:14–17; 108:4; 116:1–9; 136; Is. 1:18; 40; 42:3; 53:4–6; 54:7; 55:1–7; 63:7–9; Jer. 12:15; 31:34; Lam. 3:22, 32, 33; Ezek. 33:11; Hos. 11:4, 8; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:11; Mic. 7:18–20; Nah. 1:7; Zeph. 3:17; Zech. 9:9; Matt. 5:7; 9:13, 27–31, 36; 11:28, 29; 12:7; 14:14; 15:21–28; 17:14–18; 18:27, 33; 20:29–34; 23:23, 37; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 10:14, 46–52; Luke 1:46–80; 7:13; 8:54, 55; 10:25–37; 12:32; 14:23; 15:7, 20–24; 16:24; 17:11–19; 18:35–43; 23:34, 43; John 3:16, 17; 10:11–16; 11:5, 35; 14:1–3; 17; 19:25–27; 21:15–17; Acts 2:46, 47; Rom. 5:8–10; 8:26–39; 9:15–18, 23; 11:30–32; I Cor. 7:25, II Cor. 4:1; 6:17, 18; Gal. 2:20; 6:16; Eph. 2:1–10; 3:14–19; Col. 3:12–17; I Thess. 4:17, 18; I Tim. 1:2, 13–16; II Tim. 1:2, 16, 18; 4:8, Titus 2:11; 3:5; Heb. 2:17; 4:14–16; 7:25; James 2:13; 3:17; 4:5; I Peter 1:3, 18, 19; 2:10; I John 1:9; 3:1–3; II John 3; Jude 2, 21; Rev. 7:9–17; 21:1–7.

This divine tenderness of heart that expresses itself in helpful deeds is beautifully reflected in Paul. To satisfy his faithful helper’s ardent yearning and to relieve his deep distress he orders him to return to Philippi. Epaphroditus, now fully recovered, longs to be reunited with the church that had sent him. In all probability he wanted to present himself in person so that all could see that he had regained his health. No doubt he also wished to express his personal thanks to them for the prayers that had been offered and for the interest shown. And we may well believe that above all he was eager to help the Philippians in their continuing difficulties and afflictions (Phil. 1:29, 30; 3:2, 17–19; 4:2). Yet, on the other hand, he fully understood the charge he had received, loved Paul dearly, and would certainly not have left him had not the thoughtful administrator ordered him to do so.

The second reason for sending Epaphroditus back to Philippi is stated as follows: Accordingly, I am sending him (back) the more eagerly in order that when you see him again you may rejoice. Paul is sending his friend home again in order that the membership of the Philippian church, on seeing him again fully recovered, may leap for joy. This affords a glimpse into the inner soul of the great apostle. Easing the mind of his dearly beloved Philippians and imparting to them gladness of heart meant more to him than any personal service he might be able to derive from Epaphroditus.¹²¹

But although Paul’s appreciation of his friend and of the services which he rendered in Rome was genuine, he himself is able to rejoice when he reflects on the usefulness of Epaphroditus to the Philippians. Accordingly, the third reason for bidding the valiant helper to return to his own church is stated as follows: and I may be less sorrowful. The joy of the Philippians upon the return of Epaphroditus will make Paul’s own burden lighter. The great apostle proves himself to be a true imitator of God (cf. Eph. 5:1, 2), who rejoices in the joy of his beloved ones, in fact rejoices over them with singing (Zeph. 3:17).

29, 30. The manner in which Epaphroditus should be received by the church of Philippi is stated in these words: So, extend to him a most joyful welcome in the Lord, or more literally, “So, receive him in the Lord with all joy.” This faithful minister must be received with deep gratitude to the Lord. Certainly, no welcome could be too cordial. And he deserves more than a welcome. Hence, and hold such men in honor. Note: such men, Epaphroditus and others like him (cf. I Tim. 5:17). When Paul wrote this, he could not foresee that at a later date men would twist these words as if a person who in any way had become a martyr for Christ must always be given the privilege of casting the deciding vote in important ecclesiastical matters. The apostle, however, was saying no more than this, namely, that due respect must be shown to those who have proved themselves willing, if necessary, to surrender their lives for Christ. This implies, of course, that weight must be attached to their judgments and opinions, but not undue weight. The teaching of the Word must remain the final criterion, and the advice of the entire church must be carefully considered. Returning now to Epaphroditus personally — though as an eminent example of the entire class of loyal, valiant, and self-effacing ministers — Paul states the reason why honor should be accorded to this attendant and assistant, namely, because for the work of Christ (see on verse 25) he came to the brink of death. Epaphroditus had been in mortal danger, risking¹²² his life, as a gambler will take risks for possible gain.

By saying that for the cause of Christ Epaphroditus had exposed himself to the peril of losing his life, Paul probably had reference to more than the violent illness which seized his loyal friend, bringing him to death’s very door. Likely the phrase also points to the danger involved in the delegate’s very presence in Rome in the capacity of the constant and intimate attendant and assistant of a prisoner who might be on his way to execution. Peter, in a somewhat analogous situation, denied his Lord! Yes, Epaphroditus risked his life, says Paul, that he might supply what was lacking in your service to me. This must not be viewed as a reprimand, as if Paul were in any way dissatisfied with the sacred, sacrificial service (see on Phil. 2:17; 2:25; 4:18) which the Philippians had rendered. What he meant was probably this: “Your favors shown to me are deeply appreciated. If there were anything lacking in your kindness toward me, you have certainly made up for it by sending me Epaphroditus.”¹²³

The example of Epaphroditus, who was willing to risk his very life for Christ, was copied by others. Accordingly, in the early church there were societies of men and women who called themselves the parabolani, that is, the riskers or gamblers. They ministered to the sick and imprisoned, and they saw to it that, if at all possible, martyrs and sometimes even enemies would receive an honorable burial. Thus in the city of Carthage during the great pestilence of a.d. 252 Cyprian, the bishop, showed remarkable courage. In self-sacrificing fidelity to his flock, and love even for his enemies, he took upon himself the care of the sick, and bade his congregation nurse them and bury the dead. What a contrast with the practice of the heathen who were throwing the corpses out of the plague-stricken city and were running away in terror!

Synthesis of 2:19–30

Paul appears in this section as thoughtful administrator, who even from his prison in Rome, under God, in a wise, considerate, and unselfish manner directs the affairs of his extended spiritual domain. In the first subdivision of the present section he says that as soon as he knows how his affairs will turn out he will send Timothy to the Philippians, and this not only with news concerning himself (Paul) but “that I also may be heartened by knowing your affairs.” He warmly recommends Timothy, whose unselfish devotion to the cause of Christ contrasts sharply with the attitude of all such other persons who might be considered for this mission. The apostle adds, “But I trust in the Lord that I myself shall also come soon.”

In the second paragraph Paul informs the Philippians that he is sending (back) to them the man who was probably the bearer of the letter, namely, Epaphroditus. The latter had been sent to Rome as a gift and with a gift from the church of Philippi. While busily engaged in gospel-work and as Paul’s personal attendant he had become grievously ill, having been brought to death’s very door, but by God’s marvelous mercy he had been completely restored. In returning him to Philippi Paul had a threefold purpose:

(1) To satisfy the wish of Epaphroditus, who desires to go back to the brothers at Philippi in order to remove their alarm.

(2) To gladden the hearts of the Philippians who will rejoice when they see Epaphroditus fully restored.

(3) To rejoice in the joy of the Philippians.

The apostle, who could surely have made good use of the continued services of Epaphroditus in Rome, gladly makes this sacrifice, and, to offset possible criticism on the part of some, emphasizes that this faithful servant of Christ must be given a hearty welcome and that he and others like him should receive the honor which they so richly deserve.

⁷² The word is παράκλησις. For this meaning see also II Cor. 1:4–7; 7:4, 13; Philem. 7; II Thess. 2:16. Cf. N.T.C. on I and II Thessalonians, p. 62, and 189; and on John, Vol. II, p. 276

⁷³ This genitive transcends both objective and subjective; one might call it adjectival. That it is a fellowship with the Holy Spirit, an actual participation in that Spirit and in all his benefits cannot be doubted (cf. I Cor. 10:16; I John 1:3). But Paul also here regards it as the gift of the Spirit, just as he here considers the persuasive appeal as springing from love, and just as in II Cor. 13:13 he views grace as being the gift of the Lord Jesus Christ, love the gift of the Father, and fellowship the gift of the Holy Spirit. For a discussion of the fellowship see above under Phil. 1:5.

⁷⁴ The majority of the oldest manuscripts has τις. Is this an error of an early transcriber (for τινα or else for τι, the τι changed to τις by accidental repetition of the first letter of the following word)? See J. B. Lightfoot, op. cit., p. 108; A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. IV, p. 443. No better explanation has as yet been advanced. Lenski’s defense of the reading τις, by interpreting the passage as if the meaning were, “If any such fellowship, let it be tender mercies and compassions,” and so also in the preceding line, “if any fellowship, let it be of spirit,” does not satisfy. Paul does not thus separate fellowship and spirit. The expression κοινωνία πνεύματος is a unit as is κοινωνία τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος in II Cor. 13:13.

⁷⁵ Literally “tender mercies (deeply felt affections) and compassions. For the literal meaning of σπλάγχνα and the argument resulting from it see on Phil. 1:8.

⁷⁶ The harmonious connection between the elements of this lengthy apodosis would seem to demand that no comma be inserted after σύμψυχοι. The construction then is as follows: modifying be of the same mind are the four participles having, minding (“setting your mind on”), counting, and looking.

N.T.C. W. Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary

⁷⁷ Or minding, that is, contemplating, if φρονούντες instead of ποιούντες is to be supplied here, from the immediately preceding clause.

⁷⁸ See the poem “Living For Others,” by Charles E. Orr, in Treasures of Poetry, published by the Gospel Trumpet Co., Anderson, Indiana, 1913, p. 221.

⁷⁹ Humilitatem, ad quam hortatus verbis fuerat, nunc commendat Christi exemplo. Sunt autem duo membra: quorum in priore invitat nos ad Christi imitationem, quia sit vitae regula: secundo allicit, quia sit haec via, qua ad veram gloriam pervenitur (Commentarius in Epistolam Pauli Ad Philippenses, Corpus Reformatorum, vol. LXXX, Brinsvigae, 1895, p. 23).

⁸⁰ K. S. Wuest adopts a similar rendering: “This be constantly setting your mind upon in your inner being, that which is also in Christ Jesus,” “When Jesus Emptied Himself,” an article in Bib Sac, Vol. 115, No. 458 (April, 1958) pp. 153–158. The reading without γὰρ and with φρονεῖτε instead of φρονείσθω has the best support. The rendering, “Have the same thoughts among yourselves as you have in your communion with Christ Jesus,” injects into the text an idea that is foreign to it, is not in harmony with the context, and misconstrues ἐν ὑμῖν.

⁸¹ The preceding context has prepared us for the idea of sacrifice; hence, the rendering “though existing” (taking the participle as concessive) is correct here as in II Cor. 8:9 (“though being rich”).

⁸² The present participle ὑπάρχων stands in sharp contrast with all the aorists which follow it, and therefore points in the direction of continuance of being: Christ Jesus was and is eternally existing “in the form of God.”

⁸³

In the New Testament the first word morphe is found only here in Phil. 2:6, 7 and in Mark 16:12. The second one schema is found only here in Phil. 2:8 and in I Cor. 7:31. Both of these words are, however, also component elements in other words. Consult the original: (1) for morphe as a word-element: a. Rom. 2:20; II Tim. 3:5; b. Matt. 17:2; Mark 9:2; Rom. 12:2; II Cor. 3:18; c. Phil. 3:10; d. Rom. 8.29; Phil. 3:21; (2) for schema as a word-element: a. I Cor. 12:23; b. I Cor. 7:36 13:5; c. Rom. 1:27; Rev. 16:15; d. Mark 15:43; Acts 13:50; 17:12; I Cor. 7:35; 12:24; e. I Cor. 12:23; f. Rom. 3:13; I Cor. 14:40; I Thess. 4:12; g. I Cor. 4:6; II Cor. 11:13, 14, 15; Phil. 3:21; and h. Rom. 12:2; I Peter 1:14.

Do these two words — morphe and schema — have the same meaning? At times, throughout Greek literature, as any good lexicon will indicate, both can have the meaning outward appearance, form, shape. In certain contexts they can be just about interchangeable. But at other times there is a clear difference in meaning. The context in each separate instance must decide.

⁸⁴ Cf. the change from ἀγαπάω to φιλέω in John 21:15–17 see N.T.C. on John Vol. II, pp. 494–500.

⁸⁵

MORPHE, FORM	SCHEMA, FASHION
Rom. 8:29	I Cor. 7:31
“whom he foreknew he foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son.” An inner change takes place. A person’s nature is renewed.	“the fashion of this world passes away.” Though the universe is not destroyed as to its inner essence, the scheme or outward aspect of things is rapidly changing. “Change and decay in all around I see, O thou that changest not abide with me.”
II Cor. 3:18	II Cor. 11:14
“we are … transformed into the same image from glory to glory.” Again, an abiding change takes place, a change that affects the inner nature.	“Satan fashions himself into an angel of light.” He cannot change his inner self, but can and does assume the garb of a good angel. He masquerades!
Gal. 4:19	I Peter 1:14
“My little children, for whom I am again suffering birth-pangs, until Christ be formed in you.” Paul is not satisfied with mere beginnings. He wants to see the completed image of Christ in the inner life and character of the Galatians. — Similar is the following example:	“Be sober … not fashioning yourselves according to your former lusts.” Those addressed must show that their scheme of life — words, habits, actions, manner of dress, etc. — is not suggestive of the passions that were formerly in control of them. Outward bearing and conduct must be in harmony with the new life.
Phil. 3:10
“that I may gain Christ.… becoming conformed unto his death.”
Rom. 12:2
“Stop being fashioned after the pattern of this (evil) age, but be constantly transformed by the renewal of your mind.” Here we have both words (each occurring in a compound verb): fashion and form. Stop adopting the external customs of the world round about you. There must be a gradually progressing and abiding inner change, a metamorphosis.

Similarly, we immediately recognize the fact that basically and in certain contexts there is a difference between:

forma	and	habitus (Latin)
Gestalt	and	Gebärdung (German)
gestalte	and	gedaante (Dutch)
And so also between
form	and	fashion or figure (English)

The fact that in certain contexts the word form is the more basic one is clear also from the following two examples:

A deformed individual is generally in a worse condition than a disfigured person.

The form or inner nature of an apple tree remains the same throughout the year: short and stocky trunk, scaly bark, gnarled branches, rounded head. But the fashion of the tree changes with the seasons. As the year progresses we see the tree budding, blossoming, bearing fruit, picked clean, and finally entirely bereft of both leaf and fruit.

⁸⁶ The word ἴσα is adverbial, meaning “in a manner of equality.”

⁸⁷ Because of its length this footnote has been placed at the end of the chapter, page 129.

⁸⁸

Tyndale’s rendering “he made him silfe of no reputacion” was taken over by Cranmer, the Geneva Version, and the A.V. Cf. also The New English Bible “he made himself nothing.” Similarly, the Dutch (Statenvertaling) has, “hij heeft zichzelven vernietigd.” In favor of that translation it is usually argued that in all the other instances in which the apostle employs the verb κενόω a metaphorical sense must be given to it (see Rom. 4:14; I Cor. 1:17; 9:15; and II Cor. 9:3). Dr. B. B. Warfield even goes so far as to call the alternative rendering (“emptied himself”) a mistranslation (Christology and Criticism, p. 375).

But is this argument against the translation “emptied himself” really valid? Is it not possible to retain the translation “emptied himself” and still give a metaphorical — at least a non-strictly-literal — meaning to the verb? R.S.V. renders I Cor. 1:17 as follows, “… let the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” And cf. the use of this verb in I Cor. 9:15. At any rate the meaning that must be given to the verb in these other instances of its New Testament use hardly proves the position that here in Phil. 2 it cannot mean he emptied.

It is significant that the rendering he emptied himself has always had defenders; for example,

Latin: sed ipse sese inanivit

French: il s’est aneanti lui-même

English (Rheims translation of 1582): he exinanited himself.

This rendering “is nearer the Greek and in every way more satisfactory than that of the A.V.” (J. H. Michael). It is accepted by: The Amplified New Testament, W. G. Ballentine (The Riverside New Testament), R. C. H. Lenski, J. Moffatt, A. T. Robertson, G. Verkuyl (The Berkeley Version), K. S. Wuest, R. Young (Literal Translation of the Holy Bible), as well as by A.S.V and R.S.V. Similarly, the new Dutch translation has, “maar Zichzelf ontledigd heeft”; the South African, “maar het Homself ontledig”; and the Swedish, “utan utblottade sig själv.”

A strong argument in favor of this rendering is the fact that it expresses precisely the idea that one expects after “he did not count his existence-in-a-manner-equal-to-God something to cling to.” If a person refuses to cling to something, he empties or divests himself of it. Note: of it. Most commentators agree that when one empties himself, he empties himself of something.

Some excellent exegetes, whose doctrinal position and emphasis I share, reject the secondary object, “of it.” In line with their preference for a translation other than “he emptied himself,” they stress the fact that “of it” is not actually in the text. However, the difference between the two groups of interpreters becomes very minor when both accept the following propositions:

(1) Christ Jesus gave himself, nothing less.

(2) He did not in any sense whatever divest himself of his deity.

(3) The meaning of the clause “he emptied himself” or “he made himself of no reputation” (whichever is preferred) is set forth in greater detail in the words which follow it, namely, “as he took on the form of a servant … humbled himself and became obedient even to the extent of death; yes, death by a cross.”

Many translators, though not actually using the verb emptied, express the same idea by their translation: “stripped himself of his glory” (R. F. Weymouth), “stripped himself of all privilege” (J. B. Phillips), or “laid it aside” (E. J. Goodspeed, M. R. Vincent, C. B. Williams).

⁸⁹

The Kenotists who teach otherwise are clearly wrong. These defenders of the Kenosis-theory in any of its many forms teach that in one way or another Christ at the incarnation divested himself of his deity, whether absolutely or relatively. Christ’s human nature is just “shrunken deity.” Of the vast literature of this subject I select only the following titles:

Karl Barth on Phil. 2:5–8 in his Erklärung des Philipperbriefes; also the pertinent pages in his Kirchliche Dogmatik IV (for example, IV:1, pp. 138 f, 146, 147; Engl. transl. pp. 126 f, 133, 134; IV:2, pp. 37, 38; Engl. transl. pp. 35, 36); and C. Van Til, “Karl Barth on Chalcedon,” W. Th. J XXII (May 1960), pp. 147–166.

C. A. Beckwith, article “Kenosis” in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol, VI pp. 315–319

L. Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrine, pp. 124–126

A. B. Bruce, The Humiliation of Christ, pp. 134–192

E. D. La Touche, The Person of Christ in Modern Thought, pp. 351–366

H. R. Mackintosh, The Doctrine of the Person of Jesus Christ, pp. 223–284

J. J. Müller, Die kenosisleer in die christologie sedert die Reformatie, doctoral disseration, Amsterdam, 1931

W. Sanday, Christologies Ancient and Modern (advocates the rather strange theory that the divinity of Christ was located in the subliminal consciousness)

B. B. Warfield, Christology and Criticism, pp. 371–389

⁹⁰

This is the position of L. Berkhof: “… the verb ekenosen [he emptied] does not refer to morphe theou [form of God] but to einai isa theoⁱ, that is, his being on an equality with God” (Systematic Theology, p. 328).

That is also the view of A. T. Robertson (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. IV, p. 444): “Of what did Christ empty himself? Nor of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God.… Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory.”

Of Greijdanus (De Brief van den Apostel Paulus aan de Philippenzen, in Korte Verklaring, p. 50): “He laid aside his majesty and glory (John 17:5) but remained God.”

And of H. Ridderbos (Commentaar op het Nieuwe Testament, Romeinen, p. 25): “He divested himself of his divine power and majesty by becoming like human beings.”

⁹¹ Even H. Bavinck commits that error (Gereformeerde Dogmatiek, Vol. III, third edition, p. 456).

⁹² See further what has been said with reference to the meaning of δοῦλος in Phil. 1:1. Dr. John A. Mackay wrote an excellent article on this subject in The Princeton Seminary Bulletin (Jan., 1958). The title is “The Form of a Servant.” He states, “The servant image is the most significant symbol in the Bible and in the Christian religion.… It denotes a complete absence of external compulsion. It means voluntariness, spontaneity, a certain inner joy and even exultancy.”

⁹³ Super-combinations are typically Pauline. See N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, p. 75.

⁹⁴ In the abstract the three adjectives here used, in their genitive form, can be translated either as neuter or as masculine. A.V. and A.R.V., and also several commentators, prefer the neuter. And it is entirely true that the work of Christ is of value for the entire creation, both animate and inanimate (Isa. 11:6–9; Rom. 8:18–22; II Peter 3:7, 11–13; Rev. 21:1–5). However, we generally associate such actions as knees bending and tongues confessing with persons, not with things. So, unless it can be proved that the context here in Philippians 2:9–11 is very highly poetical (cf. Job 38:7; Ps. 65:13; 98:8; 148:3, 4, 7–10; Isa. 55:12, etc.), the view which refers these designations to persons deserves the preference.

⁹⁵

Use of the term καταχθόνιος-οι in Greek mythology.

Zeus (by the Romans identified with Jupiter) becomes the supreme deity and rules the heavens; Poseidon (Rom. Neptune), the ocean; Hades or Pluto (Rom. Dis), the realm of the dead; and the goddess Demeter (Rom. Ceres) the fruitful earth, agriculture.

Daughter of Demeter is Persephone (Rom. Proserpine). Hades abducts Persephone and makes her his wife. Demeter implores Zeus to restore her daughter to her. It is agreed that each year Persephone shall spend part of the time with her husband Hades, and the rest with her mother Demeter. (Here clearly is a symbol of Nature dying and reviving.) Hades and Persephone are therefore, respectively, the god and goddess of the underworld, and in Greek religion are to be counted among the subterraneans or καταχθόνιοι.

Use of this term in the New Testament.

In Paul’s solitary use of the term the subterraneans are the damned, for according to the context the region “under the earth” is the symbol of that which is opposed to heaven. There are commentators who (with M. R. Vincent) argue that the term in question does not include the infernal spirits or demons, since according to Eph. 2:2; 6:12 demons are not regarded by Paul as being in Hades.

Over against this, note the following:

(1) The context shows that the apostle has in mind the whole body of created intelligences. From this category the demons cannot be excluded.

(2) The reference is to the judgment day. Surely then the demons will be assigned to hell, to dwell there forever.

(3) Even now these demons are hellish ones. They belong to hell, are hellish in character, and are elsewhere represented as streaming forth upon their sinister missions out of the gates of Hades (Matt. 16:18). The place of “everlasting fire,” “is prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). What Paul says in Eph. 2:2; 6:12 is not in conflict with all this.

⁹⁶ Though it is true that the future indicative ἐξομολογήσεται, supported by A,C,D,F,G, etc., may have been changed to the aorist subjunctive ἐξομολογήσηται, supported by p⁴⁶, Aleph and B, in order to conform it to κάμψῃ yet this is merely a possibility. One expects the aorist subjunctive. Besides, since in subordinate clauses these two forms (future indicative and aorist subjunctive) frequently interchange, there is no essential difference in meaning. See also Gram.N.T., pp. 188, 872.

⁹⁷ For alternate translation see footnote 99.

⁹⁸ That the name is often equivalent to the person himself as he stands revealed is seen in such contexts as: Ps. 8; Matt. 10:22; 24:9; 28:19; Mark 13:13; Luke 21:17; Acts 4:30; 9:15; 10:43; I Cor. 1:10; I John 2:12; 3:23.

⁹⁹ Of course, these words modify the verb “should confess.” Hence, in order to avoid ambiguity I translated as follows, “and that every tongue should confess to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is Lord” (so also the Berkeley Version). A.V., A.R.V., and R.S.V. also avoid ambiguity, if due note is taken of the comma after the word Lord. Since this glorious lordship of the Anointed Savior is the burden, the main message, of the statement, so filled with thought and emotion, it is probably not incorrect to bring out this emphasis in English by slightly changing the word-order of the original and placing the word Lord at the very end. Nevertheless, in order to show that the final purpose of the praise rendered by every creature is God’s glory, the word-order of the original may be retained and conveyed in some such manner as the following: “and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (this confession redounding) to the glory of God the Father” (or, with Goodspeed, “and thus glorify God the Father”).

¹⁰⁰ On the concept glory see the detailed study in connection with Phil. 1:11, including the footnote there. On Lord see N.T.C. on John, Vol. I, p. 103; Vol. II, pp. 234, 235; and N.T.C. on I and II Thessalonians, pp. 40, 41.

N.T.C. W. Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary

¹⁰¹ This very comparison clearly shows that the words “not as in my presence only but now much more in my absence” modify “with fear and trembling continue to work out your own salvation,” and not “even as you have always obeyed.” Besides, the negative μή (instead of οὐ, οὐχ) is more natural with limitations of the imperative than with the indicative. Cf. John 13:9; James 1:22. It also stands to reason that Paul, facing a verdict and possible death, would be deeply concerned about the question: How will Christian character and conduct develop among the Philippians if I remain absent? Are there perhaps even now certain individuals in that congregation who are taking sinful advantage of my absence? Cf. Phil. 4:2, 3. — Hence, from every point of view — exegetical, grammatical, and psychological — the construction of the sentence which, along with most commentators, I favor must be regarded as the best. This is my answer to R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 803.

¹⁰² Note: “not as in my presence.” The retention of the rather difficult “as” probably represents the best reading. As in Rom. 9:32; II Cor. 2:17; and Philemon 14 ὡς indicates inward motivation.

¹⁰³

Paul employs the present participle of the verb ἐνεργέω. He uses this verb with respect to:

a. God (I Cor. 12:6, 11; Gal. 2:8, twice; 3:5; Eph. 1:11, 20; Phil. 2:13, first of two instances; Col. 1:29; cf. also Eph. 3:20 and I Thess. 2:13.

b. the spirit of Satan (Eph. 2:2; cf. II Thess. 2:7).

c. sinful passions (Rom. 7:5).

e. death and life (II Cor. 4:12)

d. comfort (II Cor. 1:6)

f. faith (Gal. 5:6)

g. believers (Phil. 2:13, second of two instances).

The word indicates the effective exercise of power.

¹⁰⁴ How Lenski can speak in this connection of Calvinistic error is not clear to me (op. cit., p. 806). Calvinism, like Paul, maintains both divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Man is neither “a self-starting and self-perpetuating organism” nor “a mechanized automaton.”

¹⁰⁵

There are other explanations. Some deny that Paul is here using τέκνον, pl. —α, in the Johannine sense. But the context, which stresses the process of sanctification, surely reminds one of John 1:12. See N.T.C. on that verse. “A child of God” should strive to become (hence also “to become manifest as”) “a child of God without blemish.”

Some commentators, failing to see how children of God can, in any progressive sense, still become children of God, re-arrange the clause so that it would read “that you, being children of God, may become blameless and guileless,” etc. But this change is neither necessary nor justifiable.

¹⁰⁶ Whether φαίνεσθε is taken as (present, middle) indicative or as imperative makes little difference as long as the main clause “Practise doing all things without muterings and misgivings” is imperative. Indicative here impresses me as the more natural of the two, especially because the verb occurs in a dependent clause removed so far from the main clause. With Lex. N. T. (A. andG.) I agree that even in the middle voice φαίνεσθε with respect to light and its sources can mean “are shining” and need not be translated “are seen.” Cf. Isa. 60:2. The transition from to be seen to to shine is a very natural semantic shift when the verb is used in connection with stars, etc. For φωστήρ, luminary, in the sense of star see same lexicon. The word κόσμος is used in various senses. See N.T.C. on John, Vol. I, p. 79, footnote 26. Here the meaning universe would seem to be the most fitting. Hence, there is much to be said for the rendering, “you are shining as stars in the universe” (or perhaps even “in the firmament,” see for this possibility The New English Bible, footnote on Phil. 2:15; and H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, entry κόσμος). Daniel 12:3 is a close thought-parallel.

¹⁰⁷

Lenski, among others, definitely rejects this rendering of ἐπέχοντες. Along with many others, before and after him, he favors holding or holding fast. Among versions and commentaries the two interpretations are about equally divided. Favoring the rendering holding or holding fast or something similar (for example, being attached to) are Moffatt, R.S.V., Berkeley Version, Dutch (Nieuwe Vertaling), Luther, Bengal, Michael, Kennedy (Expositor’s Greek Testament), and Robertson, to mention only a few of a much longer list. Favoring the translation holding forth or holding out (to them) are A.V., A.R.V., (The New English Bible has “proffer”), Weymouth, Goodspeed, Wuest, Amplified New Testament, Dutch (Statenvertaling); Eadie, Alford, Vincent (International Critical Commentary), Scott (The Interpreter’s Bible), Greijdanus, Müller, and many others. (Still others favor “being in the place of,” “possessing,” etc.)

The most detailed and, as I see it, the most satisfactory discussion on this subject is found in Greijdanus (Kommentaar op het Nieuwe Testament, Philippensen, on Phil. 2:16). He favors holding forth. Both renderings make good sense. Here in Phil. 2:16, however, the rendering “holding forth” or “holding out (to them)” or “proffering” (offering for acceptance) would seem to be best suited to the context. As for the missionary idea, this is already present in the words, “among whom you are shining as stars in the universe.” Surely, lives that are shining in the darkness of this world of sin and unbelief are exhibiting to men the power of the gospel in sanctified living. Cf. Matt. 5:16. They do it by holding out to them the word of life, just like, according to Homer, who uses the identical verb, red wine was held out or offered to a person (The Odyssey XVI, 442–444). When Lenski states that, so interpreted, “it would be the only instance of this meaning in the New Testament,” the answer is as follows:

(1) The meaning holding, which he adopts, would indeed be the only instance of this meaning in the New Testament. The only other New Testament passages in which this verb occurs are: Luke 14:7 (“holding out the mind to,” “focusing the attention upon,” “marking”), Acts 3:5 (“held out his mind to,” “focused his attention on,” “gave heed to”); I Tim. 4:16 (“hold out your mind to,” “focus your attention on,” “look to”) and Acts 19:22 (“he held out in Asia — remained in Asia — for a while”).

(2) If Paul intended to say, “holding” “holding on to,” or “holding fast” the word of life, would he not have made use of the verb κατέχω, just as he does elsewhere? Cf. I Cor. 11:2; 15:2; II Cor. 6:10; and I Thess. 5:21?

¹⁰⁸

The present σπένδομαι must be understood as a vivid reference to the future. Paul is probably thinking of his present imprisonment as “the beginning of the end” for himself, whether that end be climaxed at the close of the present imprisonment or a few years later.

I agree with H. A. A. Kennedy (The Expositor’s Greek Testament), who in commenting on this passage states, “Here again unnecessary difficulties have been raised over the question whether Paul or the Philippians are to be regarded as offering the sacrifice. There is no evidence that the apostle wishes to strain the metaphor to the breaking point.” The passive here as well as in II Tim. 4:6 is natural, the supposition being that the apostle’s life is being — or is to be — poured out like a drink-offering.

¹⁰⁹ Whether the underlying figure is the Jewish libation, poured out beside the altar, or the pagan libation, poured out over the sacrifice, makes no difference.

¹¹⁰ ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ to be understood as hendiadys.

¹¹¹ As is indicated by the relative clause (“who will be genuinely interested in your welfare”) which refers to Timothy, the word “likeminded” means “in comparison with Timothy,” not “in comparison with myself (Paul).”

¹¹² For the meaning of δοκιμή see on Phil. 1:10; also N.T.C. on I Thess. 2:4; and W. Grundmann, art. and related words, in G. Kittell, Th.W.N.T., II, pp. 258–264.

¹¹³ This is better than he slaved with me. See on Phil. 1:1; 2:7.

¹¹⁴ The idea of some that Paul started to write, “Timothy served me,” but changed this to, “Timothy served with me,” when it occurred to him that both men were after all servants of Jesus Christ, is probably not the most natural way to account for the structure of the sentence. If allowance is made for “compressed style,” so characteristic of New Testament writers, especially of Paul, the sentence as it stands is sufficiently clear.

¹¹⁵ Instead of “I consider” in verse 25 and “I am sending” in verse 28 the original has “I considered” and “I sent.” The latter are epistolary aorists written from the point of view of the readers. When Paul’s letter is received by them the considering and the sending will belong to the past. Hence, in Greek a past tense is used, where our language, viewing the situation from the point of view of the writer, would use the present.

¹¹⁶

The name, a rather common one, is related to that of the goddess of love and beauty, Aphrodite. Since in this predominantly heathen community the church was of fairly recent origin the conjecture that Epaphroditus descended from a Greek family devoted to Aphrodite may well be correct. The following facts must, however, be borne in mind:

A. (1) As a result of Alexander’s conquest with its spread of Hellenistic culture names of Greek-pagan origin had become popular all over the wide-stretching empire.

(2) Jews, too, had adopted the habit of giving their children Greek names, and even Christians did not hesitate to copy and retain these names; just as today Christion parents often do not hesitate to name their children Dennis, Dion, Diana, Isadora, Minerva. They also retain the pagan names of the days of the week.

(3) In such names as Timothy (I Tim. 1:2, honoring God), Theophilus (Luke 1:3, Acts 1:1, loved of God) and Theudas (Acts 5:36, contraction of Theodorus, gift of God) the deity referred to is not definitely indicated. Hence, these lend themselves to Christian interpretation. This holds too for several others, including in a sense even Epaphroditus. See B 2.

B. Names derived from heathen deities abound on the pages of the New Testament. For our present purpose it is necessary to note only the following items of ancient mythology:

Many or all the Olympic deities are reflected in Olympas (Rom. 16:15). Offspring of Cronos and Rhea were the Olympic deities Demeter and Zeus.

Demeter (see also footnote 95), goddess of agriculture, of the fruitful earth, protectress of the social order and marriage (by the Romans identified with Ceres; cf. our “cereals”), finds her echo in Demetrius (Acts 19:24). Zeus (Acts 14:12), chief of the gods, ruler of the heavens (by the Romans identified with Jupiter) returns to us in the name Zenas (Titus 3:13, abbreviation of Zenodorus, given by Zeus), and in Diotrephes (III John 9, nourished by Zeus).

Zeus had several wives and children:

(1) Offspring of Zeus and Leto: Apollo and Artemis.

Apollo was considered the god of the sun; later, of healing, music, poetry, prophecy, youthful male beauty. Hence, we have Apollos (Acts 18:24, abbreviation of Apollonius) and Apelles (Rom. 16:10).

The twin-sister of Apollos was Artemis, the goddess of the moon; later, of youth, health, freedom, the dance, the dewy meadows and green forests, especially of the chase, “the virgin-huntress” (by the Romans identified with Diana); whence Artemas (Titus 3:12). Another name for Artemis was Phoebe, the bright and radiant moon-goddess; hence Phoebe (Rom. 16:1).

(2) Offspring of Zeus and Dione (but according to others sprung from the sea-foam, ἀφρός): Aphrodite (by the Romans identified with Venus).

Epaphroditus and its abbreviation Epaphras are derived from Aphrodite (hence, devoted to Aphrodite, the goddess of love; and so lovely). Yet though the two names are the same, the Epaphroditus of Philippians is not the Epaphras of Colossians, for the respective contexts (cf. Phil. 2:25 with Col. 1:7) show that these two belong to different cities.

(3) Offspring of Zeus and Maia: Hermes (Acts 14:12).

He was the herald and messenger of the gods, the god of roads, commerce, invention (by the Romans identified with Mercury); whence Hermas (Rom. 16:14; abbreviation of several names, including Hermodorus, that is, given by Hermes) and Hermogenes (II Tim. 1:15, born of Hermes).

C. Even the lesser deities and supernatural beings are reflected in Biblical personal names. Thus Hymen, the god of marriage, returns to us in Hymenaeus (II Tim. 2:17); Nereus, a lower sea-deity, father of the Nereids or sea-nymphs, in Nereus (Rom. 16:11); and with less certainty Tyche (by the Romans identified with Fortuna), the goddess of fortune, chance, luck, in Tychicus (Acts 20:4), Syntyche (Phil. 4:2), and Eutychus (Acts 20:4, 9). Some find the sea-nymphs in Nymphas (Col. 4:15), but because of a textual-critical problem this is very uncertain.

¹¹⁷ For the various meanings of the word apostle see N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 49–51.

¹¹⁸ As the Greek leitourgos, motivated by love for his city and its gods, financed a great drama or fitted out a warship, so the Philippians, impelled by a love for the one true God in Jesus Christ, had sponsored this truly great undertaking, namely, the gathering of a substantial gift for Paul and the sending to Paul of this wonderful bounty and of its even more wonderful bearer. See also N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, p. 225, footnote 113.

¹¹⁹ The original has, “God mercied him,” but this does not sound well in English. German: Gott hat sich über ihn erbarmet; Swedish: Gud förbarmade sig över honom; Dutch: God heeft zich over hem ontfermd.

¹²⁰ Here in Phil. 2:27 the original has ἠλέησεν; cf. the noun ἔλεος: mercy. See the word-study of this concept in N.T.C. on The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 54–56, including footnote 23 on p. 55 there.

¹²¹ Sending Epaphroditus back to Philippi was a real sacrifice for Paul. The idea of some, that Epaphroditus had become a burden on the apostle’s hands, and that for this reason he wanted to get rid of him, is completely contrary to the entire context.

¹²² παραβολευσάμενος, aorist participle of παραβολεύομαι. The variant παραβουλευσάμενος must be regarded as a scribal substitute for the less familiar original. Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 88) cites an example of παραβολευσάμενος from an inscription at Olbia on the Black Sea, probably of the second century a.d.

¹²³ Similarly, at a previous occasion Stephanus, Fortunatus, and Achaicus had made up for the lack or deficiency of the Corinthians. They had done what, because of distance, the Corinthians had not been able to do personally (I Cor. 16:17). That the Philippians had fallen short in their duty toward Paul Phil. 2:30 does not imply any more than Col. 1:24 (“filling up whatever is lacking in the sufferings of Christ”) implies that Christ in his own person had not suffered enough.

↑ Back to top