2. Appeal and Indictment (3:17-19)
2. Appeal and Indictment (3:17-19)
17Join with others in following my example, brothers and sisters, and take note of those who live according to the pattern we gave you. 18For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many1 live as enemies of the cross of Christ. \9Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things.
In the preceding sub-paragraph (vv. 15-16) Paul approached the concept of imitatio, as he specifically applied the "mindset" illustrated in his personal story to the Philippian situation, concluding with the exhortation that they conform their behavior to the pattern of Christ thus far attained. Paul now repeats his concern, this time in the express language of imitatio. At the same time he (apparently) amplifies so as to include not only the immediate concerns expressed in his personal history, but also some more general concerns that cover a larger scope of behavior.
He begins this sub-paragraph2 with the basic imperative, that they "imitate" him in their behavior, and that they have a discerning eye for all who also walk according to his pattern (v. 17).3 This is followed by an explanatory sentence (vv. 18-19), which gives the reasons for their "taking [careful] note of [others]" in this way — because there are many whose "walk" does not conform to the pattern. Although this last sentence is full of difficulties for the interpreter in terms of identifying both the persons alluded to and the nature of their "walk," their function in Paul's appeal seems clear. They not only stand in stark contrast to his example, as to the kind of behavior he is urging on the Philippians, but the final word about them ("their minds are set on earthly things") also serves as the foil for the final word about "us whose citizenship is in heaven" (vv. 20-21) and whose minds are thus set on winning the eschatological prize.
We will reserve our best guess as to who these people are — or represent — until we have looked at the sentence in detail. Here we simply note that in many ways this passage helps to tie together several items in the letter, especially the theme of joy in suffering and Paul's reasons for the narratives about Christ (2:6-11) and himself (3:4-14). At issue throughout is living a cruciform existence, discipleship marked by the cross and evidenced by suffering on behalf of Christ. This clearly lies behind the first hint of the imitatio motif (1:30; they are experiencing in Christ's behalf the same struggle they have known and seen in Paul); this is the central focus in both paradigmatic narratives (Christ as God humbled himself in becoming human, being obedient to death on a cross; Paul suffered the loss of all former things because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ his Lord, so as finally to be conformed to his death). But in both cases there is "eschatological" glory — Christ's now and Paul's (and theirs) to come.4 Hence, whatever we make of the two more difficult items that describe these "many" over whom Paul weeps (their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame), the first and final items stand in stark contrast to both Christ and Paul at these crucial points: they are enemies of the cross and their minds are set on present, earthly things; that is, they have abandoned a lifestyle marked by the cross and have given up altogether on the sure future that belongs to those who are thus marked.
17 With the second vocative in this passage5 Paul appeals to his Philippian "brothers and sisters" to "become imitators of me."6 The idea of "imitating" a teacher had precedent in Paul's Jewish heritage,7 where a pupil learned not simply by receiving instruction but by "putting into practice" the example of the teacher; the one who "imitates" thus internalizes and lives out the model presented by the teacher. This language occurs in two kinds of contexts in Paul: suffering for the sake of Christ and the gospel, and behavior that conforms to the gospel.8 In every case "imitation" of Paul means "as I imitate Christ" (expressly so in 1 Cor 11:1; cf. 1 Thess 1:6).
The key to our passage lies in its first occurrence in Paul (1 Thess 1:6), where the Thessalonians (fellow Macedonians, one should note) are reminded that in becoming believers they became followers of both Paul and Christ at the crucial point of having received the message in the context "of great affliction accompanied by the joy of the Holy Spirit."9 That is very much like the present context. The two earlier hints of imitatio (of Paul) in Philippians (1:30; 2:18) occur in a context of suffering for Christ; the second concludes on the note of Paul's rejoicing — his own and together with them — and urges them to do "the same." This present section begins and ends with the imperative "rejoice in the Lord" ; that they should do so in the context of suffering is the main point of his personal narrative (v. 10: "participation in Christ's sufferings" as his way of being "conformed to Christ's death").
Only here does Paul use the compound "fellow-imitators." Although this could go in one of three directions,10 most likely Paul is calling on them to join together in imitating him.11 If so, Paul is once again picking up the theme of their being united on this matter, a theme that began as early as the repeated "all of you" in the salutation and thanksgiving (1:1-11),12 and is brought to its concluding moment just a few sentences later (4:2-3).
Thus, they are urged to join together in following Paul's example (as he follows Christ is always implied), while at the same time they also "take note of those who live according to the pattern we gave you." For the sake of comment we need to put that more "literally": "and take note of those who walk13 thus, just as you have us14 as an example."15 To "walk" has to do with behavior, living uprightly in all that one does. Although this may well include some among the Philippians "who walk thus" (Epaphroditus, for example), the grammar and language of this clause imply a more comprehensive group of people, reaching beyond the Philippians themselves.16 They are either to "take note of" or "be on the lookout for"17 such people, who also walk in keeping with the example they find in Paul — especially as that has been expressed in the preceding narrative.18 The final clause, "just as you have us as an example," then brings the two preceding clauses together. They are to walk, and to watch for others who so walk, in keeping with the example of Paul just given in vv. 4-14.
Who these people might be is more speculative; but in light of those who are singled out by way of contrast in vv. 18-19, very likely Paul is referring to various itinerants. Since Philippi was a small city on the main highway East and West, and a full day's walk from Neapolis on the coast, the Christian community in Philippi was undoubtedly frequented by all sorts of itinerants, who would be given the normal Christian hospitality. Paul himself was one of these, as both his letters and Acts bear witness.19 Fully aware that not all who would come through were of the same mind as Paul regarding walking in the ways of Christ, he has frequently warned them of such itinerants (as vv. 1 and 18 indicate). This imperative, therefore, besides specifying the reason for vv. 4-14, moves toward warning, that when others come among them, they mark well those who "walk" in the way of the cross and who are living in eager anticipation of the future. For, he will now go on to explain, there are many who do not so "walk." The significance of such warning lies internal to Philippi; it could well be that this is where the friction between Euodia and Syntyche fits in — over the way one lives and "does" the gospel, especially in the face of current opposition and suffering.
18 In a surprising turn of argument, Paul now goes on to give the reason, by way of contrast, for the second clause in v. 17. They must "take note of" those who walk in keeping with Paul's own imitation of Christ precisely because there are many whose "walk" is the exact opposite. The surprise comes not in the contrast as such, but in the way he describes these people, which has been the source of much difficulty — and speculation. The difficulty is with identification (who are they?), which is related to the fivefold description found here (vv. 18-19), two or three of which create problems for every proposed identification.
The difficulties of identification have to do with context, both the immediate and larger context of the letter, since nothing to this point in the letter has quite prepared us for some of this. Several matters are at issue: (1) how, or whether, they are related to those described as "dogs" in v. 2; (2) how, or whether, they are related to Paul's disclaimers in vv. 12-13; (3) how, or whether, they are related to any of the previous mention of alleged "opponents" in the letter (1:15-16, 28; 2:21); (4) whether they are internal or external to the Philippian community; and (5) whether Paul considers them to be believers at all, or former "believers" who are now headed for perdition. We will say a few further words about "identification" at the end; first, a look at the description itself.
First, Paul says that "many walk," a combination that suggests people associated with the Christian community but outside of Philippi.20 On the one hand, the verb "walk," repeated from v. 17, is used primarily by Paul in this figurative way — to describe both positively and negatively how believers are to live as Christians.21 Although it is common to regard these "many" as "false teachers,"22 Paul does not in fact refer to their teaching as such,23 but to their "walk," to the way they live — although a poor understanding of the gospel for Paul obviously lies behind such behavior. On the other hand, it is unlikely that Paul would have spoken in the third person and used "many,"24 if he had some of their own in mind. His way of referring to those within a given community who are out of step with the rest is with the (usually plural) indefinite pronoun, "some [of you]."25
But before describing them, he interrupts himself with an especially poignant word about his own feelings toward them.26 Two things are said: (a) Paul has told them about such people on frequent occasions.27 This is both the language of warning and further indication that they are not members of the community in Philippi. The normal sense of "whom I told you about" is a reference to people other than those being addressed.
(b) But "outside" (the believing community) in what sense, is made difficult by the "now" side of this clause: "and indeed I now tell you with weeping." Although there is no reason to believe Paul would not "weep" over those who have never known Christ,28 he otherwise reserves "weeping"29 and tears for those within the Christian community. Thus, he now weeps over them not because they are pagans living like pagans who have never known Christ30 — why make such a point at all, one wonders — but because as professed believers in Christ they should know better. Indeed, it is very much like the apostle to "weep o'er the erring one," even as he warns fellow believers not to walk in their ways (cf. Acts 20:31).
Thus the opening clauses seem to point to some outside the Philippian community who are not (or no longer) walking in the ways of the Lord —- or who think of themselves as doing so despite the way they live. Although Paul undoubtedly has some specific people in mind, the language is ultimately generic and would include any and all who are like this.31 The difficulties lie in squaring this with the fivefold description that follows:
(1) "The enemies of the cross of Christ." This first clause puts the whole in perspective, and ties the present concern directly to the narrative about Christ in 2:6-11 and to his own that has just preceded (especially vv. 8, 10-11). For Paul the cross is simultaneously God's means of redemption (the "foolishness" by which God is "pleased to save those who believe," 1 Cor 1:21) and his way of "turning the tables" on all merely human schemes (1 Cor 1:17-25). Thus the cross stands as God's utter contradiction to human wisdom and power. Therefore, it inevitably creates enemies of those who refuse to go that route. Paul's concern is for the Philippians to "walk" in a way that conforms to the death of Christ, even death on the cross. Those who are to be "marked" as walking contrary to the pattern Paul set for them are first of all described as "enemies of the cross of Christ."32
But in what way? since this could be a fitting description of at least three kinds of people: (a) pagan compatriots in Philippi who "stand in opposition" to them and are the probable cause of their present suffering (1:28); (b) the Judaizers in v. 2, who would try to come among them and urge circumcision, since Paul describes such "Judaizers" in precisely this way in Galatians (6:11-14; cf. 3:1; 5:11); or (c) the kind of triumphalist antinomians Paul speaks against throughout 1 Corinthians, especially chapters 1-4, whose "spirituality" has put them beyond present suffering as they glory only in the Spirit and the present power of the resurrection.33 It is not surprising, therefore, that each of these has had its advocates. But the very diversity of options demonstrates that this clause helps little toward their identification, except that it could fit in a variety of scenarios. My own attempt to put a face on these people appears at the end of v. 19 (p. 375).
19 (2) "Their destiny is destruction." With something of a play on "completed" (v. 12) and "mature" (v. 15), Paul speaks about the eschatological outcome34 of such "enemies of the cross"; it is "destruction."35 This stands in the starkest contrast, both by its wordplay and by its content ("utter loss"), to Paul's "goal" described in v. 14 ("the heavenward call of God in Christ"), which he reiterates in the final contrast in vv. 20-21. Our present bodies may exist in "humiliation"; but they are destined for a "glorious" transformation. But those who have abandoned the cross, both for themselves and as the paradigm for Christian life, are destined for "destruction." The contextual reason for its appearing second in this listing, as over against its logical place at the end, is probably for rhetorical effect. Since the way of the cross is central to Paul's concern, the "end" for those who are enemies of the cross is brought forward to a place immediately following, while the final position, though still climactic, expresses their present "mindset" that differs altogether from his which focuses on the glorious future; and thus it launches the final contrast.
But this phrase also creates difficulty for identification. This language ordinarily refers to those outside Christ altogether — and very well may do so here, even though that seems to stand in conflict with much else that is said. More likely, Paul is referring to some who have appeared as believers, but whose "end" demonstrates that something was wrong with their "faith." They probably consider themselves to be within the household of faith, and most likely are, or were, but whom Paul now assigns to a place outside Christ, precisely because they have abandoned Christ by adopting a lifestyle that is totally opposed to the redemptive work of the cross.
(3) "Whose god is their stomach."36 Here is the clause, along with its companion, "and their glory is in their shame," that presents most of our difficulties.37 Only one thing seems certain: that these two phrases belong with the final one, giving concrete expression to what that one generalizes, namely that they live only for the present; they have set their minds on earthly, not on heavenly, things. The present phrase, which from our distance is especially cryptic, is very close to what Paul says of some "divisive people" in Rom 16:17-18 ("they do not serve Christ but their own stomachs"); in both instances the imagery probably refers to some specific behavior. But to what? "Stomach" may be a metonymy for the craving after sumptuous fare, or perhaps for surfeiting.38 One cannot be sure. Perhaps it is intended to be more representative — of those who are so given over to present bodily desires of all kinds, represented by the "appetites," that such has become a "god" to them.
In any case, this phrase is the basis for some to find "libertines" here. Which may well be the case for this phrase and the next one; but the phrases are otherwise so completely on their own in this letter that one can hardly argue on this basis for a libertine "threat" in Philippi. A greater difficulty rests with those who think Paul is here further describing the "dogs" of v. 2, as sarcasm for their being into "food laws" as well.39 But that seems much too circuitous; and Paul is forthright about this issue elsewhere. All in all, we must again beg a degree of ignorance on this matter, except to repeat that it is almost certainly a specific illustration of the way in which these people have set their minds on earthly things.40
(4) "Whose glory is in their shame." From our distance this clause is even more cryptic than its predecessor.41 It is connected to "their god is their belly" by a single relative pronoun, suggesting that this is the flip side of whatever that one means.42 "Glory" is what they delight in; "shame" is how they should perceive their behavior.43 The word "glory" is undoubtedly another word play, setting up the contrast to our being transformed into the likeness of Christ's present body "of glory" in v. 21. Hence it is an especially striking bit of irony, where not only are they not destined for "glory" at all, because of their present enmity to the cross, but what "glory" they have in the present lies precisely in what should be for them a matter of shame.44 But beyond that, in terms of specifics, we are largely in the dark.45
Again this clause creates all kinds of difficulties for some and opportunities for others in terms of speculations about identity. As with its predecessor, difficulties with this language are greatest for those who identify these people with the "dogs" of v. 2,46 or with some form of enthusiasm. But such readings of the text cause the presuppositions to put more weight on the language than it seems able to bear, since there is nothing elsewhere in Paul or in other sources that hint of such things.
(5) "Their mind is on earthly things." Here is where the whole has been heading right along. Two things are significant for understanding. First, Paul once more uses the crucial verb from 2:2-5 and 3:15. They do not simply "think about" earthly things; their "minds are set on" such things, which stands in pointed antithesis to Paul's own mindset as portrayed in his personal story. His mind is set altogether on Christ, who for Paul is life and for whom to die is gain. Second, what their minds are set on is "earthly things,"47 which not only sums up the preceding two clauses but at the same time sets up the contrast that follows. Here is the second crucial matter. These people over whom Paul weeps are first of all "enemies of the cross"; they are now characterized as those who have abandoned the pursuit of the heavenly prize, in favor of what belongs only to the present scheme of things.48 Their focus is altogether earthward, even if we cannot be sure of how that specifically works out in their case.
Thus this final clause sums up the former two; this is what it means finally to be given over to the "stomach" as one's deity and to "glory" in what should be shameful. By their fruit, Paul says, you will know them; by their focus you will also recognize that they are not walking according to the pattern of Christ and his apostle.
Who, then, are these people? Some things seem more certain than others: first, they are almost certainly to be understood as "insiders" in the sense defined above (as professing Christians from their own point of view, despite how Paul views them); second, they are unlikely to be the same as those mentioned in v. 2; third, they also seem unrelated to anything Paul says about "not having arrived" in vv. 12 and 15;49 fourth, since they are "believers" after a fashion, they can scarcely be the same as those mentioned in 1:28; fifth, it is highly unlikely that they are members of the Philippian community. Moreover, the language "opponents" seems ill-suited to describe them. They are enemies of the cross, to be sure, but that is because of the way they live, rejecting a cruciform existence and a sure future for present self-indulgence. Paul weeps over them, and warns the Philippians against them; but he does not set them up as personal "opponents."
Most likely, therefore, Paul is here picking up on the major concerns of his personal narrative in vv. 4-14, by reminding the Philippians again of some about whom he has often warned them in the past, who have left the way of the cross and have "set their minds" on present, earthly concerns. He is probably describing some itinerants, whose view of the faith is such that it allows them a great deal of undisciplined self-indulgence. Whether they have taken Paul's view of "justification by faith" to a libertine conclusion,50 as many think, is plausible, but probably too specific in terms of what Paul actually says in the text. In any case, they have not appeared heretofore in the letter, and do not appear again. They have served their immediate purpose of standing in sharp relief to Paul's own "walk" and to his heavenly pursuit, so crucial to this letter, and toward which Paul now turns once more as he begins to draw this appeal to an end.
—————————
1. In what appears to be the earliest attempt to tie vv. 18-19 to v. 2, P46 adds a βλέπετε before τούς έχθρούς, thus creating a (nongrammatical) sentence that reads: "For many live, about whom I have told you often before and now say again with tears; watch out for the enemies of the cross, etc."
2. I use this language cautiously, since there are good reasons, as noted in the introduction to 3:15-4:3 (pp. 351-52), to see this larger section as a single flow of thought, which not only concludes the immediate exhortation (from 3:1) but the former exhortation (1:27-2:18) as well.
3. Since most of us read or study this letter in small pieces, it is easy to forget that just a few minutes earlier — in the actual reading of the letter — both Timothy (who looks out for the interests of Christ Jesus) and Epaphroditus (who risked his life for the sake of the gospel) are set before them as among those who "imitate" Christ in this way.
4. For this basic point of view, see also Motyer, 183-84; O'Brien, 444-45; Bauder (NIDNTT, 1.491); and Fowl (DPL, 429).
5. See on v. 13 (also v. 1); cf. 4:1. See also n. 12 on 1:12.
6. Gk. συμμιμηταί μου; the compound appears only here in the NT (see the discussion) — indeed, only here in all of Greek literature. The non-compounded form appears in Paul's earliest letter (1 Thess 1:6; 2:14) and several times thereafter (the verb in 2 Thess 3:7, 9; the noun in 1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Eph 5:1). Elsewhere in the NT, see Heb 6:12; 13:7; and 3 John 11.
7. As well as in the Greco-Roman world, sometimes of a worshiper and his/her deity, which may well serve as the background for it usage in Judaism, since it appears there in the later intertestamental period. On the role of exemplary paradigms in letters of moral exhortation, see the Introduction, pp. 11-12. For the Jewish background see Wis 4:2 (imitating wisdom); Ep. Ar. 188, 210, 281 (imitating God); 2 Macc 9:23 (imitating a holy martyr); Jos. Ant. 1.68 (descendants of Seth who imitated his ways); 8.315 (Asa, who imitated David); Philo, Virt. 66 (Joshua imitating Moses); Congr. Qu. Er. 70. Philo's understanding is found in this latter reference: "for the practiser must be the imitator of a life, not the hearer of words, since the latter is the characteristic mark of the recipient of teaching, and the former of the strenuous self-exerciser" (LCL, 4.493). See Michaelis, TDNT, 4.659-74; Bauder, NIDNTT, 1.490-92; Larsson, EDNT, 2.428-30; Fowl, DPL, 428-31; De Boer, Imitation; H. D. Betz, Nachfolge; Brant, "Place" (see Larsson for a larger bibliography on this idea in the NT).
8. See esp. 1 Cor 4:16, where the Corinthians are to be reminded of Paul's "ways in the Lord." The early believers in Christ did not live by "principles" or by "the Book," but by the living example of those who taught by doing as well as by instruction. Thus the nature of Paul's argument with the Thessalonians in 2 Thess 3:7-10. See the discussion in Fee, First Corinthians, 187-88.
9. On this text and its significance for Pauline theology, see Fee Presence, 45-47.
10. Besides the view adopted here, it could mean either (a) that they are to be fellow-imitators with him of Christ, or (b) that they are to be fellow-imitators of others who are already imitating Paul. In support of (a), Paul has previously used "syn-compounds" to emphasize his and their mutuality (συγκοινωνούς μου in 1:7 [cf. 4:14]; συγχαίρω/συγχαίρετε in 2:18; συνεργών μου και συστρατιώτην μου in 2:25; cf. συνήθλησάν μοι in 4:3); though frequently noted in the literature as an option, it has seldom been adopted (W. F. McMichael, "Followers Together"; and Pollard, "Integrity," are exceptions). The basic difficulty with this view is grammatical. Had Paul intended "together with me," the pronoun would have been dative and thus go with the συν. The genitive (μου) means the pronoun goes with μίμηται as the object of imitation, as always with the occurrences of the non-compounded noun ( 1 Thess 1:6;2:14; 1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Eph 5:1).
The second view supposes that Paul is here pointing to the second part of the sentence. Although adopted more often (e.g., Weiss, Ellicott, Meyer, Kent, Silva, Melick; Earle [Word Meanings, 56]; cf. NIV), this view is the least likely of all, since it runs roughshod over Paul's xαί (pace Silva) and offers a forced sense to the correlative ούτω . . . xαθώς (as in Meyer, 180). It should perhaps be noted also that Michaelis (TDNT, 4.667 n. 13) allows that the compound noun might not have significance at all; but that seems highly doubtful, since the word seems to have been coined (from its cognate verb, to be sure) for the occasion.
11. So the majority of interpreters (inter alia, Lightfoot, Meyer, Vincent, Kennedy, Jones, Plummer, Beare, Collange, Martin, Kent, Bruce, Hawthorne, O'Brien; De Boer, Imitation; Betz, Nachfolge).
12. See on 1:1 (and n. 41 for further references).
13. Gk. περιπατοϋντας; only here and in v. 18 in this letter, but the primary verb in Paul for paraenesis (at least 20 of its 30 NT occurrences in his letters). The usage derives from his Jewish heritage, where God's people are to "walk in the ways of the Lord" (although the verb πορεύεσθαι is used most often in the LXX for this idiom). The point, of course, is that of the NIV, that these people "live" in this way; but the figure is a pregnant one and should not be easily laid aside. After all, the primary imperative in Paul is not, as many would have it, "love one another," but "walk in/by the Spirit" (Gal 5:16). Everything else follows from this one.
14. This a rare "editorial we" in this letter (see the disc, in Hawthorne, 160-61); in light of 2:20-22, it very likely includes Timothy as well (so many interpreters), since he has joined Paul in the writing of this letter and Paul says of him that he is like a son with his father with regard to his relationship to Paul and the gospel. Some (e.g., Lincoln, Paradise, 95) see the ήμάς as including all of Paul's associates, thus suggesting they are also "those who walk thus."
15. Gk. τύπον, here denoting "pattern" or "model"; for this usage in Paul see 2 Thess 3:9; cf. 1 Thess 1:7; 1 Cor 10:6; 1 Tim 4:12; Tit 2:7. The later meaning of "prefigurement," in which one thing prefigures a later reality, is argued for as the sense here by Schunack (EDNT, 3.373); but this is such a forced meaning for the present context that one must judge it as an attempt to force a single sense on all Pauline uses, which does not work well either here or in several of the other texts.
16. Not all think so (e.g. Jones, Plummer, Martin, O'Brien; De Boer, Imitation, 182-83). Plummer, O'Brien, and De Boer see Paul here pointing to leaders (Plummer, "pastors"!) within the congregation. But this seems to go against the plain sense of the language: He addresses the whole community in the first clause ("you [all] join together in imitating me"); it seem unlikely that the next clause then means, "you [all] take note of those [among you] who do in fact walk thus, just as you [all] have us for a pattern."
17. Gk. σκοπείτε; see on 2:4. Here it probably means to "mark, take note of" so as to follow (as Lightfoot); but in light of the very similar passage in Rom 16:17, where it means "mark so as to avoid," it may even here come closer to the sense of "watch for, be on the lookout for" (so EDNT, 3.255). Some (e.g., Martin) see a word play here between this verb and the σκοπόν in v. 14; but that is unlikely, since the point of the two words has no real "play" between them, even though they come from the same root.
18. Martin (142; following Michaelis, TDNT, 4.667-68) asserts: "The passage is really a call to obedience to apostolic authority more than a summons to imitate the apostle's way of life." That is to read foreign matter into this text on the basis of one's (questionable) presupposition that the Sitz im Leben of the text is primarily polemical; and it does special disservice to the plain sense of the present clause.
19. On this matter see the Introduction, p. 27.
20. Cf. Kennedy (461): "Plainly they were persons inside the Christian Church, although probably not at Philippi" (cf. Beare, Hendriksen, Kent, Bruce, Hawthorne). The majority agree in seeing them as believers (of a sort). On the other hand, most scholars assume them to be in Philippi (as, e.g., Martin), but the plain sense of these opening words of v. 18 is otherwise. Jewett ("Conflicting Movements," 376-77) argues otherwise on both counts, that they are not "valid Christians" from Paul's perspective, who were one-time members of the Christian community there but had "left the church."
21. The exceptions are Col 3:7; Eph 2:2, 4:17 (second occurrence), in each case referring to the "walk" of pagans (or former pagans) that is in contrast to that of believers — which could also be the case here, of course.
22. So esp. Gnilka (211, "Irrlehrer") and Martin (143): "These teachers [emphasis mine] were setting up themselves as 'models' of Christian leadership." This is the presup-position of most who use the language "opponents" to describe these people, which ordinarily means they are opponents of Paul who are teaching that which is contrary to what Paul teaches.
23. Except in the more circuitous language of "enemies of the cross." But as many point out (e.g., O'Brien, 453), this almost certainly does not refer to their teaching a doctrine of salvation that differs from Paul's, but to their way of life that spurns the cross. Cf. GNB, "there are many whose lives make them enemies of Christ's death on the cross."
24. Gk. πολλοί; although a general term, it implies that a goodly number were like this (although Schenk and Silva think it more rhetorical and therefore not attempting to say anything about their number). In any case, it seems to exclude nonbelievers since, besides the reasons given in the discussion, that would require οι πλείονες ("the majority"; cf. 1:14). For a convenient listing of the reasons for this conclusion see either Caird, 146, or O'Brien, 452. All of this runs counter to the suggestion of some that Paul is here referring to non-Christian Jews (see n. 28 below).
25. As noted below, the next clause, ους πολλάκις ελεγον ύμΐν ("whom I spoke to you about many times before"), with its combination of first, second, and third person pronouns, strongly implies that those mentioned to the Philippians in the third person ("about whom") are not a part of those to whom Paul is now speaking. For them to be currently within the Philippians community would seem to require the following presuppositions, some of which are highly dubious: (a) a community of considerable size (for "many" to make sense), which may or may not be so; (b) considerable "division" within this large community that would cause Paul to speak of some of them in this way, which is most doubtful; and (c) that the letter has excluded these people all along, since he has been writing to the whole community on the predicate of friendship, which is also doubtful.
26. It is often suggested that the grammar breaks down here, especially with the final clause (οί τα επίγεια φρονούντες) appearing in the nominative, following the preceding accusatives (ους, τους εχθρούς); so Reumann, "Hymnic Fragment," 598. But even though the grammar gets admittedly stretched, very likely the final clause is intentionally nominative and should be understood to modify the subject πολλοί (cf. Kent). In that case, one should perhaps not be so hasty to see the two genitive relative clauses ("whose end is destruction; whose God is their belly and glory is in their shame") to be in apposition to "the enemies of the cross," but already to be grammatically pointing back to the subject πολλοί. If so, and this seems to be the best way to understand the whole grammatically, then the emphasis seems to lie on the first and final members. Thus:
πολλοί περιπατοΰσιν
ους πολλάκις ελεγον ύμΐν
(νϋν δε xαί κλαίων λέγω),
τους έγθρούς τού σταυρού τού Χριστού,
ών τό τέλος άπώλεια.
ών ό θεός ή κοιλία
xαί
ή δόξα έν τη αισχύνη αύτών,
οί τά έπίνεια φρονούντεα
27. This is the clear sense of the combination of the adverb πολλάκις (= many times, frequently; cf. Rom 1:13; 2 Tim 1:16) and the iterative imperfect έλεγαν (= "I used to tell you"). This is the language of parents to children. For this kind of reminder of former "warnings" see Gal 5:21.
28. Indeed, he comes very close to this in Rom 9:2, where he says about fellow Jews who have not believed in Christ that for the sake of Christ he has "great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart" over them. Hawthorne (164) rightly points out that Paul does not speak of weeping "for" anyone, and thus conjectures, in keeping with his viewpoint that the "opponents" are non-Christian Jews, that the weeping may be out of frustration.
29. Gk. κλαίων, a verb used elsewhere in Paul only of the mutual "weeping" that believers have for those who are "weeping" (1 Cor 7:30; Rom 12:15); he expresses the present sentiment twice elsewhere with the noun "tears" (2 Cor 2:4, over his "sorrowful letter"; 2 Tim 1:4, of Timothy's tears at their former parting); cf. Acts 20:19 and 31.
30. So Weiss. For those who think Paul is here speaking about non-Christian Jews, see n. 38 on v. 2. There are no analogies in Paul or the rest of the NT for describing non-Christian Jews with the content of these five phrases ("enemies of the cross" might be the one exception). In Paul, see, e.g., 1 Thess 2:14-16, which is especially harsh but has nothing in it that even borders on the present description.
31. Cf. Motyer (185): "In the long run it makes no odds whom he is decrying, and it is better not to attach the verses too firmly to any situation in the past. . . and the description is perfectly clear even if the names are absent." I am less convinced as to anything being "perfectly clear" in this passage; but this is a proper caution.
32. One can never divorce "walking (by the Spirit) in the ways of God" from a "theology of the cross" in Paul; nor does the present context allow for an interpretation of "enemies of the cross" that is purely theological (as, e.g., Koester, "Purpose," 325). It is ultimately that, of course, given the next clause ("whose τέλος is destruction"), but Paul's concern at this point is with their "walk," and in Paul that is never a simply theological matter.
33. On the alleged "Gnosticism" behind this language, see n. 21 on v. 8.
34. Gk. τέλος, the adjective from which the verb in v. 12 and noun in v. 15 have been formed. It means "the end" in the sense of "the goal" toward which something has been pointing; thus, "destiny." But it is hard to escape the conclusion that Paul is here offering a word play. His own destiny is to be "completed" (τετελείωμαι) by his full knowing of Christ at the eschaton; but he — and the Philippians — already have arrived at a measure of that destiny, hence they are "mature" (τέλειοι) in Christ, even if not yet fully completed. But these people have a different eschatological "end" (τέλος) altogether. Cf. Schenk, Silva, O'Brien. For this usage, cf. Rom 6:21, referring to the pagan past of his Gentile readers, το τέλος έκείνων θάνατος ("the end of those things is death"); and esp. 2 Cor 11:15, of the "false apostles" who preach "another gospel." ών τό τέλος εσται κατά τα εργα αύτών ("whose end shall be in keeping with their works"). Koester ("Pur-pose," 326) takes the unlikely position that Paul is using the language of his "opponents" here, thus negating Pauline usage as offering any help.
35. Gk. απώλεια; cf. 1:28 (η. 56) of those in Philippi who stand in opposition to the believers there. This is the language of eternal loss; it is generally reserved by Paul to describe the eternal destiny of those outside of Christ.
36. Gk. κοιλία; cf. 1 Cor 6:13 and esp. Rom 16:18. These two passages make it clear that Paul is referring to the "stomach" as such, not using it as a circuitous way of referring to the "flesh," as some would have it (Gnilka, Caird, Schenk, O'Brien; Klijn, "Opponents," 283; Lincoln, Paradise, 96). This seems to be theological wishfulness on the part of its proponents, since it lacks linguistic and contextual support.
In what appears to be a massive misreading of the evidence, Mearns ("Identity," 198-99) takes up the mistaken notion of Behm (TDNT, 3.186) that κοιλία in the LXX sometimes denotes "the male sexual organ." But the primary passages listed in support do not refer to the penis, but to "the fruit of the loins," to use older terminology. In Mearns' "most blunt" passage (Sir 23:6) the RSV does not translate κοιλίας δρεξις as "lust," as Mearns asserts, but (correctly) "gluttony" (= "the longing of the belly"). It is συνουσι-ασμός that is translated "lust." Thus the idea that "κοιλία and αισχύνη are euphemisms for the circumcised male organ" (198) is a creation out of thin air.
37. Grammatically, the two clauses are held together by a single relative pronoun, indicating that in Paul's mind they go together, probably as often with this kind of usage, as two sides of one reality. Both clauses are elliptical, requiring a copulative verb, which most likely should appear as in the NIV.
38. In 1 Cor 15:32 Paul cites Isa 22:13 to the effect that those without hope in the resurrection may just as well "eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. " But that is hardly the same thing as making the stomach one's god. The closest analogy is found in Euripides (Cyclops, 334, 335), where Cyclops, with the words δαιμών and γαστήρ, says, "I offer sacrifice to no god but myself, and to this belly of mine." The "stomach" (usually γαστήρ) is used variously by Greco-Roman writers as a metonymy for gluttony and the like: Seneca refers to people who are "slaves of their bellies" (Ben. 7.26; cf. Xenophon Mem. 1.6.8; 2.1.2), and in another place of seeking "the good of man, not that of his belly" (Vit. Beat. 9.4); whereas Lucian (Patr. Laud. 10) uses "stomach" in a context of "people measuring happiness by their appetites."
39. An ancient view (held by Ambrosiaster, Hilary, Pelagius, Augustine, Theodoret, Bengel) and revived in modern times by Barth, Müller, Klijn, Hawthorne; Gunther, Op-ponents, 98. But there is no analogy for such usage anywhere in Paul or the NT. It is striking that Hawthorne, e.g., rejects the "libertine" view on the basis that there is no analogy in Paul, but then presents his own case as though there were, which in fact there is not. Besides the fact that nothing in the present language nor from any outside sources supports a metonymy for food laws, this seems to be much too strong a denunciation for what Paul elsewhere allows for Jewish Christians, as long as they do not thereby judge others (Rom 14:1-17); in fact by his own testimony he eats "kosher" when with Jews (1 Cor 9:20).
40. So also most interpreters.
41. It is common to find an allusion to sexual immorality here (Plummer, Collange; Bultmann, TDNT, 1.190; Schmithals, Paul, 110-11; Jewett, "Conflicting Movements," 381); this is sometimes objected to as not reflecting NT usage (so Koester, "Purpose," 326), but in light of Rom 1:27 that seems to be an assertion over against the evidence itself.
42. Hawthorne, 166, suggests that ή κοιλία and ή δόξα serve as compound predicate nouns to the subject "God." But see the critique in Silva, 212.
43. Silva (210), following Gnilka, suggests that αισχύνη here refers neither to immoral behavior nor to circumcision, but should be read in light of 1:20 as referring to "the objective disgrace that falls on those who come under divine judgment." But the context is that of moral/immoral behavior (as both the imitatio motif and the verb "walk" make certain). It is the Pauline view that life in sin is a life of "shame" (Rom 6:21, "the things of which you are now ashamed" ; cf. 2 Cor 4:2). More unlikely still is Mearns's view (see n. 36 above) that "shame" refers to the circumcised male organ. Athough he suggests he will support this view with detailed exegesis, he offers no (valid) linguistic grounds nor parallels.
44. Two passages may serve as background to Paul's use of this language. In Hos 4:7, God says, "I will make your glory (δόξα) into dishonor (άτιμίαν)"; in Sir 4:21, in a context of not being ashamed to be oneself, the proverb goes, "For there is a shame that leads to sin, and there is a shame (αισχύνη) that is glory (δόξα) and grace" (cf. Prov 26:11a LXX). Paul's clause reads ή δόξα έν τή αισχύνη αύτών. His point seems very close to that of Hos 4:7, even if his language is not.
45. It takes considerable confidence in one's ability to read between the lines, not to mention the need to make several exegetical "jumps" (e.g., to see "glory" here as related to "boasting" in v. 3!) to see this clause (as does Martin et al.) in terms of the opponents' "glorying" in "their powerful presence as charismatic figures in the church, claiming to be a special breed of Christian who had 'arrived' " (145).
46. Those who take this view (the majority) see the shame as referring either to the genitals or the nakedness exposed during circumcision. This is even more circuitous than its predecessor. And in any case Paul never considers circumcision shameful. Rather, it is irrelevant. Therefore, even though Jews may continue to practice it, they may not impose it on Gentile converts.
47. Gk. τα επίγεια; used by Paul primarily in contrast to "heavenly" things (cf. 1 Cor 15:40; 2 Cor 5:1), but only here in a pejorative sense (cf. Jas 3:15). Koester ("Purpose," 328; followed by Jewett, "Conflicting Movements," 378-89) sees Paul's use of the phrase as an "ironic" twist of the view of his "opponents" (they were into "heavenly things," but Paul sees them as merely "earthly"); but that is to turn Paul's own usage on its head for the sake of a hypothesis which exists only by reading between the lines.
48. Cf. Col 3:2: "Set your minds (φρονείτε) on things above (τα άνώ), not on earthly things (τα έπί της γης)."
49. Those who think otherwise are dependent on two exegetical "jumps" to make it work: that Paul is speaking about "perfectionism" and that the specific brand of "per-fectionism" is "spiritual" not ethical. Neither of these accords well with the data in the respective texts.
50. As the wag in the Middle Ages is reported to have put it: "The world is remarkably well arranged; I like to sin and God likes to forgive sin."