2. Their Gift as Partnership in the Gospel (4:14-17)
2. Their Gift as Partnership in the Gospel (4:14-17)1
14 Yet it was good of you to share in my troubles, l 15Moreover2 as you Philippians know, in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel, when I set out from Macedonia, not one church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only; 16for even when I was in Thessalonica, you sent me aid3 again and again when I was in need, 17Not that I am looking for a gift, but I am looking for what may be credited to your account.
Returning to the language of the thanksgiving in 1:3-8, Paul resumes what he began in v. 10, moving it a step forward. In v. 10 he joyfully received their gift as tangible evidence that their care for him had "blossomed afresh." Since their gift met his material needs while imprisoned, it is also evidence of their being partners with him in his affliction (v. 14), and thus of their partnership with him in the work of the gospel (v. 15). As in 1:5-7, their love for Paul and serving the cause of the gospel blend. After all, to love Paul is to love the gospel.
In vv. 15-16 this "partnership" is expressed in the language of Greco-Roman friendship, language that untangles much in this letter.4 He recounts their history of material support in terms of their having entered into a "giving and receiving" relationship with him, which is the first mark of friendship. "Giving" is what has been renewed. But friendship also presupposes reciprocation. In terms of the principle established in 1 Cor 9:ll,5 their gift is already to be understood as reciprocation; but having now "received" their gift, it is Paul's turn to reciprocate, which he does beginning in v. 17. The gift itself, he reminds them (cf. v. 11), is incidental; what he desires is for them to experience "an ever-increasing balance in their [divine] account" (= divine reciprocation), which in this first instance has to do with eschatological reward. Present "reciprocation" is promised in v. 19, now in terms of God supplying their various needs (including material ones).
As with the preceding sub-paragraph, where Paul transformed the language, and thus the significance, of the Stoic idea of "contentment" into something radically Christian, so here. The language is that of Greco-Roman friendship, which in this case is not so much "transformed" as it is totally subsumed under the greater reality of the gospel, thus giving friendship new meaning.
14 The "yet" with which this sentence begins is the certain evidence that vv. 10-13 do not constitute a paragraph on their own. This particular adversative is Paul's way of "breaking off a discussion and emphasizing what is important" (BAGD).6 Thus, even though Paul's life is not determined by "need" —he has learned "contentment" whether full or hungry — "nonetheless," he now comes back, picking up the thread of v. 10, "what you did in my behalf was a good thing."7
Paul's emphasis lies on the "good" they did. But not yet is the "good" the gift itself; that is reserved for the end (v. 18). This sentence resumes the acknowledgment begun in v. 10, where Paul referred to the gift as "a renaissance of your caring for me." Here that is elaborated in terms of their "partnership/participation with him8 in his affliction." This returns to the language of 1:7, where Paul gives reason for his thanksgiving in terms of their being "partners/participants" together with him in his chains and in the defense of the gospel. In the present instance he refers to his imprisonment with the broader word "affliction,"9 used most often to refer to afflictions suffered by believers because of their relationship to Christ. It is an especially appropriate word in this case because not only did they "participate" with h im in his affliction by sending their gift, but they did so in the context of their own affliction, noted in 1:29-30 and 2:17 and hinted at elsewhere.
15-16 Reintroduction of the language "participation" launches Paul into a brief rehearsal of the Philippians' considerable — and exemplary — history in this regard. He begins with an emphatic reminder, "now you know, even you Philippians yourselves."10 The content, which elaborates the theme of their "participation/partnership" with him, is in some ways quite remarkable, since it tells their story, and is thus well known to them.11 Our interest in the passage is with both the what and how and the why. The why we will note briefly at the end; first a look at what Paul says, including how he says it, which is of interest in two ways.
First, he reminds them of their past "partnership with him in the gospel"; but, second, that reminder is couched in the language of friendship, indeed of the primary expression of friendship in Greco-Roman antiquity, "partnership in the matter of giving and receiving." The narrative itself forms an "inclusio" around the theme of friendship:
A 15At the beginning of the gospel,
when I set out from Macedonia,
B not one church shared with me
in the matter of giving and receiving,
except you only;
A' 16for even in Thessalonica,
once and again,
you sent (aid) for my need.
Part A takes them back to the beginning of their association with Paul, from the time he first departed from Philippi, carrying through beyond his departure from Philippi to his departure from the province (Macedonia). Part Β takes up the theme of friendship, their "partnership with him in the matter of giving and receiving," emphasizing in particular their singular history in this matter. Part A' reemphasizes both of these realities by reminding them that "even in Thessalonica," at his first stopover after leaving Philippi and even before leaving Macedonia, they had already ministered to his physical needs on several occasions. The result is a threefold emphasis: (a) on their friendship (- "partnership in giving and receiving"); (b) that it goes back to the beginning of his association with them; and (c) that they were the only church with whom he had entered into this kind of "contractual friendship."
(A) What Paul reminds them of first is that their "partnership" with him in "giving and receiving" has to do with the gospel, that it goes back to "the beginning of the gospel," which, given that the narrative is for their benefit and thus from their point of view, refers back to the time of their origins as believers in Christ.12 His emphasis in this initial phrase is twofold:
(1) that the "friendship" into which he and they had entered, of which he will speak next, has its focus not just on his and their own personal relationship, but is a three-way bond that includes Christ and the gospel — the "glue" that has cemented their relationship and that gives it significance (see on 1:5); and
(2) that this partnership goes back to their beginnings as Christians.
Second, he reminds them that the outworking of this "partnership in the gospel" stems from the time13 he "set out from Macedonia." This phrase is somewhat ambiguous, since on the one hand Paul frequently uses the provincial name when referring to Philippi in particular,14 while on the other hand it technically refers to the province and should refer to the time when (or after) he left Berea (Acts 17:10-15). Given the preceding vocative, "you Philippians," which particularizes them within Macedonia, and the way he further qualifies their role even in Thessalonica, a Macedonian city, he almost certainly intended them to hear this clause in the sense of his departing the province.15 Why he should mention this aspect first, before that of Thessalonica (v. 16) which chronologically came first, is something of a puzzle.16 Most likely the "narrative" is typically imprecise, as such personal recountings of "history" often are. He begins, as the emphasis in the context dictates, by focusing on their long-term relationship, hence "after he left Macedonia"; but since Thessalonica is also in Macedonia and the Philippians had already been serving him in this way even while he was in Macedonia, he (apparently) adds the qualifier in v. 16.
The concrete evidence for such "partnership" beyond Macedonia is to be found in 2 Cor 11:8-9, where in defense of his not having entered into such a contractual friendship with the Corinthians Paul argues: "I 'robbed' other churches by receiving support from them so as to serve you. And when I was with you and needed something, ... the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed."17 Whether, and if so how extensive, this ministry carried on beyond the time in Corinth cannot be known. Lacking other such fortuitous moments of verification like the one in 2 Corinthians, we can only guess that it extended beyond Corinth, but we cannot be certain.
(B) This material functions as the main clause in Paul's sentence. Its primary concern is to point out that they are the only church with whom Paul had entered into "contractual friendship." That is expressed twice, at the beginning and end of the clause: "no other church . . . except you only." It is further emphasized by the addition of the final clause (v. 16) which not only points to their repeated expression of this dimension of friendship, but also joins v. 15 to exclude Thessalonica from such an arrangement with Paul.
The nature of this "arrangement" is to be found in the language "in the matter of giving and receiving," which is the key to much, not only in the present passage but also to the letter as a whole. This has long been recognized as a metaphorical use of "commercial" language, traditionally interpreted as indicating Paul's stance toward their gift(s).18 Thus the phrase "in the matter"19 means that they have "opened an account" with Paul (Goodspeed), in which there is mutual "credit" (giving) and "debit" (receiving).20 This understanding is corroborated by the extension of the metaphor in v. 17, where their giving is understood by Paul in terms of "interest that accumulates in this way to your divine credit" (Moffatt), and further in v. 18 with the expression, "you have paid me in full" (Goodspeed). This usage is so well established both in the papyri and in literary works that it is quite impossible for the Philippians to have understood it differently.
What was not recognized traditionally is that this commercial metaphor had already been co-opted within the context of Greco-Roman "friendship," especially to refer to "consensual" friendship, which would be evidenced by a mutual "debt and credit" (giving and receiving), that is, gifts and services understood as "benefits" mutually given and received.21 This is almost cer-tainly how we should understand Paul's usage. The combination "shared with me in"22 also reflects the metaphorical use of this technical language, thus meaning something like, "you alone entered into partnership with me in this matter." The language is intended to express both the mutuality and the reciprocity of such "giving and receiving." What is unique to Paul's relationship with the Philippians is that their "partnership" with him was not so much "one on one," as it were, but a three-way bond — between him, them, and Christ (and the gospel).23
This third factor results in a considerable "skewing" of the convention. Left intact is reciprocity and mutuality; "skewed" is the form these take in Paul. The discussions in Greco-Roman literature of "giving and receiving" in relation to friendship indicate that they often ended up in (sometimes destructive) one-up-manship. If reciprocity did not exceed the former gift, the original recipient came under long-term "obligation"; thus mutuality degenerated into a kind of "patron-client" relationship where one party "held the upper hand." But in Christ, Paul's relationship with the Philippians has been "leveled out" in its own divine way. On the one hand, a "patron-client" relationship already existed between him and his churches, in his role as apostle. This is why even in a letter of friendship like this one Paul can take such a strong hortatory stance. What is remarkable is how little he plays that note in this letter at all; rather, he and Timothy are "slaves of Christ Jesus" in their behalf, and rather than simply exhort by way of imperative, he appeals to his own example as the model for them to follow. Whatever else, they are in this (that is, in Christ) together.
On the other hand, another form of "patron-client" relationship had also long ago been established between him and them with regard to his personal, material needs. As far as we have records to guide us, in Philippi alone among his churches did he accept patronage while present with them, in this case in the household of Lydia. When he went on to Thessalonica, he chose a different course, deliberately "working with his own hands" so as to set such a model before the Thessalonians (2 Thess 3:7-10), a practice he continued when he went to Corinth (1 Cor 4:12).24 As a result, the Philippians also alone among his churches had entered into "partnership with him" regarding his material needs, apparently assisting him as they were able and had opportunity. Thus, he became "client" to their "patronage," in this sense.
But precisely because their "friendship" was predicated on their mutual belonging to Christ, these two expressions of "patron-client" relationship were leveled by total mutuality and reciprocity. How he deals with his end of the "reciprocity" is what vv. 17 and 19 are all about. In any case, this is the relationship to which Paul is here calling their attention by way of reminder; his concern is to remind them that he has this unique relationship with them alone among all "his" churches.
(A') As a further reminder of the uniqueness of their "friendship," Paul adds a final explanatory clause, "for25 even26 (when I was) in Thessalonica, once and again, you sent unto my need." This clause does three things. First, it joins v. 15 to exclude Thessalonica from the same kind of contractual friendship that he has with them; "Macedonia" means the province, and when he set out from the province, Thessalonica did not join with them in sending him aid,27 even though it was the much larger and more influential city in Macedonia. Second, it reminds them of how they had repeatedly upheld their end of the "giving and receiving" from the time he first left Philippi. "Once and again"28 believers from Philippi traveled the 145 kilometers (95 miles) down the Egnatian Way to Thessalonica to assist with Paul's material needs. In comparison with getting to Corinth or Rome (and especially to Caesarea),29 this was "a piece of cake." Third, as in 2:25, he now mentions their gift to him as "for the sake of supplying my need."30 If he felt compelled to establish in vv. 11-13 that his joy over their gift was not grounded at this level, which could be viewed as utilitarian, neither did he intend to deny that they had in fact ministered to his "need." At the same time, he sets up the reciprocal language of v. 19, where God picks up Paul's end of the mutuality by supplying "all their needs" in Christ Jesus.
Finally, the question of "why this sentence at all" needs to be addressed, even if our answer is more speculative. That is, why this reminder of what, by his own admission, they well know? And why this emphasis on their being the only church to have entered into this kind of "partnership" with him? A couple of reasons may be suggested. First, such a reminder is itself an indication of the happy relationship he has with this church. The mention of "being paid in full" in v. 18 makes clear that no hidden motive, such as "putting them under obligation," lies behind it. Rather, as often happens in an interchange between friends, one partner in the friendship takes delight in reminding the other how that one has expressed friendship in the past. Paul's point, then, is that their present gift, even though after a hiatus of some years, represents yet another in their long and laudatory history in this regard. Second, in ways far more profound than the use of the verb "to thank," this is Paul's way of saying thank you for this long history of their "giving" and his "receiving." There is good evidence from the Greco-Roman world that the actual expression of "thank you" was not a part of friendship as such. As strange as it may seem to us, true friends did not need to express thanksgiving directly in order for it to be received.31 What Paul is most likely doing here in keeping with social convention is thus expressing his "thank you" indirectly, but even more tellingly, by rehearsing their history in this way.32
The final "why" question, why he should have entered such a relationship with only one church, lies in the area of pure speculation and will not detain us. That he did so, is what we learn from this passage, and nothing more.
17 With another "not that" (cf. v. 11), Paul interrupts his expression of gratitude with yet another qualifier against possible misunderstanding.33 His short recital of their exemplary history of friendship with him in the matter of "giving and receiving" is not to be taken as an indirect request for more help.34 Exactly the opposite, and now picking up on the commercial metaphor itself, what he "seeks,"35 he tells them, is "the fruit that increases into your account," by which he means metaphorically, "an accrual of 'interest' against your divine 'account'." When unpacked, the metaphor expresses Paul's real concern for them, found as early as 1:25 in terms of "your progress in the faith." Their giving to him is an expression of love, of the gospel at work in their midst. For Paul every time they do so, it is also evidence of "fruitfulness," of the kind for which he prayed in 1:11. Such "fruitfulness" has the effect of being entered on the divine ledger as "interest," as the certain indication of the increase of their "fruitfulness," which will find its full expression at the coming of Christ. They themselves will be Paul's eschatological "reward" (2:16; 4:1); their gift to him has the effect of accumulating "interest" toward their eschatological "reward."
The metaphor, however, does not need to "walk on all fours" to be understood, or even to carry punch. Paul's interest is not in their "reward" as such, but in their gift as evidence that their relationship with Christ is in good order and is continuing to grow. He does not thereby negate the gift; indeed, he finally speaks directly to that in the next sentence. But here is the certain evidence that his ultimate concern is for them — far more than for his own material needs. Their gift, which serves his "physical health," serves more significantly as evidence of their "spiritual health." What else would one "seek," one wonders, in a relationship such as theirs, which is predicated altogether on their mutual belonging to Christ?
Many years ago a wise preacher counseled some younger ministers that Satan has three hounds with which he pursues those in ministry: pride, money, and sex. Money is surely not the least of these. It is therefore of some interest for us to note how sensitive Paul is on this matter. He can scarcely speak about it, and especially his relationship to receiving it, without offering a demurrer such as one finds in v. 17. This may well account for his (apparent) change of policy when he got to Thessalonica. There were enough itinerant religious and philosophical hucksters about, who, according to Dio Chrysostom, "used flattery as a cloak for greed" (cf. 1 Thess 2:4), for Paul to set out on a different course of maintenance upon leaving Philippi. Thus he can appeal to both Thessalonica and Corinth that his motives were totally free of pecuniary interests ( 1 Thess 2:1-10; 2 Cor 12:14-15). Paul did not "seek what is yours, but you" (2 Cor 12:14). A lesson in paradigm for all who are in Christian ministry of any kind.
The uniqueness of this passage in the corpus comes into focus here. For in Philippi he did accept their material support once and again. This says something significant about his relationship with this church, and here it is hard not to see the hand of Luke (and Lydia?) at work. Thus he gladly acknowledges their gift, but even here one finds the demurrer. These verses put much into perspective. They know him well; they also know that from them alone among his churches has he accepted gifts on an ongoing basis. The key to all of this is v. 14, read in light of 1:29-30; 2:6-8; and 3:8-10. Their relationship is not a kind of business transaction, despite the use of commercial metaphors throughout; rather, their gift is evidence of their being in partnership with him "in affliction" and for the sake of the gospel.
Thus he concludes that money — material support of his own needs — is ultimately irrelevant; what counts is what God is doing in their lives. Their gift serves as evidence of "fruitfulness" that will only gain interest toward their eschatological "reward." In an oppressively materialistic culture, these words are written off as saccharine spirituality — or "sour grapes" — so as to justify ongoing greed. My sense is that Paul has the better of it, and that truly Christian life lies closer to where he and they were than where many of us are.
——————————————
1. As noted above (n. 12 on νv. 10-13) this is not a paragraph in its own right, but it follows the "pattern" of vv. 10-13 and makes its own distinct contribution to the overall expression of gratitude. Hence the reason for isolating it in the present discussion.
2. Lying behind this "moreover" is a δε xαί. The δέ is omitted by P46 D* pc, probably due to homoeoteleuton (οΐδατε δε).
3. Paul's Greek reads εις τήν χρείαν μοι έπέμψατε (= you sent to me for my need), which is just awkward enough for it to have been considerably tampered with in the process of transmission. One strand of "correction" (P46 A D* 81 104 326 1175 1241s 2464 pc) omitted the είς (= "you sent what I needed"), although this is most likely purely accidental (resulting from homoeoteleuton, δις είς). Another strand (D L Ρ 323 614 629 630 pc) changed the μοι to μου, an understandable, "logical" variation.
4. Contra many who see it as some form of "thankless thanks," in a pejorative sense; see nn. 2 and 3 on 4:10-20. Sampley (Partnership, 51-77), on the basis of the commercial language (see on vv. 15-16, 17) suggests that the passage represents a version of "consensual societas," in which Paul and the Philippians have entered into a form of contractual "partnership" in the gospel. Simply put, Paul preaches, they pay — although in Sampley's version the gospel modifies the relationship somewhat. This suggestion has been picked up and applied vigorously by Capper ("Dispute"), who reads the whole letter in light of an alleged "dispute" between Paul and the Philippians over (a) Paul's ending up in prison, thus not fulfilling his end of the "contract"; (b) the Philippians' not sending him money as a result; and (c) our letter as his follow-up after their "pay" has been re-instated, explaining that they have read his imprisonment incorrectly and thus barely giving thanks for what he saw as his due. Besides missing the fact that the commercial language had already been co-opted by writers on friendship, this view strains Paul's language considerably (see nn. 30, 34, 35 below), and must reinterpret the friendship motifs in purely "utilitarian" terms (see n. 14 on 4:10-13). Capper's version in particular reflects a trend to mirror read "opposition" between Paul and his churches behind every sentence in his letters where moderns feel uncomfortable with the way Paul expresses himself (see further the Introduction, p. 7 n. 24).
5. That is, "material" support from his churches is his due because he has ministered the life of the Spirit to them (see n. 8 on vv. 10-13). Meyer, Hawthorne, et al., object to the use of the 1 Corinthians reference with regard to the present passage because it "mixes" two kinds of giving and receiving, which stands over against their "literal" understanding of the commercial language. But the objection misses the friendship (and therefore metaphorical) dimension of the language here, which has to do with reciprocity, not an actual business transaction.
6. Gk. πλην, see above on 3:16 and the discussion on 1 Cor 11:11 in Fee, First Corinthians, 522; cf. Zerwick-Grosvenor (602), "but still."
7. Gk. καλώς έποιήσατε (cf. Acts 10:33), for which the American slang, "you did good," offers a literal, if ungrammatical, "translation." Καλώς is the adverb of the adj. καλός, which variously means "good, beautiful, pleasant, noble, splendid." The English equivalent "well" would lose too much of the sense of the Greek. The NIV chose to keep the sense of the adverb, but did so at the expense of the verb; "it was good of you" seems a bit bland for the Greek idiom. It should also be pointed out that the combination καλώς έποιήσατε also plays havoc with those views which see Paul in 4:10-20 as "virtually condescending" (Capper) or as involving "some measure of rebuke" (Michael). See n. 4 above and nn. 2 and 3 on 4:10-20.
8. Gk. συγκοινωνήσαντες (cf. the adj. in 1:7), a modal participle (= in this way); thus they "did good" by sharing his affliction with him. This anticipates the noncompounded form of the verb that recurs in v. 15, for whose meaning see the discussion on 1:5. My infelicitous "translation" is an attempt to capture both nuances in the verb, the primary one of "participating" in something, which in 1:5-7 and here means also to "participate" as "partners" with Paul in both his suffering and the gospel. The redundant συν prefix in particular emphasizes their participating together with him in his affliction. Cf. Lightfoot (164), "It was not the actual pecuniary relief, so much as the sympathy and companionship in his sorrow, that the apostle valued." See further n. 87 on 1:7.
The attempt by Sampley (see n. 4 above) to make κοινωνία the equivalent of the Roman societas (= contractual "partnership") has special difficulty with this compound, since the dative μου τή θλίψει indicates that the koinonia is in Paul's affliction, not "partnership" in a financial pact. Thus Sampley sees this usage as "incidental" (p. 60). It is not surprising that Capper avoids discussion of this verb and its corresponding adjective (1:7) altogether (cf. Beare [153], whose fault is even greater, since he wrote a commentary and did not so much as mention this verb and its prepositional phrase in commenting on this verse). This passage joins 1:7 and 3:10 (in light of 1:29-30) to indicate that the first meaning of the word group in Philippians has to do with "participation" in the sufferings of Christ, which Paul, by way of paradigm, declares to be his highest value and to which he desires his whole life to be conformed.
9. Gk. μου τή θλίψει; for θλΐψις cf. 1:17 above. See the helpful overview by J. Kremer, EDNT, 2.151-52; cf. NIDNTT, 2.807-9 (R. Schippers). Although it is true that this word often inherently carries eschatological overtones (so Schlier, TDNT, 3.144-47, followed by Kremer; cf. Martin [164, followed by Melick], who rejects any reference here to Paul's imprisonment — despite 1:7 and 17), such overtones are only minimally present in this case, where there is no eschatological significance attached to Paul's present "affliction" by imprisonment.
The grammar is difficult. Ordinarily one would have expected μοι της θλίψεως, had Paul intended "sharers together with me in the affliction," in which case the μοι would pick up the "together" in the συν, and της θλίψεως would be a genitive with xοινωνέω. Nonetheless, this is probably what Paul in fact intended with the present combination. By bringing the "my" forward for emphasis (a rare "vernacular possessive" [see on 2:2], which occurs with the pronoun μου only in Rom 11:14; 1 Cor 9:27; Phil 2:2; and Phlm 20 among scores of occurrences), Paul puts θλΐψις in the dative as his way of emphasizing the "togetherness" inherent in the συν. The result is even greater emphasis on their being sharers in the affliction itself, while the "vernacular possessive" emphasizes that they share it with Paul.
10. Gk. ο'ίδατε δε xαί ύμεις, Φιλιππησιοι. The δε marks a transition in the narrative; the combination xαί ΰμεΐς ("even you yourselves") and the vocative, "Philippians," together create the impression of strong emphasis on what he is about to narrate — a way of saying, "sit up and take note of what I am about to say." As noted on 1:2, the rare use of the designation "Philippians" also calls attention to their present earthly situation. Here it is used as an expression of affection (so most interpreters), contra Michael (218; cf. Hawthorne, 203), who sees it as intended "to soften or tone down a rebuke, lest perchance it might seem too severe."
11. One might compare this passage with sentences in Cicero and Seneca, which appear in their discussions of friendship: "Services . . . ought to be kept in mind by him for whom they were performed and should not be mentioned by him who performed them" (Cic. Amic. 71; LCL 20.181); "In the case of a benefit . . . the one should straightway forget that it was given, the other should never forget that it was received" (Sen. Ben. 2.10; LCL 3.67). Paul's sentence is evidence that he does "not forget it"; at the same time, he "mentions it" for the Philippians — hence the emphasis on their "knowing it" — since it would be impolitic for them to do so.
12. Thus the NIV's expanded translation, "in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel." For this understanding, cf. the discussion of the similar phrase in 1:5 (so most interpreters, e.g., Meyer, Vincent, Kennedy, Jones, Plummer, Dibelius, Lohmeyer, Müller, Hendriksen, Gnilka, Collange, Martin, Bruce, O'Brien). There has been an unusual amount of speculation over this phrase (cf. the articles by Glombitza, "Dank"; Suggs, "Concerning" [see the overviews and critique by O'Brien, 531-32]; Beare, who finds no solution satisfactory; and Capper, "Dispute," 204-6). For its meaning here, see the identical usage in 1 Clem 47:1 ("what did he [Paul] first write to you in the beginning of the gospel?"). Writing to Corinth some forty-five years after the founding of the church and some forty years after 1 Corinthians, to which he is referring, Clement uses this phrase from the Corinthians' point of view to refer to their origins as Christians, even though 1 Corinthians was written several years after their "beginnings." The present context calls for the same sense.
13. Gk. οτε έξήλθον, which can mean either, "at the moment I set out" (Meyer, et al.), or (more likely) "after I had set out," where the Greek aorist has a pluperfect sense, as it often does in narrative (Burton, Moods, 23-24; so, e.g., Lightfoot, O'Brien). Which view one takes depends in part on how one understands this initial clause in relation to the final clause in v. 16. Since the "pluperfect aorist" is such a common practice, there is no good reason to suppose that the Philippians were tracking Paul's moves from the moment he left Berea (his last stop in Macedonia) so as to offer him financial support; and in any case we have firm evidence of such ministry in Corinth (2 Cor 11:9). Moreover, the evidence in 1 Thess 2:9 and 2 Thess 3:8 demonstrates that their "ministry to his needs" did not begin to cover all the living expenses for him and his companions.
The very awkwardness of the sentence when taken literally (that he entered into partnership with them after he had left Macedonia, hence well after he had left them) suggests that Paul's sentence is expressed "carelessly," which I take to mean "casually," precisely because it is not calculated but is the stuff of personal narrative. After dictating v. 16, Paul saw no need to "clean up" the sentence because he knew the Philippians would understand him well enough, even if we are less sure. This rather "casual" way of expressing himself throws considerable doubt on Capper's reconstruction that it refers to a prior arrangement they had made with Paul that their "consensual partnership" with him should begin after he left Macedonia. That is conjecture, pure and simple, and does not accord well with what Paul actually says.
14. This could have been guessed at in several instances (2 Cor 1:16; 2:13; 7:5); it is made certain by 2 Cor 11:9, quoted below, which in combination with this verse narrows "Macedonia" down to Philippi alone.
15. Which, along with the ascensive xαί in v. 16 ("even in Thessalonica"), makes it extremely unlikely that he intended at this point to include the instances mentioned in v. 16. as well (as Michael contends [which he says is the "natural" reading of the text!]; cf. Loh-Nida).
16. Not to mention the cause for all kinds of conjectures and "solutions" to the rather imprecise way in which all of this is said. See n. 13.
17. This bracketed emphasis on "you only among the churches," with the obvious exclusion of Thessalonica, creates some tension with the plural in 2 Cor 11:8-9 ("I robbed other churches," in a context of mentioning the brothers from Macedonia), which has been variously handled (if at all). B. Holmberg (Power, 91-92) reads the present sentence (on the basis of "at the beginning") to imply that by the time Philippians was written, other churches by now had joined in such "giving and receiving"; he then finds the plural in 2 Cor 11:8 to confirm this view. While this is attractive, it seems to run counter to the evidence from the Thessalonian and Corinthian correspondence noted below (p. 445; cf. n. 24), and especially to that of the 2 Corinthians passage, which refers to an event very soon after he left Macedonia for the first time! Reumann ("Contributions," 441-42) adopts Holmberg's reconstruction, adding that the bracketed emphasis in the present passage is an "exaggerated captatio benevolentiae" (a polite way of "buttering people up"). A captatio may praise someone (or group) highly, but to emphasize (as Paul does here) what amounts to be a flatout lie (on the view that 2 Cor 11:8-9 has it right, and this is a polite "gesture" toward the Philippians) is hardly the stuff on which friendship is built. The best solution to the plural in 2 Cor 11:8 has to do with Paul's emphasis there; most likely "other churches" means "other believers."
18. Which ranges from "embarrassment" to an actual business transaction. Cf., e.g., C. H. Dodd, "Mind (I)," 71-72, who sees Paul as having "a well-to-do bourgeois" attitude toward money, needing it, on the one hand, but embarrassed by such a need, on the other. Thus he "covers up his embarrassment by piling up technical terms of trade, as if to give the transaction a severely 'business' aspect"; he is followed by Beare (155). Earlier Kennedy (472; cf. Beare, Martin) saw the usage as intentionally offering "a genial strain of humour" to the word of acknowledgment. J. Fleury ("Société"), on the other hand, considers Paul to have actually entered into a business partnership with Lydia, to which he is here referring, which has rightly been described as "fanciful" (Capper, "Dispute," 201). Cf. the summary of such views in Peterman, "Giving," 19-24.
19. Gk. εις λόγον, which as a commercial idiom means literally to "settle an account" (see the references in BAGD, 2 b). See esp. Sir 42:3, among a list of things for which one should not feel ashamed (v. 1): "of keeping accounts with a partner [περί λόγου κοινωνού]" (NRSV). Thus, NEB, "my partners in payments and receipts."
20. Gk. δόσις xαί λήμψις; for this usage in commercial transactions, see Sir 42:7 (in the same list of items from the preceding n.): "and when you give or receive, put it in writing [xαί δόσις και λήμψις, πάντα έν γραφή]" (NRSV). That the same language refers to "social reciprocity," see Sir 41:21; cf. the discussion in Peterman, "Giving," 53-54.
21. In this regard see the discussion by P. Marshall, Enmity, 160-64; and Peterman, "Giving," 59-60, 63-104. See, e.g., Plutarch, De Lib. Educ.. 14 (IIB),regarding Antigonus, king of the Macedonians, who sent to Theocritus that he should come to him xαί λόγον δούναι και λαβείν, which Babbitt translates (LCL, 1.53) "engage him in discussion." The usage in Herrn. Man. 5.2.2 (περί δόσεως ή λήμψεως) also seems to be a case in point. Lightfoot (165) understands it literally, as referring to the passing of money between the two, but the context suggests otherwise. The "mandate" is discussing how "an angry temper works," in that it leads astray those who are "empty-headed and double-minded" (5.2.1). "For," Hermas picks up in 5.2.2, when it insinuates itself into the head of such people they become "embittered over worldly concerns, either about food or something trivial, or some friend, or about giving or receiving, or some such foolish matters" (Lightfoot, AF-, 220-21). The collocation of "giving and receiving" with "friend" is probably not accidental, and belongs to the context of reciprocity in friendship, rather than to financial transactions as such.
22. Gk. μοι. . . έκοινώσησεν εις. This idiom explains both the specialized use of the verb in this case as well as the unusual usage of εις with it. For the usage see Plato, Rep. 5.453A (τη τοϋ άρρενος γένους κοινωνήσαι είς απαντα τα εργα; [whether the female human nature can] share with the male in all tasks."
23. See the phrase "at the beginning of the gospel" (v. 15). Cf. O'Brien (535), who suggests, "Marshall's point may be taken further by noting that both the Philippians' gifts and their friendship with the apostle derive from and are an expression of their 'partnership in the gospel from the first day until now'."
24. See also the testimony recorded in Acts 20:33-34 for the same practice in Ephesus. See n. 17 for some who take a different view. On the larger question of how "itinerants" (philosophers/religious propagandists) were supported (fees, begging, patronage, working) see Hock, Social Context, 52-59.
25. Gk. ότι, which some (e.g., Kennedy, Michael, Gnilka, Collange, Hawthorne) see as a second object clause dependent on οιδα. But that seems unlikely, since it makes the sentence more "calculated" than it probably was (see n. 13).
26. Not all are persuaded that this xαί is ascensive. Some (Morris, "απαξ," 208; Martin; Reumann, "Contributions," 439-40 [Bruce and O'Brien are favorably inclined]) see this xαί and the xαί preceding απαξ as coordinate, meaning "both . . . and" (= "both in Thessalonica and once and again [beyond Thessalonica]"). But that is an altogether unnatural reading of the Greek. There is nothing grammatically coordinate (or in keeping with Paul's own "balancing" style) between "in Thessalonica" and "once and again"; and the usage in 1 Thess 2:18 includes the xαί with the idiom και απαξ xαί δίς (see next η.).
27. Contra Reumann ("Contributions," 440), who on the basis of the plural in 2 Cor 11:8 (see n. 17) asserts, "Thessalonica must have contributed." This passage stands squarely against that.
28. Gk. και απαξ xαί δίς, lit. "both once and twice," which is equal to our idiom "once and again," or "more than once" (so Morris, "απαξ"); cf. 1 Thess 2:18. Morris also points out that the idiom does not intend many such occasions (as the NIV, following BAGD, "again and again"), but two or three at the most.
29. The fact that Caesarea and Philippi are not on a "beaten path" best explains the hiatus in their giving.
30. Gk. τήν χρείαν, again in v. 19. This is the common word for "need"; the word ύστέρησις in v. 11 indicated "lack," which often could mean "need" as well, but not necessarily so. The definite article probably indicates "the need at that time." Sampley (Partnership, 55), in the interest of his view of this relationship as "consensual societas" (n. 4), suggests on the basis of an entry in LSJ that the word should be broadened to include "requests." But his discussion has moments of questionable methodology, in which he rejects what he calls "corpus harmonization" (= finding meaning here from usage elsewhere in Paul), but accepts a classical usage for which he offers no hellenistic data in support. The word clearly means "need" in Paul; to make it mean "request" here would require not only firm contemporary evidence, but evidence within the context of "contractual partnership." Not only so, but Paul has just used the appropriate language for "request" in v. 6.
31. In this regard see esp. Peterman, " 'Thankless Thanks'," who cites P. Merton 12 (CE 58), "I may dispense with writing to you with a great show of thanks (μεγάλας ευχαριστίας); for it is for those who are not friends that we must give thanks in words." Peterman points out that at issue in the citation is verbal gratitude, with which he may dispense because of friendship, but that such a disclaimer followed by an expression of indebtedness nonetheless functions as "thankless thanks" — of a positive sort.
32. Lightfoot (164) thinks otherwise, that he is reminding them of his willingness to receive such gifts from them, in light of his refusal to do so from other churches.
33. On the "pattern" involved with this demurrer, see p. 425 above; for a detailed examination of the similarities between vv. 11 and 17 see Schenk (44-46; O'Brien [536-37] gives a convenient overview in English).
34. Gk. το δόμα, elsewhere in Paul only in Eph 4:8, in a citation of the LXX. It is used especially in the contexts of friendship to describe the "gifts" of reciprocity; thus it here refers to their most recent gift, picked up in v. 18, as τα παρ' υμών ("the things from you"). Contra Sampley and Capper (n. 4), who on the basis of some scattered papyrological evidence, suggest "payment" here; but such a sense in not found anywhere in biblical Greek, and runs counter to the context of friendship that pervades this discussion.
35. Gk. επιζητώ, only here (twice) and Rom 11:7 in Paul. It is an intensified form of ζητέω, meaning here something close to "strive for." On Collange's mirror reading this verb to suggest that Paul had actually asked them for help, see n. 3 on 4:10-20 (cf. Capper, "Dispute," 199 n. 10 = "a legal 'demand' "). The repetition of this verb in the second clause seems to render this view impossible. Does Paul intend to say, "but I request/demand that you receive interest etc."?