Additional Notes §29
§29 Second Conclusion: Food for Thought (Phil. 4:8–9)
In thought and action alike the readers are urged to concentrate on those things that are both good in themselves and beneficial to all.
4:8 / Finally, brothers: practically the same wording as in 3:1.
If “the mind is dyed the color of its waking thoughts,” then what one thinks about gives character to life. As good food is necessary for bodily health, so good thoughts are necessary for mental and spiritual health. Paul lists six such things, and then urges the Philippians to think about such things; that is, “take them into account” or “give them weight in your decisions” (F. W. Beare). Set your minds on such things, he says, and having set your minds on them, plan to act accordingly—whatever is
(1) True. This could be a warning against indulgence in mental fantasies or baseless slanders. But even some things that are factually true are not healthy things to dwell on: whatever is true has the moral qualities of uprightness and dependability, of reality as opposed to mere appearance.
(2) Noble. This word (Gk. semnos) is particularly common in the Pastoral Letters; this is its only NT occurrence outside those three documents. A mind that concentrates on ignoble matters is in danger of becoming ignoble itself. Nobility is the converse of that vulgarity which debases all moral currency and is incompatible with the mind of Christ.
(3) Right, or righteous (Gk. dikaios). The propriety of righteous thoughts and plans needs no emphasizing: God himself is righteous and loves righteousness in his people (Ps. 11:7). The converse to this is found in the wicked man who “even on his bed … plots evil” in order to carry it into action when daylight comes (Ps. 36:4; cf. Amos 8:4–6).
(4) Pure. The word (Gk. hagnos) has the general sense of innocence (as in 2 Cor. 7:11) or the special sense of chastity (as in 2 Cor. 11:2). Purity of thought and purpose is a precondition of purity in word and action, as opposed to “sexual immorality, or … any kind of impurity, or … greed” which should not even be mentioned among God’s people (Eph. 5:3).
(5) Lovely. (Gk. prosphilēs). Lovely things are those that commend themselves by their intrinsic attractiveness and agreeableness. They give pleasure to all and cause distaste to none, like a welcome fragrance.
(6) Admirable. (Gk. euphēmos). A thing is admirable in this sense if it deservedly enjoys a good reputation. The mind that dwells on such things rather than on those that are disreputable has much in common with the love that takes more pleasure in what is to other people’s credit than in what is to their discredit (1 Cor. 13:6).
There is a rhythmic quality about the Greek text of verse 8 (as there is in the familiar KJV rendering: “Whatsoever things are true …”). This suggests that Paul may be quoting some well-known words of ethical admonition. The virtues listed are not specifically Christian; they are excellent and commendable wherever they are found. But in a Christian context such as they are given here they take on the distinctive nuances associated with the mind of Christ.
Such things, then—things that are excellent or praiseworthy—are to be pondered and planned; the results will be beneficial for life and action.
4:9 / Once again the note of the imitation of Paul is struck. By teaching and example Paul had shown his converts how to live and act, thus imparting to them the ethical tradition that stemmed from the teaching and example of Jesus. If they put these lessons into practice, then their conduct will be the outward expression of the habits of mind inculcated in verse 8.
Thus the God of peace will be with them. He is the God of peace; it is not only that he gives us peace; peace belongs to his very character. He is “the author of peace and lover of concord”: dissension and strife are “acts of the sinful nature” (Gal. 5:20). To have the God of peace himself is even better than having the peace of God (v. 7). “The God of peace” is a recurring designation of God in the NT—especially in Paul’s letter closings (Rom. 15:33; 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:11; 1 Thess. 5:23) and also in Hebrews (13:20).
4:8 / Finally, brothers (Gk. to loipon, adelphoi): the pronoun “my” (Gk. mou) is absent here, whereas it is expressed in 3:1. On the repetition of to loipon see pp. 17, 19, and 101 above.
Noble: Gk. semnos, “dignified.” The quality of semnotēs, according to Aristotle, is “a mild and seemly gravity” (Rhetoric 2.17.4); it is the mean between areskeia, obsequiousness, subservience, and authadeia, incivil stubbornness (Eudemian Ethics, 2.3.4).
Admirable: J. B. Lightfoot (ad loc.) suggests an active meaning for this adjective (euphēmos): “fair speaking” rather than “well spoken of.”
If anything is excellent: lit., “if there is any goodness” (Gk. aretē, “virtue,” “excellence,” not found elsewhere in Paul).
Think about: Gk logizesthe, “reckon,” “take into reckoning.”
4:9 / Received: Gk. parelabete. Here we should probably recognize the verb paralambanein in the sense “receive by tradition” (the correlative being paradidonai, “deliver as tradition”), as in 1 Cor. 15:1; Gal. 1:9; Col. 2:6; 1 Thess. 4:1. The tradition (paradosis) of Christ in the NT has three main components: (1) a summary of the gospel story, whether it takes the form of preaching (kērygma) or confession of faith (homologia); (2) a narration of the deeds and words of Christ; (3) ethical and procedural guidelines for Christian living. It is the third of these categories of tradition that is in view here. See R. P. C. Hanson, Tradition in the Early Church; F. F. Bruce, Tradition Old and New.
In the presentation of Paul’s example here, as in 3:17, W. Schmithals discerns a polemical note, as though Paul were warning the Philippians against what they might have “learned and received and heard and seen” in others (Paul and the Gnostics, pp. 112, 113).