Part 114
v. 14 may be a snatch of an early hymn (such as may be found under a heading such as 'The Gospel' in older hymnbooks today). If sung by early congregations it would function both as a recall to their conversion, as a reminder (like Rom 13:11) that falling asleep is a constant threat to be resisted, and as a promise of final waking from sleep, resurrection from death, and enlightenment from Christ.
The structure is particularly close to that of Col 3:18-4:1, which probably provided the precedent for those which followed (here and i Pet 2:18—3:7; cf. e.g. Titus 2:1—10; Didache 4:9—11; i Clem 21:6—9). Th£ core teaching is fairly conventional (good ethics are by no means exclusively Christian). But the conventional is transformed by the Christian sense that all relationships have to be lived 'in the Lord' and with the unselfish, sacrificial love of Christ as the pattern and inspiration.
In the final paragraph the contrast between unwisdom and wisdom (w. 15-17) in effect draws upon the accumulated wisdom of Proverbs, Ben Sira, the teaching of Jesus gathered in the Sermon on the Mount, and so on. But it adds the ominous note recalled from 2:2 that such wisdom is needed because the context of the life of faith is stamped by evil (v. 16). That is why conduct must be 'careful' (v. 15; still attractive is the older KJV translation, 'walk circumspectly') and the significant time (the sense of the Gk. word used here) must be 'bought up' (v. 16). The latter exhortation is just the same in Col 4:5, and the metaphor more evocative than clear, but the emphasis is presumably on discerning and acting upon all too scarce opportunities for good and the gospel in the midst of lives which are all too pressurized and constricted, v. 17 pre-
In the first part of the rule (5:21-33) the transformation begins at once. That wives should be subject to their husbands
(5:22; Col 3:18; i Pet 3:1) accorded with the moral sensibilities of the time; here we need to recall that in the law and ethos of the time households were patriarchal institutions and that the paterfamilias (father of the family) had absolute power over the other members of the family. But the rule is already softened by prefacing it with a call to be subject to one another (5:21; cf. Gal 5:13; i Pet 5:5): in a Christian household the power of the paterfamilias was not absolute. And the reminder that wifely submission is to be 'as to the Lord' (5:22) sets the whole relationship within the primary context of mutual discipleship (cf. Mk 10:42-5).
"77 E P H E S I A N S
classic word in this context) and instruction; at the same time it was recognized that such power unwisely handled could easily provoke or goad youths and young men to a resentment which was destructive of household order and family. Again the Christian qualification is added—'the training and instruction of the Lord' (cf. Prov 3:11).
It is true that the placing of the relationship of husband and wife parallel to that of Christ and church (5:23—4) seems to set the wife in an intrinsically inferior status (cf i Cor 11:3). But that again reflects the ethos of the time (the marital law which treated wives as the property of their husbands was only changed in Britain in the igth cent.). And the main thrust of what follows is clearly intended to transfuse and transform that given relationship with the love of Christ. The paradigm for the husband is Christ as lover and saviour, not as lord and master.
The final pairing in the household code is slaves and masters (6:5-9). Th£ exhortation to slaves is closely modelled on Col 3:22—5. Again it is worth noting that they too are here recognized as full members of the congregation and having responsibilities as Christians to discharge the duties which their status as slaves laid upon them (cf. i Tim 6:1-2; Titus 2:9—10). If any are surprised that Paul did not question the morality of slavery, they should recall that slavery only became a moral issue as a result of the slave trade (only two centuries ago), and that in the ancient world slavery was simply an economic phenomenon, slaves being essential to the smooth running of the economy (though by no means solely on the bottom rung).
The beautiful imagery of 5:25—7, so beloved at wedding ceremonies, has in view the purificatory bath which the bride took prior to and in preparation for the wedding ceremony; Christ's self-giving had an analogous cleansing in view (cf. Ezek 16:8—14). Perhaps there is a side glance at baptism, but the primary thought is of the (corporate) Christian life as equivalent to the time between betrothal and the wedding ceremony, the marriage itself only taking place at the return of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Rev 19:7—8; 21:2, 9—10). The cleansing is evidently a spiritual cleansing, and it comes 'by the word' (5:26; cf. i Cor 6:11; Titus 3:5-6; Heb 10:22).
The exhortation recognizes the reality of slavery: obedience had to be unquestioning and orders carried out with fear and trembling (many masters treated their slaves harshly). Butthe thrust of the exhortation is to provide the slaves with the right motivation, so that their service might lose its servile character and become a way of serving the Lord with sincerity of heart (6:5), doing the will of God with a will, and not (as we might say) as clock-watchers or solely to catch the master's eye or to curry favour with him (6:7). Slavery too can be a form of discipleship (cf. i Cor 7:20-4). At the same time, they are reminded that their earthly masters are only that (6:5), and that both slave and free will receive from their heavenly Lord the appropriate recompense according to the good they have done (6:8; cf. 2 Cor 5:10).
5:28—33 develops a different aspect of the imagery, drawn from Gen 2:24 (5:31; cf. Mt 19:4—6). The idea of 'the two become one flesh' invites a twofold corollary: that a healthy love of the other is inseparable from a healthy respect for oneself (5:28—9; cf. Mk 12:31; Rom 13:8—10)—an important psychological insight; and that the love of Christ sustains the mutual love of husband and wife within the corporate context of the church, of their being individually and jointly members of his body the church (5:30, 32; cf. Rom 12:5).
The final exhortation (5:33) maintains the emphasis on each and every husband's responsibility to love his own wife. The wife is not so counselled, for the love in view is not marital or family love so much as the sacrificial and non-self-serving love of the more powerful for the disadvantaged. In a situation of given inequality between husband and wife the appropriate response of the wife was to respect her husband.
In 6:9 the point is driven home directly to those in the congregation who were slave-owning householders (the assumption is that the household as a whole is Christian). In the spirit of OT slave legislation (Lev 25:43), they should forbear from threatening their slaves, remembering that both they and their slaves have the same Lord in the heavenly places, and that he is an impartial master—a common OT motif (e.g. Deut 10:17; 2 Chr I9:7) echoed elsewhere in the NT (Acts 10:34; R°m 2:11; Col 3:25; Jas 2:1).
The second pairing within the household code (as in Col 3:20—1) is children and parents (6:1—4). As with the submissiveness of wives, so the obligation of obedience to parents (6:1) was a widely recognized virtue in the world of the time. But again it is qualified by an 'in the Lord' (though the phrase here is missing from some important MSS). And just as noteworthy is the unusual feature in such codes, of children being directly addressed; evidently they were regarded as responsible members of the house churches where such a letter as this would be read out. As in the case of the previous exhortation to husbands (5:25-33), so here the basic exhortation of Col 3:20 is elaborated, on this occasion by drawing in the scriptural authority for it—Ex 20:12 and the slightly fuller version of Deut 5:16—with the exegetical note inserted to point out that this was the first commandment with promise. As in other similar cases, the NT writer saw no difficulty in applying a promise relating to Israel's prosperity in the promised land to Gentile believers in another part of the Mediterranean world.
(6:10-20) Put on the Armour of God The final strand of exhortation is one of the most vivid portrayals of the Christian life as a spiritual struggle, indicating the power of the hostile forces (w. 10—12), the means of withstanding them (w. 13—17), and the need for co-operative effort (w. 18-20). The metaphor, be it noted, is of warfare, not of a school debate or of a business enterprise. Asa piece, it is clearly constructed from a sequence of allusions to well-established Jewish motifs, particularly that of YHWH as the Divine Warrior (Isa 59:17; Wis 5:17-20). The writer would no doubt be conscious of the fact that the armour he describes is depicted by Isaiah especially as YHWH's own armour, armour which YHWH dons to effect judgement on human sin and social injustice (Isa 59:12-18).
In contrast, the advice to fathers is left stark (6:4). Again it is fairly conventional. Only the father is addressed: the paterfamilias had sole legal authority over his children and primary responsibility for their paidtia (training or discipline; the
The spiritual opposition is described both as 'the devil' (cf. 2:2; 4:27; Jas 4:7; i Pet 5:8—9), and as cosmic and spiritual powers in the heavenlies (w. 11—12; cf. Rom 8:38—9; Col 1:16; 2:15). With this information added to that of the earlier refer-
E P H E S I A N S 1178
Pauline thought (Rom 1:17), just as the breastplate and shield have a similarly defensive function (hence i Thess 5:8). Trust itself can be exposed to quite a battering, but trust sustained keeps inviolate the one who so trusts (cf. Rom 4:16-22).
ences to the heavenlies (1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10), we are given a clearer picture of the heavenly regions—presumably as a sequence of heavens (cf 2 Cor 12:2—3), in which the lower heavens (nearer to earth) are inhabited by hostile powers, and the upper heavens are where Christ is seated (1:20-1). Modern cosmology is very different, and the extent to which such names ('rulers, authorities, cosmic powers') were already perceived to be metaphorical is unclear. What matters is the recognition that there are forces active through human fear and greed which can captivate whole groups and even societies and wreak all forms of evil, from the most subtle ('the wiles of the devil'; cf. 4:14) to the most inhuman. Those who have lived through any three or four decades of the twentieth century should need no convincing on that score. To designate them as 'spiritual powers' helps prevent such evil from being treated lightly or superficially (they are not merely 'flesh and blood') (see e.g. Wink 1984: 84-9).
5. Helmet (v. 17). Here we are back with familiar imagery (Isa 59:17; i Thess 5:8; though in Wis 5:18 the helmet is 'impartial justice'). In i Thess 5:8 the helmet is 'the hope of salvation', which reflects the thought of the earlier Paulines that salvation is a still future goal (but 'hope' is confident hope). Here, however, as in 2:5 and 8, the question is raised whether the perspective has changed: that which keeps the head of the body (cf. 4:15) safe is the security of salvation realized and not just the confident hope of it.
6. Sword (v. 17). Notably the one offensive weapon is doubly denoted as 'of the Spirit', and as 'the word of God'. Again the imagery reflects older usage (Isa 49:2; Hos 6:5; cf. Heb 4:12). What is in mind is not just the written word, as though the thought was simply of the believer being well versed in scripture, able to cite the appropriate passage for all occasions (cf. Mt 4:1-11). The Spirit is here seen as an inspiring force, the Spirit that inspires the word from God appropriate to the occasion (Mk 13:11; Rom 10:8—17; J P£t l:25)- ^ is no accident that the enabling of powerful speech is one of the most regular charisms and marks of the Spirit in the NT (e.g. Acts 4:8; i Cor 2:4-5; I2:8» IO); despite immense developments in communication, the force of the spoken word is still immeasurable.
The appropriate and necessary response (given the character of this evil) is to seek a strength commensurate with and more powerful than that evil—a spiritual strength to match a spiritual crisis (cf. Rom 4:20; i Cor 16:13), a strength from God, the strength of God himself (v. 10; the first OTecho—Isa 40:26). Correlated with (or an elaboration of) this strength is the equipment of the Divine Warrior, 'the panoply of God'
(w. n, 13). Only that equipment and empowering will provide the fortitude and the means to withstand in a day when evil seems to be rampant (cf. 5:16), and having done all within one's power, still to stand one's ground; the sign of God's enabling is not so much clear-cut victory over evil, as the sustained will to resist evil, come what may.
The final stress is on prayer (w. 18—20), not, somewhat surprisingly, as part of the continuing metaphor of spiritual armour, but emphasizing none the less (by the greater elaboration given to the request) its importance in the warfare just described. Christian soldiers must never forget that they need constant help from God. Moreover, since the previous imagery had been somewhat individualistic (despite the plural verbs), this last addition helps underline the importance of co-operation and mutual support in the warfare. Like the speaking (v. 17), the praying should look to the Spirit for inspiration (cf. Rom 8:26-7; I Cor 14:15; Jude 20); and the military mood is retained in the calls for alertness and application (6:18; cf. Lk 21:36).
The list of equipment is inspired by earlier, briefer metaphors, and the metaphors themselves are not fixed (e.g. in i Thess 5:8 the breastplate is faith). Nevertheless, the appropriateness of this listing is notable.
i. Bdt (v. 14). In a day when clothing was much looser, it was necessary for the flowing cloak to be fastened firmly by a belt, otherwise movement would be hindered and action impeded (cf. Lk 12:37; I7-8)- To be caught out in deceit or falsification was like tripping over one's own clothing; the belt of truth prevents one being 'caught with one's pants down'.
The transition from exhortation to personal request (w. 18— 20) seems to be modelled on Col 4:2-4 (cf. Lk 21:15; Mk 14:38), with a final recapitulation of the 'mystery' motif and play on the contrast between Paul's imprisonment and his boldness as commissioned by God (3:1—12; cf. 2 Cor 3:12; 5:20; Phil 1:20; i Thess 2:2).
2. Breastplate (v. 14). The metaphor draws directly on Isa 59:17 (and Wis 5:18), describing YHWH's breastplate. There it is the fact that what God does is right which makes his judgement invulnerable to criticism (of partiality). Here the thought is of God's acceptance of those who trust in him as their breastplate which keeps them equally secure in the face of hostile criticism (cf. Rom 5:1-2; 8:31-4).
Conclusion and Benediction (6:21-4)
3. Shoes (v. 15). This is a more original image, but no doubt adapted from Isa 52:7, a passage which is also echoed in Acts 10:36 and cited in Rom 10:15. Why the word 'preparation' is added is unclear, but it strengthens the impression that what is in view is the responsibility of the church and believer to speak out the gospel of peace with God. Mission is the best form of defence; the church on the move will be more surefooted in face of the encroachments of evil.
Most of w. 21-2 is almost verbatim Col 4:7-8. It is of course conceivable that Paul wrote both letters at more or less the same time (thus unconsciously or deliberately giving Tychicus precisely the same commission each time). But the perspective of the letters is too different for that to be the most obvious solution. And in a letter thus far marked by its lack of specific reference to particular situations, this brief personal note rings somewhat oddly. It is more likely, then, that the author has drawn the language from Colossians to indicate the very Pauline effect he hoped his letter would have, and as an expression of what Paul would have wished to say had he himself still been able to dictate such a letter.
4. Shield(v. 16). Again theimagery is original; more typically God is a shield (e.g. Gen 15:1; Ps 18:2,30; 28:7); in Wis 5:19 the shield is 'holiness'. But 'faith' is also appropriate (cf. i Pet 5:9). Faith and righteousness are two sides of the one coin in
"79 P H I L I P P I A N S
Since Tychicus appears only in the later Pauline letters (Col 4:7; 2 Tim 4:12; Titus 3:12; see also Acts 20:4) he probably emerged only in the Pauline circle at a late stage; like Epaphras (Col 1:7) he is remembered as a beloved brother and faithful servant of Christ. Whatever the precise historical circumstances, the reference reminds us that there must have been regular contacts between the Pauline churches.
Best, E. (1987), 'Recipients and Title of the Letter to the Ephesians:
Why and When the Designation "Ephesians"?', ANRW 2. 25. 4
(Berlin: de Gruyter), 3247-79. Bruce, F. F. (1984), The Epistles to the Colossians to Philemon and to the
Ephesians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans). Caragounis, C. C. (1977), The Ephesian Mysterion (Lund: Gleerup). Dunn, J. D. G. (1989), Christology in the Making, 2nd edn. (London:
SCM). Fee, G. D. (1994), God's Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the
The final benediction (w. 23-4) is unusual in Paul, but it strikes the regular notes of grace and peace (1:2) and links them with two of the great Pauline words—love and faith
Letters of Paul (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson), 658-733. Lincoln, A. T. (1990), Ephesians, WBC 42 (Dallas: Word). Mitton, C. L. (1951), The Epistle to the Ephesians (Oxford: Clarendon). Schnackenburg, R. (1991), The Epistle to the Ephesians: A Commentary
(love with faith'). Effective also is the final balance between divine enabling ('from [both] God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ') and human response ('all who have an undying love for our Lord Jesus Christ').
(Edinburgh: T. £T. Clark). Schweizer, E. (1979), 'Traditional Ethical Patterns in the Pauline and
Post-Pauline Letters and their Development (Lists of Vices and House-Tables)', in E. Best and R. McL. Wilson (eds.), Text and Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 195—209. Wild, R. A. (1985),' "Be Imitators of God": Discipleship in the Letterto
the Ephesians', in F. Segovia (ed.), Discipleship in the New Testament
Balch, D. (1981), Let Wives be Submissive: The Domestic Code in i Peter
(Philadelphia: Fortress), 127—43. Wink, W. (1984), Namingthe Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress).
(Missoula; Scholars Press). Earth, M. (1974), Ephesians (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday).
69. Philippians ROBERT MURRAY, SJ
A. Character and Main Concerns of the Letter. 1. Equalled only by Philemon, Philippians is the most personal of Paul's letters. Among the categories listed by ancient theorists
2. Apart from Acts, Philippians is our only source for the origins of this church. Lydia had been a Jewish God-fearer. All the people named in Philippians except Clement are Greek, but this does not exclude their having become Christians via Judaism. The church was doubtless mixed in ethnic and social character. It probably met in house-groups (Peterlin 1995: 135-70). By the time of the letter it had officers called episkopoi and diakonoi (1:1); presbuteroi are not mentioned. Paul refers to the Philippians' suffering for Christ (1:27-30; 2:15-17) and refers to 'opponents' (1:28), but without identifying them. Motives for hostility can be imagined on the part (respectively) of the civic authorities, the pagan public, Jews opposed to Christians, and Jewish Christians opposed to Paul.
(Malherbe 1988), it combines features of a hortatory 'letter of friendship' (Fee 1995: 214) with those of a 'patronage letter' (Bormann 1995: 161—205). Unusually for Paul, the OT is seldom cited; his argument is passionately centred on Christ, yet he often uses Stoic language (see PHIL E).
2. Although the letter's contents are conditioned by practical matters, the main emphasis is on strengthening the commitment and faith of the Philippian Christians, as was Paul's regular aim (Meeks 1983: 84-107). He urges them to follow the example of Christ in union with him (repeatedly expressed by 'sharing', koinonia and its compounds), so as to grow in a Christlike mindset guiding both belief and action. This is expressed by several recurring verbs, especially phronein, 'think' or 'feel', which, together with 'rejoice', chairein, virtually structures the letter, creating a major indusio from beginning to end.
3. The references to disunity have evoked many hypotheses (O'Brien 1991: 26—35). Theories of Gnostic opponents (Fee 1995: 19—32) are unconvincing. Tellbe (1994) plausibly suggests a crisis facing Gentile Christians unprotected by Jewish exemption from Roman cult practices. Others propose grounds for the quarrel mentioned in 4:2, especially disagreement over financial support for Paul (Peterlin 1995: 101—32, 171-216). This letter of only rarely polemical tone is subjected by some to a process which Barclay (1987) calls 'mirrorreading'; both the method and its criteria are open to criticism (Fee 1995: 7—10). Discord in the Philippian church at this time is probably best explained by the situation of Gentile converts vis-a-vis Roman civic pride and official cult and a tempting compromise offered by Jewish Christians (Tellbe 1994).
B. The Addressees. 1. Philippi (Bormann 1995) stood on the plain of eastern Macedonia, about 16 km inland from its port Neapolis. It was refounded as a city by Philip II of Macedon in 358—357 BCE. Prosperous from mineral deposits and its location on a main east-west route, Philippi came under Roman rule in 167 BCE. Octavian, after gaining supreme power in 31 BCE, settled veterans here and gave the city the status of a colonia with citizenship by ius italicum. The population would have been mainly Macedonians, Greeks, and Romans. Acts 16:12-40 recounts Paul's visit with Silas (about 50 CE), conversion of Lydia, and misfortunes before he revealed his citizen status. The alarm of the city magistrates and their anxiety to see the last of Paul and Silas doubtless gave Christianity a prejudiced start.
C. Paul's Situation. 1. The common view till this century was that Paul wrote from Rome in the early 6os CE. Even if he was only under house-arrest (Acts 28:30), this could mean painful frustration. On this view 'the (praetorium) imperial guard'
P H I L I P P I A N S 1180
5. Evaluation: whatever the origin of this undeniably poetic passage, it actually exists only in Phil 2; the exegete must expound it in that context. If Paul quoted an existing text, by himself or another, it became part of his letter; any argument for its detachability raises similar problems to those for denying the letter's integrity (Hooker 1978). Arguments against Pauline authorship risk being circular (Fee 1995: 45). Hypotheses about the development of Christology have been allowed to determine the exegesis of the passage, again producing circular arguments. Heightened poetic style does not prove non-Pauline origin (Martin 1983: 57; Fee 1992). Recent literary analysis emphasizes that the passage is integrally embedded in its context and the whole letter. Many of its keywords recur, subtly transposed, in ch. 3 (Dalton 1979: 99—100; Garland 1985: 158—9). This does not prove it was not an already existing text, but isolating it becomes increasingly problematic.
(1:13) and 'the emperor's [Caesar's] household' (4:22) would be in their regular bases in Rome itself.
2. Many today favour an earlier imprisonment, most preferring Ephesus in the mid^os, about the probable time when Paul wrote 1-2 Corinthians and Romans, to which Philippians is said to be close in doctrine. Though there is no direct evidence for such an imprisonment, i Cor 15:32 and 2 Cor 1:8— 10 might refer to it. Some epigraphic evidence is cited to argue that 'praetorium' and 'Caesar's household' could refer to a provincial governor's establishment. Communication between Philippi and Ephesus would be easier and quicker than with Rome.
3. Evaluation: in 2 Cor 11:23 Paul l°°ks back on 'many' imprisonments, so that in theory any of them could be possible. However, the case for Ephesus is linked to the doubtful theory that Philippians is an amalgam (see PHIL D.2); the fewer letters are posited, the less need there is to suppose a shorter distance to be travelled. Similarities with Romans and i—2 Corinthians need not tell against Philippians being dated a few years later. The epigraphic evidence is judged not relevant by Bruce (1980-1). In fine, the arguments for Ephesus have not overcome those for Rome (Fee 1995: 34-7)-
6. These expressions of reserve, however, do not deny that the passage's theological importance reaches wider than its immediate function in Philippians, or that its pattern of Christ's descent and ascent is paralleled in other early Christological statements in solemn style.
E. 'Stoicism' in Philippians. 1. The frequency of Stoic language in Philippians is emphasized by Engberg-Pedersen (1994). The evidence is seldom noted even in larger commentaries. When compelling examples such as autarkes (4:11) cannot be denied (e.g. Fee 1995: 427-35), commentators insist that Paul radically transforms Stoic themes, which are generally disparaged. Yet the use of Stoic ideas in Luke's account of Paul's sermon in Athens (Acts 17:22-31) is matched by passages in Paul's letters. In fact Stoicism had appeal for both Jewish and Christian preachers, i Clement, which should be dated not much later than 70 CE (Herron 1989), that is, only about ten years after Philippians, is full of Stoic ideas and terms, all interwoven with biblical, Jewish, and Christian themes.
D. Critical Questions. 1. Pauline authorship of Philippians is almost universally acknowledged, apart from some theories about 2:6—11.
2. The letter's unity and integrity have been challenged on grounds of apparent breaks in coherence and an order thought to be unsuited to its purpose (e.g. Collange 1979). Many hold that it has been re-edited from two or three letters by Paul, but disagree on where the cuts and rejoins are. The main reasons offered are an apparent ending and abrupt new start at 3:1, and the improbability that Paul left his thanks to the end.
3. Criticism (cf O'Brien 1991: 10-18): no manuscript evidence suggests disturbance of the text. Any theory that an existing text has been rearranged by a redactor must show that it solves difficulties in the text better than maintaining the traditional arrangement. For Philippians it must explain credibly why and how the supposed redactor wove several letters by Paul into a new composition. In fact the problem at 3:1 is not solved but shifted from Paul to an unknown X with unknown motives. As for the postponement of thanks, Polycarp, writing to the same church at twice the length, likewise keeps business to the end (Phil. 13, see Lake 1912—13: i). The strongest argument, however, for the integrity of Philippians rests on appreciation of the whole as a structured masterpiece (Garland 1985; see PHIL F).
2. Romans shows Paul readily adopting Stoic language for his message (e.g. 1:28,12:2); perhaps he did this whenever he addressed converts with any degree of philosophical education. Whatever the reason, in Philippians his use of Stoic language is pervasive, serving most of his main themes: the emphasis on keeping a right mind (phrondn), discernment to choose the better (dokimazdn ta diapheronta), aiming
(skopeiri) at the right end (tefos); seeking contentment (autarkeia) in one's state, with joy (chara) even when suffering; community (koinonia) lived out in good citizenship (politeuesthai) related to a state or model (politeuma), and still more. These expressions prove serviceable to Paul, though only up to a point; the reality of Jesus and the supreme value of knowing him in life and death, through faith and hope, are grasped only by experience (3:8-11). Yet the paradox seems true that 'it is when Paul is at his most Stoic that he is also at his most Christian' (Engberg-Pedersen 1994: 280). Paul's harnessing of Stoic ideas to the gospel in Philippians does not enter those areas where Christian Stoicism was to reveal its dangers (e.g. excessive anthropocentrism and distortions of asceticism).
4. The theory that 2:6—11 is an already existing hymn that Paul quotes for his purpose, first proposed by Lohmeyer (1928), has come to dominate both exegesis of Philippians and study of early Christology and credal formulas, though the term 'hymn' remains imprecisely defined and the theory still takes various forms, including earlier composition by Paul. The literature is enormous; with the standard survey by Martin (1983); see now O'Brien (1991: 186-271). A rare voice questioning the theory's solidity and value for exegesis is raised by Fee (1992; 1995).
F. The Structure of Philippians. The letter has a 'rondo' structure; after an 'overture' (here called iB), comments on
n8i P H I L I P P I A N S
course, knew what the sharing had meant. For other readers Paul reveals it gradually: work for the gospel (1:5); prayer for him in his imprisonment and preaching, which he calls 'shar[ing] in God's grace' with him (1:7); striving side by side (1:27; 4:3) a metaphor from athletics that will recur, and finally their gifts of material support (4:15—18). v. 6, T am confident'
practical matters (sections 2, 4, and 6C) alternate with two major exhortations (sections 3 and 5) each centring on a narrative with a downward—upward movement; the first about Christ (2:5-11), the second about Paul (3:4-14). These and their contexts are linked by many corresponding words and phrases (Garland 1985:158—9; Fee 1995:314—15). Repetition of significant words or ideas occurs throughout the letter. Indusio is used systematically, both to articulate sections of the argument and to make the letter's closing sentences echo keywords in the opening. The commentary notes these points in detail.
(1:6): with this Paul passes from the Philippians' action to God's. (The verb recurs at 1:25, 2:24, and 3:3-4.) What Paul is confident about here is that their faith is God's 'good work', from when he began it till he brings it to completion 'by the day of Jesus Christ'. Paul returns to the interplay of human effort and God's work at 2:12-13. 'Th£ day of Jesus Christ' is the day of his expected return; the phrase occurs again at 1:10 and 2:16. Paul refers to it as an assumed point of faith for the Philippians, a future reality though of unknown date; not a matter for overexcitement as it had been in Thessalonica. (This may perhaps lend some slight support for later dating of Philippians.)
Introduction (1:1-11) (1:1-2) Greeting Paul includes colleagues with himself in seven letters, and Timothy most often, but not as co-author; in 2:19-24 he occurs in the third person. Paul refers to them both as 'slaves' of Christ Jesus, as in Rom 1:1. Since this is an opening formula, it can hardly be a conscious anticipation of its application to Christ in 2:7, though this may strike a reader today. Paul uses the expression 'the saints' in six letters, thus or in the formula 'called [to be] saints'. Modern versions often paraphrase it as 'the holy people of God'; the phrase connotes the Christian claim to have been brought through faith in Christ into God's covenant people (Ex 19:6; i Pet 2:9-10). Though the words 'bishops and deacons' come from the Greek (see PHIL B.2), their meanings have changed so much since their NTuse that it is less misleading to render them by (e.g.) 'pastors' or 'guardians' and 'assistants'. The inclusion of these ministers, as well as the repeated 'all', five times from 1:1 to 1:8 (admittedly unusual for Paul), have been seen as a first hint of the disunity that Paul will address more clearly later
v. 7, the key wordphrontin (see PHIL E.2) appears for the first time. Here it expresses a warm personal concern, based on mutual affection, to 'hold' others in one's 'heart'. Whose heart, holding whom? Most older versions took it as Paul's, holding that of his friends. NRSVoptsforthe reverse. Both are grammatically possible; the emphasis may be on the comfort Paul receives in his captivity and his service of the gospel from the thought of them, or on their thought and prayer for him in his situation. It makes little difference, because the relationship is mutual; they are sunkoinonoi with Paul, they 'share in God's grace' with him. To understand the heart as Paul's perhaps makes the next sentence follow more smoothly, v. 8, Paul says his feelings are not merely his own. He lives in such union with Christ (Gal 2:20) that he experiences Christ's compassion as his own. 'Compassion' renders splagchna, literally 'bowels', an idiom borrowed from Hebrew, which can relate strong emotions to various internal organs.
(Lightfoot 1879: 67; Peterlin 1995). At this point, however, this can hardly do more than raise a suspicion, v. 2, 'Grace to you and peace' slightly varies the word order of a formula Paul uses in opening and closing greetings. The 'grace' formula is echoed in 4:23 to wrap up the whole letter. Though the Holy Spirit is expressly named only three times (1:19; 2:1; 3:3), here the formula can be called implicitly trinitarian (cf 4:7; see Fee 1995: 48-9). (1:3-11) Thanksgiving and prayer v. 3, Paul begins every letter to a church (except Galatians) by thanking or blessing God for the good he has heard about his addressees. Here he mingles these two reactions with his prayer for them (1:3—4) an(^ with joy (i: 5), a combination he will recommend in 4:6, as in iThess
v. 9, Paul circles back to what he began to say in v. 3. He wants them to grow in agape, the kind of love he has described in i Cor 13, and will appeal to here in 2:1, 2. He does not say love for whom, either for himself or for each other; he simply prays that their capacity for loving may increase so that it overflows ever more and more. But he wants it to be far more than mere feeling; rather, to be directed by 'knowledge and full insight'. These words are of great importance for understanding the letter; they spell out what Paul means by phronein. The word rendered 'knowledge' is epignosis, prob-
ably in the sense of a knowledge transcending ordinary cognition (gnosis). This is best illustrated by Paul's use of the related verb in i Cor 13:12: 'Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known' (emphasis added); it is
5:16-18. This paragraph is like a musical overture which anticipates themes to be heard later (PHIL F). Joy (chara) is the first of these; with its verb chairein it runs right through the letter. The focus of Paul's joy is the Philippians' sharing
knowledge that at least approaches the knowledge that God has of us. 'Insight' renders aisthlsis which basically means perception, but the Stoics and other moral philosophers used it for moral knowledge gained by experience, and this is its probable meaning here (the only occurrence in the NT), v. 10, the verb 'determine' (dokimazo) primarily means the testing by which something comes to be approved. 'What is best' is literally 'the things that are different' i.e. morally better. Such choices lived out will lead Christians to such a state that Christ at his return will find them to be 'pure and blameless'. The
(koinonia) with him in the gospel (1:5). Koinonia is a keyword in the letter; aspects of it can be expressed by 'partnership', 'fellowship', 'union', and 'communion'. It occurs again at 2:1 and 3:10. Koinonos (sharer, partner) occurs in the compound form sunkoinonos at 1:7 and the related verbs at 4:14, 15. The prefix sun- ('together') occurs twelve times in the letter, compounded with eight nouns or verbs; it serves to enhance Paul's constant emphasis on relationship, unity and joy in community, and in sharing with him. The Philippians, of
P H I L I P P I A N S 1182
the other of envy (phthonos), rivalry (eris), and selfish ambition
former word probably refers especially to motives; the latter (lit. with no stumbling) may refer both to moral steadiness and to not causing others to stumble. All this will bear the 'harvest of righteousness' through Christ's gift and to God's glory. Paul's prayer contains a whole cluster of pregnant words concerned with moral experience that develops character, and especially the capacity for loving realistically. Cf. Philem 4-7. The desired 'knowledge' is of God; the 'insight' is experience that builds up that knowledge; the testing of all things (i Thess 5:21) leads to knowledge of God's will (Rom 12:2; Eph 5:10), with the purification of motives and moral firmness; all add up to the global moral term 'righteousness'. These ideas, if not the same words, reappear in Paul's central affirmation of his deepest values in 3:8—12. They are fundamental for the whole theory and practice of discernment in Christian tradition; yet it was Stoicism that provided Paul with many of the keywords: there is no need to shy away from this conclusion.
(eritheia, v. 17; 2:2), making some act not with pure motives (hagios, purely), but to cause Paul distress (thlipsis, v. 17; 4:14). The latter group is not identified, but they seem to be a part of the Christian community where Paul is. Clement of Rome, writing to Corinth not long afterwards (PHIL E.2), says that Peter and Paul were hounded to death by envy, jealousy, and rivalry (i Clem. 5.2-5); see Brown and Meier (1983:123-7; they also favour Rome as where Paul wrote Philippians, pp. 185-8). The trouble could well have begun with Jewish Christians who wanted the church to remain within Judaism and saw Paul's policy as misguided. Paul, however, regards all negative factors with a sublime equanimity, because for him they are outweighed by his supreme desire, to see Christ's gospel spreading; frustration and anger are simply overwhelmed by joy (v. 18).
(1:19—26) Paul's Hope and Confidence in Christ Paul turns from his reactions to recent events to envisage the foreseeable future. Indusio markers are 'joy' (v. 26, picking up the related verb in v. 18), 'progress' (v. 25, from v. 12), and 'trusting' (v. 25, from v. 14). All three have now changed their subjects (see PHIL 1:12 and 1:18; 'joy' is now Paul's wish for the Philippians). The passage is full of the vocabulary of hope and confidence and the motives for these, and of a peaceful yet passionate equanimity, based on certainty of Christ's love, v. 19, this verse is pivotal, grounding both Paul's joy in the situation just described and his confidence for the future: T know [the verb is repeated at v. 2 5] that... this will result in my deliverance.' Verbally this is one of the few OT allusions in Philippians; it reproduces the Greek of Job 13:16, in a passage that expresses Job's invincible trust in a transcendent justice. But in Paul's very different situation he is hardly likely to be comparing himself with Job; the coincidence of language could almost be accidental. 'Deliverance' is soteria (salvation); the NRSV's rendering seems to focus on Paul's vindication and release, but this does not exclude an implicit eschatological sense, as is clear, with reference to the Philippians in 1:28 and 2:12. Paul's first motive for confidence is his certainty that his friends pray for him as he does for them (1:4), and that their intercession is effective. Paul's second motive is revealed with the first of the three explicit references to the Holy Spirit in Philippians (see PHIL 1:2). 'Help' is epidioregia, the act of supplying or providing for needs. Lightfoot (1879: 91) discusses whether the Spirit is the giver or the gift, and concludes for both. Choregia and the related verb could still retain a note of generous bounty, from their origin in sponsorship of civic celebrations by rich Athenians, v. 20, 'eager expectation' (Gk. apokaradokia) evokes a picture of heads strained forward in anticipation. The only other occurrence in the NT is in Rom 8:19, where Paul sees the whole of creation thus longing 'for the revealing of the children of God'. Paul hopes that he, and still more the gospel, will not be brought into public discredit, especially at his trial. In the biblical world 'shame' refers not so much to an emotion as to public worsting and discrediting; the psalmists often pray to be spared it (e.g. Ps 71:1), but to see their enemies suffering it (e.g. Ps 70:2). Positively, Paul hopes to speak 'with all boldness': the last word is parrhesia, which is what Peter and John showed before the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:13). It is contrasted with being put to shame also in i Jn 2:28, but at
Paul's Situation and his Reactions to it (1:12-26)
(1:12—18) What has been Happening Two keywords mark off this section as another loose indusio. The first is 'progress'
(prokope, v. 12, obscured in NRSV's 'to spread the gospel'). This is picked up again in 1:25, where the progress is on the part of Paul's addressees. The other keyword is 'confidence'; it recurs in 1:14, of Christians heartened by Paul's successful witness despite his imprisonment, and again in 1:25 of Paul trusting that he will remain some time longer for the encouragement of the Philippians. Other keywords in this section are 'gospel' (1:12, 16, 27) and 'rejoice'/'joy' (chaird, chara, 1:18, 25).
In the first seven verses Paul assures his readers that two aspects of his situation which might be expected to cause him pain and frustration have rather had the opposite effect. The first is his captivity. He does not describe his circumstances except by the conventional 'chains' and the implication that it would be his guards who spread favourable impressions of him around the praeiorium (1:13 probably in the regimental sense, Lightfoot 1879: 99—104). On the alternative theories based on Rome and Ephesus, see PHIL c. The traditional view, that Paul is writing from Rome, naturally refers to Acts 28; he had come 'in chains' (28:17) with a soldier guarding him
(28:16), temporarily in a 'guesthouse' (28:23) but then for two years in lodgings where he could receive visitors (28:30). Philippians, for all its reticence, implies severer conditions than this. Perhaps after two years of waiting, on being called to have his case heard, Paul came under regulations requiring prison custody. Apologia (defence) in Phil 1:7 and 16 could refer to a formal hearing (cf 2 Tim 4.6) but by reason both of its range of meaning and of its context here it can equally well refer to the 'apologetic' aspect of preaching. (Of course, such a series of events could have taken place in Ephesus, and no arguments seem decisive.) Paul does not explain how his imprisonment has encouraged Christians to witness to their faith more boldly (v. 14). Perhaps they are saying 'if Paul can do so much in chains, how much more should we dare to do in freedom?' If his guards have played a part, this could be cheering news also for his readers in a proud Roman colonia (Tellbe 1994: no—n). v. 15, Paul sees two spirits at work in their activity, one of goodwill (eudokia) and love towards him,
1183 PHILIPPIANS
usage, implying that the church is the New Israel; but see Engberg-Pedersen (1994: 263) and Fee (1995: 161—2). It makes a difference whether Paul is urging the Philippians to show their Christianity in good citizenship, or has transferred the verb to a purely Christian context. His wish for their steadfast unity in fidelity to the gospel (rest of 1:27) might suggest the latter, but bold resistance to their opponents (v. 28) implies the public forum. The exhortation to unanimity in Christ already anticipates 2:1-5. Is then the 'one spirit' in 1:27 simply human unanimity (as NRSV implies), or does it point to the clearer reference to the Holy Spirit in 2:1? Fee (1995: 164-6) argues plausibly for the latter. For unanimity Paul could easily have used the Stoic homonoia (frequent in i Clement), just as his athletic metaphors ('striving side by side', v. 27, and 'contest', v. 30, NRSV 'struggle') are Stoic cliches (Tellbe 1994: in). What is essentially Christian is, of course, the hope of'salvation' which 'is God's doing' (v. 28), and the sense that both faith in Christ and suffering for him are 'graciously granted' (echaristhe) as a privilege (v. 29), which Paul sees as binding them more closely to himself in Christ, v. 30. Faith in Christ is again linked with the idea of suffering in 2:17 and 3:9—10. The 'opponents' at whose hands suffering is expected probably refers to political and social pressure to take part in the imperial cult (Tellbe 1994). If politeuesthe indeed refers to good citizenship, Paul would be recommending this as the best defence (cf. Polycarp, Phil. 10.2). But the threat is also to the Philippian church's unity, and Paul is passionately concerned that this should be in and with the suffering Christ as Paul has preached him.
the eschatological judgement, not a human trial. However, Paul's focus here, that 'Christ will be exalted now as always in my body, whether by life or by death' may have an overtone of the special sense ofparrhesia which developed in the NT. The word was born in political and forensic contexts, meaning freedom of speech or outspokenness. It came to connote also courage in speaking out; finally in the NT it has a special sense of confidence in God, a gift of the Holy Spirit to all who become God's children in union with Christ, and through him have access (prosagoge) to God. (See Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 3:12; Eph 3:12; Heb 4:16; 10:19; J Jn 3:2IJ 4:I7J 5:I4-) Paul need not have this sense fully in mind here, but he is hardly thinking merely of speaking boldly at his trial. He speaks from his awareness of constant union with Christ. If he is worsted, then Christ will be shamed in him; if he is enabled to speak well, Christ will be 'exalted' in him, and just as much if he dies as if he lives on, for neither circumstance can separate him from Christ, v. 21, thus Paul's thought flows straight into the third great expression of his spiritual equilibrium. First came prison or liberty; then being spoken of with love or with malice; now death or life, because 'to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain'. A psychological state undisturbed by fear or human attachments was the ideal for both Stoics and Epicureans; but for Paul, both his emotional balance and his whole range of values are entirely governed by his union with Christ, as he will make even clearer in 3:7—12. This serenity pervading Philippians, in contrast to Galatians and 2 Corinthians, suggests a spiritual state perhaps more appropriate to Paul's final years, and therefore to Rome. ('Gain', kerdos, reappears with its related verb in 3:7—8, referring to values which Paul has rejected and replaced by new ones.) He cannot make a choice even between living and dying (even though the latter would lead to his being 'with Christ' in the fullest sense) except by discerning Christ's will. This evidently leads him to decide that he must stay (v. 24); then immediately he says that he knows this with confidence
(2:1—6) Unity of Minds and Hearts v. i, the tone of appeal now rises to a more intense level of feeling through a series of'if clauses, regular in the rhetoric of entreaty. This more solemn tone tells against supposing a 'hymnic' style only from v. 6 onwards. In prayers, the formula typically reminds a deity of past theophanies; here the idiom implies something like 'if x means anything to you, then prove it now'. Paul appeals to what he is sure the Philippians have experienced: 'encouragement in Christ', 'consolation from love', 'sharing in the Spirit', 'compassion [see PHIL 1:8], and sympathy'. Of these, sharing, koinonia, is fundamental to all the others, above all since it is in (now certainly the Holy) Spirit. At last (v. 2) comes the apodosis to the four 'ifs': 'make my joy complete', the joy which Paul has expressed for himself in 1:4 and 18, and wished for them in 1:25. The desired response is described by four phrases which all express union of minds and hearts: two use the keyword phronein ('be of the same mind... of one mind'); the others are 'having the same love' (agape] and 'being in full accord' (sumpsuchoi, united in soul). The most important words here were already established in 1:4—9, together with words compounded with sun-, 'together', to intensify the sense of sharing. In v. 3 Paul continues his description of the attitudes he desires by alternating dos and don'ts: not 'selfish ambition', which he has been suffering (1:17), nor conceit (kenodoxia, vainglory) but rather 'humility, regarding] others as better than yourselves'. The last phrases are significant for the letter's unity, being echoed both in 2:78 and in ch. 3. v. 4, another do and don't concerns looking to 'the interests of others'. The verb is skopeo, 'to aim' (like
(cf 1:6, 19), for the Philippians' 'progress and joy in faith': (v. 25; cf. 2:17). Towards them, he is so far from Stoic apatheia as to want to come 'and share abundantly in your boasting in Christ Jesus' (v. 26). This is one of only three occurrences in Philippians of the word-group of kauchaomai, commonly rendered 'boast', that is so characteristic of Paul (55 of 59 instances in NT, 34 of them in 1—2 Corinthians; see TDNT iii. 645-54). His repeated concern with having (or not having) grounds for boasting is puzzling, especially given his teaching on 'works' in Romans 3—4; one can only conclude that the Greek words have a wider reference than self-glorification, and include joyful exultation for and with others, as seems the case here.
First Exhortation on Disdpleship (1:27-2:18) (1:27-30) Steadfastness in the Face of Opposition This paragraph is linked to what precedes, especially by 'gospel' (1:12, 16, 27), 'salvation' (1:19, 28), and 'faith' (1:26, 29). v. 27, 'conduct yourselves' translates the verb politeuesthai, 'to act as a citizen' (Lightfoot 1879; Brewer 1954). NRSV misses the political sense (important also in Stoicism), though it keeps it when the related noun politeuma 'commonwealth' or 'citizenship' occurs in 3:20. Miller (1982) shows that Judaism had appropriated this vocabulary, and argues that Paul follows this
P H I L I P P I A N S 1184
It is desirable to keep one word in both places, and 'form' remains the least unsatisfactory. This verse already raises the question whether it refers to Christ's pre-existence or to his life on earth, but first we must read further. Paul has just used the verb 'regard' (hegoumai) in exhortation (2 :^), and will use it thrice of his own values in relation to Christ in 3:7—8. 'Equality with God' seems like a repetition with variation of 'being in the form of God', but not all agree on this. Indeed, the meaning of this clause is the storm-centre of modern controversy on Philippians. 'Something to be exploited' interprets one word, harpagmon. It is important that in the Greek the negative governs not the verb 'regard' but this noun (Carmignac 1971—2). The actual order is: 'not [as] harpagmos did he regard being equal to God'. The issue is not pedantic; it is between two alternative 'stories'. These depend (i) on two possible senses of harpagmos and (2) on what is being contrasted with what. Harpagmos is a verbal noun from harpazo, to seize or snatch. Its form raises problems (BAGD 108; Hoover 1971; O'Brien 1991: 211-16); it can refer either to the act of seizing or the thing seized, and the sentence does not indicate when in the 'story' either of these was contemplated by Christ, in his 'pre-existence' or his earthly life. This question also affects how, in the next verse, we understand 'he emptied himself and what follows; it is relevant also to the other Pauline passage which seems to parallel this passage most closely: 'For you know the generous act [lit. grace] of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich' (2 Cor 8:9).
phrondn, a Stoic word); it recurs (with its noun) in 3:14-17. In
Paul's present context, of course, phrondn essentially involves a right skopos of mind and heart, 'as in Christ Jesus' (v. 5).
Do the attitudes (and perhaps activities) not commended in w. 3-4 point to actual divisions within the Philippian church? Whether 1:1—4 contains hints or not, the immediately preceding exhortation in 1:27—30 now makes a reference to disunity more likely, especially on such grounds as Tellbe (1994) suggests. This will be discussed later, where clearer indications occur. Here it is not certain how far breaches of unity have actually gone. 'Selfish ambition' (2:3) could be in Paul's mind because he has suffered from its effects (1:17). Other phrases he uses may well refer to the quarrel to be mentioned in 4:2, especially if others had joined in; but surely the main thrust of this appeal, as of the passage into which it leads, is to focus the Philippians' minds on their relationship with Christ; references to human faults need to be clearer to prove an actual state of conflict.
(2:5-11) Christ, the Focus and Model for Discipleship The standpoint of the following comments is outlined in PHIL D. w. 5—11, most commentators, accepting a hymn theory, set the passage out like verse. This displays its elegant composition in short cola, as found in classical artistic prose, but does not prove it to be a hymn in terms of either Semitic or Greek models. The wide and imprecise use of 'hymn' in modern discussion has not helped (O'Brien 1991: 188). The opening exhortation follows smoothly from the preceding sentences, points to Christ as model, and continues with a narrative about him in language which is certainly poetic and goes beyond Paul's usual vocabulary, but not necessarily his capacity when moved. Many keywords are echoed later, especially in ch. 3. The following exegesis takes the passage as it stands in its context. However, the possibility that Paul is adopting the structure of an existing model for credal-type statements will be considered in conclusion.
The two lines of exegesis may be summarized as follows. First, most of the tradition, from the Greek fathers till recent times, assumes that w. 6-n are integral to their context and also that Paul believed in Christ's divinity and incarnation. Christ's being 'in the form of God' and 'equality with God' refer to his status 'before' his incarnation, which is the subject of v. 7. Christ, being by nature one with the Father, regarded this status as no harpagmos, i.e. not like a prize which he had won (and might fear to lose, as a freed slave would jealously treasure his new status and refuse slavish work). Instead, in trustful obedience to the Father, Christ 'emptied himself and became not only mortal but actually like a slave, e.g. by washing feet, and above all by suffering a slave's death. The contrast implied by the placing of the negative is between Christ's status as Son of God and his acceptance of that of a slave. This summarizes the exegesis of Chrysostom (PG 62.217—37) an(^ Isidore of Pelusium (PG 78.1071), both masters of Greek artistic prose as a living tradition.
v. 5, 'Let the same mind be in you that [was] in Christ Jesus': more literally, 'be thus minded in/among yourselves as also in Christ Jesus'. The first 'in' is ambiguous in Greek; the context favours 'among', i.e. in interpersonal relations. The unexpressed verb has to be understood; more complicated ellipses have been proposed, e.g. 'which you have by virtue of your [life] in [union with]'; but 'was" is most satisfactory. Paul points to Jesus, as known on earth, as the example for Christians in their relationships. This is rejected by some, for whom the hymn theory dictates their exegesis; they hold that the hymn was kerygmatic, proclaiming doctrinal truths about Jesus and that to make him a mere ethical model is somehow an inferior use of the hymn (cf Martin 1983: 68—74, 84—8; Stanton 1974: 99—110; O'Brien 1991: 253—62). v. 6, 'who, though he was in the form of God': 'though' is an added interpretation; others suggest 'because' (Moule 1970). The Greek for 'was' is not the simple verb, but the participle of a stronger verb, huparchon, 'existing'. Form (morphe) has a complex history (Behm, TDNT iv. 742-50). It connotes the outward aspect of something but not mere appearance; it also reflects the inward nature. Since God is incorporeal we must examine how Scripture describes theophanies. This suggests 'glory' as being what morphe implies, but this will not fit in v. 7, where morphe is that of a slave.
The second line (or rather several lines, but all stemming from the same basic option) reads the negative as if it governed the verb 'regard', and harpagmon as a prize to be won. To mention an agent and immediately characterize him as one who did not seek to usurp divine status suggests a contrast with some figure who did that; thus some have proposed historical rulers (Seeley 1994); more have turned to the OT Here lines diverge: one sees a contrast with rebellious deities, as in the myths (applied to human kings) in Isa 14:12-21 and Ezek 28, or (as an aetiology of evil and also against the post-exilic Jerusalem priesthood) in i Enoch (Sanders 1969). More widely canvassed is a contrast with Adam, following the
1185 PHILIPPIANS
(e.g. doulos, 'slave', instead of pais, 'boy'), the cluster of significant ideas could well form a recognizable way of hinting at the Isaian figure. Thus he 'emptied himself could evoke 'he poured out himself (Isa 53:12), morphe could allude to the Servant's lost beauty (Isa 52:14; 53:2), and he 'humbled himself to Isa 53:4. This proposal has been unjustly opposed; it has more explanatory power than others. It illuminates the paradoxical choice of morphe to connote both Christ's divine nature and his acceptance of 'slave' status, especially if we accept that behind the Isaian Servant lies the role of the king in the pre-exilic cult (Eaton 1979: 75-84).
tradition that he sinned by ambitious pride (hubris), wanting to become like God (surveyed in O'Brien 1991: 263—8); Wright
(1992: 56—98) makes this integral to a comprehensive New Adam theology. But this reading of v. 6 rests on two unsafe foundations: first, that morphe in the NT can be a synonym for eikon, the 'image' of God, as in Gen 1:26 (in favour, Martin 1983:106—10; against, Behm in TDNTiv. 752: in Paul, Christ is the eikon of God); and second, on an unverified assumption that the tradition ascribing such hubris to Adam was in existence by the time of Paul. It is not found in the OT or prePauline literature; it seems to have arisen (perhaps because of the obscure similarities between Ezek 28 and Gen 2-3) by ascribing to Adam the arrogant motives of the figures in Isa 14 and Ezek 28. The earliest hint of this is probably in Josephus, Ant. 1.47 (Procope 1941—). The roles of Adam in Romans and 1-2 Corinthians are clear; proponents of a contrast with him in Phil 2 have yet to prove that Adam's hubris was already a theme that could be referred to by mere allusion. The most likely OT reference is quite different (see below). These and other proposed backgrounds (Martin 1983: 74-93; O'Brien 1991: 193-7) which generally assume the hymn theory as proved, mostly understand Christ's position in v. 6 as referring to his lifetime on earth, and harpagmos as an act of usurpation which he renounced. Yet not all who interpret thus oppose pre-existence, indeed, this is increasingly (and rightly) recognized as Paul's belief, expressed both here and elsewhere.
Doulos is then not merely a slave as in the Graeco-Roman world but the royal Son and Servant of the divine King, living and dying in obedience (as in v. 8) as Chrysostom realized. Christ's 'self-emptying', like that of the Isaian Servant, bears an implication of sacrificial self-giving, lived out physically on earth, but also revealing a quality intrinsic to divine love.
Several keywords here also help to anchor the passage in the letter as a whole. 'He humbled himself gives the model for the humility recommended in 2:3. The root occurs again, together with words formed from morphe and schema, in 3:21. As the Son 'was found' in the human race (v. 7), so Paul hopes finally to 'be found' in him (3:9). But these recurrences are transformed in a way that depends on the second part of the 'story' of Christ. The whole passage, 2:5—11, has a downward—upward movement. The shameful death by the cross is the lowest point; w. 9-11 are the upwardmoving reversal, a second stanza in terms of poetic structure.
w. 7-8, the older exegetical line (i) takes these verses as referring first to the incarnation, then to its continuation in Jesus' life and death. Some proponents of a type (2) theory try to make them refer only to Jesus' history, but the effort is forced. The last phrase, 'even death on a cross' was declared by Lohmeyer a secondary 'Pauline addition' because it did not fit into the 'hymn' as reconstructed by him (O'Brien 1991: 230—1). Simply on a stylistic analysis, it crowns a series of steps as a climax (not of height but of depth), the effect of which would strike ancient hearers with the force of shocking paradox (Fee 1995: 217). Its centrality for Paul is reflected in 3:10. A Christological complication was introduced by the Kenotic theory (Martin 1983: 66-8, 169-72) which interpreted the 'self-emptying' as a real abandonment of the nature of God. This misses the metaphoric character of'he emptied' (ekenosen; for its probable OT source see below); Chrysostom (PG 62.229) realized this, as part of the parable of a selfhumbling king's son which he finds implicit in the the whole passage; it is explained by the following phrases in w. 7—8. These are admittedly difficult. They are not typical of Paul's usage, and 'form', 'likeness', and schema all seem rather weak ways of expressing the reality of Christ's humanity, which Paul surely wants to affirm as truly as his divinity. Morphe in a human context balances its previous divine context, and (as we saw) implies more than mere outward shape; but schema does mean shape (though NRSV loosely renders it 'form'), while 'likeness' is also vague. And why is 'slave' mentioned before human status? The best answer lies in recognizing an allusion to the Isaian 'Servant' (Jeremias 1963; 1965). This is prima facie likely because that figure was so important for NT writers (Dodd 1952: 88-96). Though here all the words that favour an allusion are different from those usual in the NT, and imply the existence of a translation closer to the Hebrew
v. 9, 'Therefore' (dio) implies God's acceptance of Christ's self-offering, not necessarily a reward. The verb 'highly exalted' (huper-hupsod) expresses a superlative degree of honour. Paul delights in fiuper-compounds (Fee 1995: 221). Those who take the passage primarily as a Christological statement find it strange that the resurrection is not explicitly mentioned, but it is implicit in 'exalted'. 'And gave him' (echarisato) is more accurately 'graciously conferred on him'; the verb used of God's giving the Philippians the grace of suffering for Christ (1:29). This echo, occurring in such close proximity, links their sufferings with Christ's glorification after his passion; the upward movement is for them too. What has been conferred is 'the name that is above every name': in biblical idiom 'name' can be personal or titular; a name has meaning and is charged with power. What name is meant here? The choice is between Jesus and Kurios, 'Lord'. '[S]o that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend' (v. 10) might seem to favour 'Jesus', but the confession that 'Jesus Christ is Lord' (v. n) points decisively to the latter. 'Jesus' is his human name; Kurios and Christos are conferred titles, as in Peter's proclamation 'God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified'
(Acts 2:36).
Christos (Heb. masiah) denotes the expected 'Anointed one'; Kurios was the regular Greek rendering of'ddondy, the reverent equivalent of YHWH, though it had many other uses, including for the emperor. But w. 10-11 are an adapted quotation of Isa 45:23, the context of which is that YHWH has proclaimed that he alone is God; there he says 'To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.' Paul vastly expands
P H I L I P P I A N S Il86
the theme of lifting up and glorification. In early poetry we find it in the second-century Odes of Solomon, with typically Syrian emphasis on the descent to Sheol, in Odes 17, 22 (which brings Jesus' baptism into the pattern), 24, and 42. Since Paul was probably the earliest of all the writers involved, the variants ofthe pattern may well issue out from him.
'every knee', and changes 'to me' to 'at the name of Jesus'; then he changes 'swear' to 'confess' adding the object clause 'that Jesus Christ is Lord (Kurios).'At the beginning ofthe 'story' in 2:6 Jesus was 'in the form of God'; now he is 'hyper-exalted' and Paul adapts a text that denies that there is any God but YHWH, to say that God has given Jesus the supreme name, so that he may at last be adored by every being in the threefold cosmos and universally acclaimed as Kurios. But in this acclamation does Kurios function as the name YHWH, so that, God having conferred it on Jesus, a distinction is implied between God and YHWH? Or if Kurios functions not as a name but as an ordinary predicate, what other value for it is high enough to measure up to Paul's statements implying Jesus' divinity? (He must also have been aware of making a politically dangerous claim contrary to the imperial cult (Tellbe 1994: 111—14), but Paul's primary focus is theological.) The above dilemma seems inescapable: intolerable to Jews, and embarrassing to Christian exegetes who assume that rigorous monotheism was established long before Jesus and Paul. This is why theories of non-Jewish influences on early Christology have proliferated, encouraging theories that the 'hymn' in ch. 2 is non-Pauline. Recent research, however, is showing ever more clearly that, at least until the reconstruction of Judaism after 70 CE, Jewish theologizing took many forms and at least some were far short of the eventual monotheism (Segal 1978; Barker 1992). The total identification of YHWH with the High God 'el felydn, and the redefinition ofthe latter's sons as angels, long remained incomplete, and the memory of how the king had been enthroned as 'Son of YHWH' haunted minds disaffected towards the second temple. The varieties of pre-rabbinic Judaism already contained the materials for the Christian interpretation of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection in relation to the divine unity. It is no longer enough to say that in v. n Kurios is 'the equivalent of Yahweh' and that 'Paul's monotheism is kept intact by the final phrase, "unto the glory of God the Father " ', as in i Cor 8:6, 'one God the Father... and one Lord Jesus Christ' (Fee 1995: 222, 226); this only restates the dilemma above. Paul's faith can be understood only as already essentially trinitarian.
(2:12-18) The Response Paul Desires from the Philippians Paul returns to direct exhortation, now illuminated by Christ's example; 'you have always obeyed' echoes 'he became obedient' (2:8), and likewise has no named object, but implies primarily God (Lightfoot 1879: 115-16), rather than Paul (as NRSV). w. 12—13, Paul has mentioned salvation as his hope both for himself (1:19) and for the Philippians, adding 'this is God's doing' (1:28). What is added now is emphasis on human collaboration with God: 'work out your own salvation... for it is God who is at work'. It is not, of course, autonomous labour. The force of 2:5—11 still directs the thought; the Christian's personal effort is with and in Christ. 'Fear and trembling' was proverbial from the OT; Paul usually uses it of human relations (i Cor 2:3; 2 Cor 7:15; Eph 6:5), but here of a stance before God. At 1:15 Paul uses 'good pleasure' of attitudes favourable to himself, though usually in the NT it refers to God's benevolent will towards humankind (e.g. Lk 2:14; Eph 1:5). w. 12-13 became a key text in all discussions of grace and free will.
v. 14, Paul echoes the Exodus story for both warning and encouragement, alluding to the people's repeated grumbling (Ex 15-17; Num 14-17) and 'arguing': with divided minds, doubting God's providence, v. 15, phrases in Deut 32:5 are turned from condemnation to encouragement: 'children of God without blemish' is what Moses said the people no longer were; Paul promises the Philippians that they can become so. A 'crooked and perverse generation' was said ofthe people; Paul applies it to the hostile environment in which the Philippians 'shine like stars' (with perhaps a hint of Mt 5:14,16). He uses the present tense to encourage them, but in v. 16 there is a hint of pleading; on their 'holding fast to the word of life' depends his hope ofbeing able to 'boast [cf 1:26] on the day of Christ [cf. 1:10] that [he] did not run in vain'—again the athletic metaphor, used as in Gal 2:2; 4:11. v. 17, he changes to a metaphor of religious intensity: 'even if I am being poured out as a libation [eight words for one in Greek, spendomai] over the sacrifice and the offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice'. Here the 'priests' are the Philippians (cf. 4:18); he is ready to be part of their offering. (Paul never uses cultic or priestly terms in direct designation of his apostolic ministry, but only by way of metaphor; this is true even ofthe concentrated cultic language in Rom 15:16. Priestly and sacrificial language can be applied to all members ofthe church.) 'Offering' here renders leitourgia, see PHIL 1.19. It came to refer to religious worship (hence 'liturgy'), especially in the Greek Bible, but it retained its financial connotations (Peterlin 1995: 195—9). Here it combines with 'sacrifice' in a cultic metaphor, meaning the life of Christian faith. (In 2:25, 30 the financial sense is more prominent.) v. 18, Paul ends this section with a burst of joy (T am glad') using not different words (as NRSV) but chairo four times, twice compounded with sun-, to express his own joy and to call the Philippians to the same.
In conclusion, w. 5-11 are fully integrated in the letter. Paul introduces the 'story' of Jesus to encourage the Philippians to humility and mutual respect by looking at him. Within that context the upward movement, effected by God's exalting of Christ, reminds them ofthe divine call behind the exhortation in 2:1—5, as ^^0 say 'as disciples and members of Christ, you do not need to think of your own interests or dignity—leave it all to God; just contemplate (phroneite) the whole story of Christ. Whatever you have to suffer now, Christ is leading you to glory.' Within the letter as a whole, the passage is the climax ofthe first great exhortation. The second climax, in ch. 3, balances the first, both by verbal echoes and by repeating the downward-upward movement, now with reference to Paul. The movement corresponds to a pattern found (with variations) in a number of early quasi-credal statements, some more poetic in style, others less. The pattern would have taken shape in early meditation on Jesus' baptism, death, and resurrection in the light of OT texts, as in Acts 2:22-36. Its skeleton is in 2 Cor 8:9; freer variations appear in Col 1:15-20 and the Gospel of John, especially the prologue and