I PLEAD WITH Euodia and I plead with Syntyche to agree with each other in the Lord. 3Yes, and I ask you, loyal yokefellow, help these women who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.
4Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! 5Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. 6Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
8Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. 9Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.
Original Meaning
IN THIS NEW section Paul continues his discussion of how the Philippians should “conduct” themselves “in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ” (1:27). Once again he is concerned, as he has been throughout the letter (1:1, 18a, 27; 2:1–4, 14, 29; 3:15), with the unity of the Philippians. The section is, nevertheless, clearly separate from the previous section. It contains no particles linking it to chapter 3, and beginning with verse 4 the apostle uses brief, unconnected statements instead of sustained argumentation. This procedure is not atypical of the conclusions of Paul’s letters, as the short, pithy exhortations in 1 Thessalonians 5:12–25 and Colossians 3:18–4:6 demonstrate. In addition, for the first time in this letter Paul calls the names of several of his Philippian readers. It is almost as if, knowing that he is coming to the end of the letter, he is concerned to place as much emphasis as possible on his concluding admonitions and to make sure that those in Philippi who need to hear them most will pay close attention.
This part of the letter can be divided into two paragraphs, one that exhorts two women to be united with one another (vv. 2–3) and the other that advises the Philippians how to live amid the persecution they are experiencing (vv. 4–9).
A Plea to Two Coworkers (vv. 2–3)
In verse 2 Paul singles out two of his Philippian readers by name and asks them to adopt a common mind “in the Lord.” Although the point is disputed among commentators, the disagreement between these two women may have been at the bottom of the disunity that has concerned Paul throughout the letter. Two indicators point in this direction. (1) The unusual tactic of calling the women by name in a letter to be read to the entire congregation (cf. 1 Thess. 5:27; Col. 4:16) shows that Paul considered their disagreement to be unusually significant. (2) The phrase that the NIV translates “agree with each other” represents a Greek phrase (to auto phronein) nearly identical to the one Paul used in his general exhortation in 2:2 to be “like-minded” (to auto phronete). The clear verbal echo of this general exhortation probably indicates that Euodia and Syntyche, more than any of the others, needed to put the interests of each other first and, “in the Lord,” to drop their quarrel.
As we have seen often in this letter, the manner in which Paul exhorts his readers is as significant as the content. Three elements of the way in which he exhorts Euodia and Syntyche are particularly significant. (1) He addresses each woman equally. The repetition of the word “plead” is not grammatically necessary and produces a slightly ponderous sentence, but the use of the term before each name communicates a desire to be evenhanded—not to take sides but to exhort each participant in the dispute with equal firmness.1 In a letter that would have been read to the entire congregation, Paul probably considered such evenhandedness of paramount importance.
(2) Paul asks for help from an unidentified third party, a man whose name we do not know and whom Paul calls simply “loyal yokefellow.” If Paul wrote Philippians shortly after 1 Corinthians, perhaps he had fresh in his mind the dispute between two believers in Corinth that led to an embarrassing lawsuit before the unbelieving civil authorities (1 Cor. 6:1–11). Paul had angrily asked the Corinthians in his letter to them, “Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers?” (6:5). The Philippians were certainly on better terms with the apostle than the Corinthians, and there is no indication that the dispute between Euodia and Syntyche was of the type that could be taken before civil authorities. But as with the Corinthians, Paul finds value in calling in a third party to adjudicate the disagreement. The unity and sanctity of the church is too important to consider the dispute a private matter to be settled by the women alone.
(3) Paul mixes his exhortation to these two women with commendation. This is a common feature of Paul’s hortatory style, both when admonishing whole congregations (1 Cor. 1:4–7; 1 Thess. 1:2–10) and when admonishing individuals. In Philemon, for example, Paul mingles his request that Philemon forgive his slave Onesimus and return him to Paul with praise for Philemon’s “faith in the Lord Jesus and … love for all the saints” (Philem. 5, 7). Thus when Paul exhorts Euodia and Syntyche, he speaks warmly of “these women who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel” (Phil. 4:3). He also places them in company with Clement, one of Paul’s coworkers whose identity is otherwise unknown, but who must have been a highly respected member of the Philippian congregation.2 In addition, he says that their names, along with those of his other coworkers, “are in the book of life” (v. 3), a traditional title of honor frequently used in Jewish literature for the people of God who have suffered persecution but have nevertheless remained faithful (Dan. 12:1; Rev. 3:5; cf. Isa. 4:3; Luke 10:20).3
Paul’s actual exhortation to Euodia and Syntyche is simple: He asks them to overcome their dispute with one another. The language he uses helps us see Paul’s primary concern in issuing this exhortation. Since his language echoes 2:2, Paul likely wants Euodia and Syntyche to put into practice toward one another the qualities mentioned in 2:1–4. They should be in Spirit-produced fellowship with one another, and this relationship should be characterized by “tenderness and compassion,” a mutual love, and a unity of purpose. It should, in addition, lead them to put the interests of the other ahead of their own interests.
Paul is under no illusions, however, that Euodia and Syntyche will end their dispute with one another on some purely human grounds. Thus he adds to his admonition the qualification that their agreement should be “in the Lord.” The phrase “in the Lord” has played a prominent role in the letter as a qualifier of surprising human conduct whose source is the Lord. It seems strange that Paul’s imprisonment would create courage in his fellow believers to proclaim the gospel, but that is what happens “in the Lord” (1:14). Similarly, Paul’s travel plans are more tentative than they would otherwise be because he makes them “in the Lord” (2:19, 24). The Philippians must overcome any resentment against Epaphroditus’ early return and welcome him “in the Lord” (2:29), and they can be joyful “in the Lord” despite persecution (3:1; 4:4). In the same way Paul says in this passage that Euodia and Syntyche, although they might normally let their disagreements disrupt their fellowship, must seek unity because they are “in the Lord.” Those who live within the sphere of Christ’s Lordship are equipped to overcome circumstances that would dishearten unbelievers and disrupt their friendships, and Paul wants Euodia and Syntyche to put this principle into practice in their relationship with one another.
Brief Set of Exhortations (vv. 4–9)
The second part of this passage, like the first, is unattached to the sentences preceding it by any connecting word. At least through verse 8, the passage itself makes only minimal use of connecting words (“but” in v. 6, “and” in v. 7, and “finally” in v. 8 are the exceptions). This lack of connecting words was a stylistic device called “asyndeton” by the grammarians of Paul’s time. It was used for emphasis and was especially effective at the end of a discourse.4 Indeed, the device continues to be used in similar ways in modern times. “We shall pay any price,” said John F. Kennedy in a famous speech, “bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”5 Paul uses the device to similar effect here. As he begins to close the admonitory part of his letter, he trims his language to a minimum in order to communicate his meaning with as much precision, emphasis, and persuasion as possible.
Verses 4–7 contain four admonitions (“rejoice,” “let your gentleness be evident,” “do not be anxious,” and “present your requests to God”), which at first seem to have little to do with one another. A closer look at the meaning of the terms standing behind these admonitions, however, reveals a common background for them all. The term “gentleness” (epieikes) was often used of an attitude of kindness where the normal or expected response was retaliation. Thus in the apocryphal book of Wisdom, a group of evil people who believe that life is short and that nothing lies beyond the grave decide to “crown” themselves “with rosebuds before they wither” and “everywhere … leave signs of enjoyment” (Wisd. 2:8–9, NRSV). But since the righteous man does not approve of their irresponsible merriment, they decide to persecute him. “Let us test him with insult and torture,” they say, “so that we may find out how gentle he is (ten epieikeian autou), and make trial of his forbearance” (2:19, NRSV). This is probably the connotation of the term in 2 Corinthians 10:1, where Paul appeals to “the meekness and gentleness (epieikeias) of Christ” as the reason for his own gentleness with the recalcitrant Corinthians. Paul, like Christ, refused to answer his detractors in kind.
The words “be anxious” (merimnao, 4:6) can refer to being unduly concerned about anything, but it is often used in contexts where persecution is the issue. Thus both Matthew and Luke use this word in their record of Jesus’ admonition to his disciples not to be concerned about what they will say before the local councils, governors, and kings who hunt them down because of their commitment to the gospel (Matt. 10:19; Luke 12:11). The term “guard” (phroureo) likewise is a figure drawn from the arena of conflict and is frequently used to refer to the action of a military garrison stationed inside a city (Judith 3:6; cf. 2 Cor. 11:32).
All of this points to the context of persecution as the background for Paul’s admonitions. The Philippians were suffering under opposition from their pagan neighbors, just as Paul and Silas had suffered when among them (Acts 16:19–24; Phil. 1:28–30). Thus, just as Paul had started the admonitory section of the letter with a command for the Philippians, despite their persecution, to conduct themselves in a manner worthy of the gospel (1:27–30), so he returns to this theme at the end of the section, asking the Philippians to maintain an attitude of joy “in the Lord” at all times (v. 4; cf. 3:1), urging them to adopt toward their persecutors Christ’s approach of gentle nonretaliation (v. 5; cf. Rom. 12:17–21; 15:3; 1 Peter 2:23; 3:8–9; cf. Isa. 53:7–9), and admonishing them not to be anxious about anything (v. 6; cf. 1 Peter 5:7). Instead, they should remember that the Lord is near (v. 5; cf. 3:20–21) and replace their anxiety with thankful prayer about their suffering (v. 6).6
The “and” at the beginning of verse 7 is more important than it looks. It does not simply attach another statement to verses 4–6 but gives the result of the thankful prayer that Paul has described in verse 6.7 If the Philippians follow Paul’s advice, he says, then “the peace of God, which transcends all understanding” will stand like a garrison over their hearts and minds. But what is the “peace of God”? Is it an overwhelming sense of inner contentment? Is it the serenity that characterizes God himself, who is never anxious? Is it the peace (cf. Rom. 5:1) that results from God’s justifying work in Christ Jesus?8 Since the peace mentioned here stands in contrast to the anxiety mentioned in verse 6, it is probably an inner sense of contentment supplied by God. It transcends all understanding because the anticipated response to the persecution the Philippians are experiencing is anxiety, but just as throughout this letter Paul expects Christian behavior to break the bonds of normal behavior, so here God supplies an attitude in the face of adversity that does not fit the normal categories (cf. 2 Cor. 1:3–11).9
Paul’s next paragraph begins with the same loose connective phrase he had used at 3:1. The NIV translates it “finally,” and indeed a close approximation of the phrase appears near the end of 1 Thessalonians (4:1) and 2 Corinthians (13:11). But, as in 3:1 (which is far from the letter’s conclusion), the phrase here probably means something like “as far as the rest is concerned,” “beyond that,” or “in addition.”10 It expresses no logical connection between verses 8–9 and verses 4–7, but simply shows that Paul is now moving to a different set of admonitions. This new set of instructions is bound closely together by the style in which he expresses them and by the balance of their content. In verse 8, Paul tells the Philippians how they should think and, as in verses 4–7, leaves out connecting words for emphasis (“asyndeton”). In verse 9 Paul tells the Philippians how to act and, using precisely the opposite stylistic device (“polysyndeton”), repeats the connective word “or” (kai) over and over. The effect, again, is emphasis.
The list of virtues that Paul asks the Philippians to “think about” is not a distinctively Christian list and could have been embraced by many right-thinking people in ancient times.11 Paul seems to place special emphasis on the breadth of these qualities by repeatedly using the indefinite adjective “whatever” (hosa). He tells the Philippians to look for the true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, and praiseworthy everywhere around them and to ponder the things in which these qualities are exemplified. Perhaps Paul knows that since the Philippians are being persecuted by the society around them, they will be tempted to reject everything outside the church as indelibly tainted with evil. If so, then this list, with its admonition to look for the virtue (arete; NIV “excellent”) in the wider world, reminds the Philippians that, although society sometimes seems hostile and evil, it is still part of God’s world and contains much good that the believer can affirm.
| THE RHETORIC OF 4:8–9 |
|---|
verse 8 |
whatever is true |
whatever noble |
whatever right |
whatever pure |
whatever lovely |
whatever admirable |
if anything is excellent |
or [if anything is] praiseworthy |
think about these things |
verse 9 |
Whatever you have learned |
or [you have] received |
or [you have] heard from me |
or [you have] seen in me |
put [these things] into practice |
Whatever Paul’s intention in giving this list, he goes on to say that the Philippians must practice the distinctively Christian ethic they find exemplified in his teaching and conduct (v. 9). The four verbs Paul uses here all show that he is reminding his readers both of his personal conduct while with them and of the Christian tradition he passed on to them. The term “learned” (from manthano) refers to learning from someone else’s example (cf., e.g., 1 Cor. 4:6).12 The term “received” (from paralambano), on the other hand, refers to the reception of a particular body of teaching (cf. 1 Cor. 11:23; 15:3; Gal. 1:9, 12; Col. 2:6; 1 Thess. 2:13; 3:6), sometimes teaching specifically about how Christians should live (cf. 1 Thess. 4:1).13 The Philippians would have received this teaching by hearing Paul, and they would have learned from his example by seeing how he conducted himself. Thus, they are not simply to ponder the best of the moral standards valued in the culture around them, but they are to follow the distinctively Christian pattern of behavior they learned from Paul’s words and deeds.
Bridging Contexts
THIS PASSAGE PROVIDES a good illustration of two classical interpretive problems. The first section (vv. 2–3) is so obviously dependent on the historical context of the letter for its meaning that it is tempting to resort to flights of fancy about the identity of Euodia, Syntyche, Clement, and the mysterious “loyal yokefellow” in order to make the passage more suitable for application to the modern church. The second section (vv. 4–9), on the other hand, contains such general advice that it is easy to miss the connection it has to the situation in Philippi—a connection that is crucial for discovering the primary meaning of these verses. As we apply these two sections to the modern church, we should find their theological underpinnings, discover how Paul applies those theological principles to the Philippians, and then apply those principles in the same way to the modern situation.
Theology and Application in 4:2–3. Paul’s plea to Euodia and Syntyche is built on two theological principles. (1) The unity he has urged on the Philippians as a group throughout the letter and in general ways (1:1, 27; 2:1–16, 29) must be implemented in practical ways in specific disputes. Paul has no interest in putting his admonition on merely an abstract level, simply issuing a general command that he then leaves the Philippians to work out on their own. Here he shows that the heady concept of Christian unity must be worked out on the ground, one quarrel at a time. So Paul singles out Euodia and Syntyche, identifies them as two people who have contributed to the disunity within the church, and urges them to “agree in the Lord.” Because they understand the implications of living in the sphere marked out by the Lordship of the Christ described in 2:6–11, they must seek reconciliation with one another. In 4:2, Paul pours all the theological richness of 2:6–11 into a single dispute between two people. For him there can be no dichotomy between reflection on the Incarnation and the behavior that the Incarnation requires of individual Christians.
Similarly in the modern church, no dichotomy can exist between what we believe and what we practice. If we believe that God is the “Creator of heaven and earth,” we cannot exploit his creation in ways that dishonor him. If we believe in “the forgiveness of sins” through the death of Jesus Christ, then we cannot refuse to forgive the sins of others. If we believe in “the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting,” then we cannot grieve over death as if we had no hope. But especially in light of this passage, if we believe in “the holy catholic church” and in the “communion of saints,” then when relationships within the church are broken, we must work for their reconciliation. It should be unthinkable to confess our faith in the words of the Apostles’ Creed but to refuse to associate with our brothers and sisters across the church aisle.14
(2) Paul provides an example to his readers of how to work for the unity with which he has been so concerned throughout the letter and with which he is especially concerned here. Such disputes are not the private concern of those quarreling, but of the entire church. It is appropriate, then, for the church to seek to arbitrate such disputes through the mediation of a believer who is gifted with the ability to help people overcome their differences. In addition, Paul’s example demonstrates that when the church must address such problems, it must do so with gentleness and evenhandedness, affirming the gifts of the people involved and guarding against bias in favor of one party.
Verses 2–3, then, reveal the principle that the way we think about God must be worked out in the way we conduct our day-to-day lives. This passage shows especially the importance of applying what we believe about the need for Christian unity to disputes within our churches. The way in which the apostle himself makes this application in the Philippian church also provides a model for us. The church should be willing to mediate between antagonists in its midst, but must do so in the gentle and impartial way that he demonstrates here.
Theology and Application in 4:4–9. The short, pithy, and rhetorically sophisticated admonitions of verses 4–9 flow from four theological sources: The Lord is near, God is sovereign and merciful, the world belongs to God, and those who live in the world can only be fully obedient to God by following his revelation of himself in the gospel. The first two principles are bound closely together and dominate verses 5–7; the second two are also tightly linked and stand beneath verses 8–9.
In two memorable phrases, Paul calls on the Philippians to rejoice in the Lord at all times and to let their gentleness be evident to all. Although these admonitions were particularly important within the Philippians’ situation of persecution, where suffering could dampen joy and prompt a vengeful response, the way in which Paul phrases them shows that he did not intend to limit their application to this setting. Believers are to rejoice “always” and to be gentle to “all.” Even when persecution is not present in the modern context, then, these admonitions provide a guide to the attitude and conduct that the gospel requires of believers. We should “rejoice” in both good and bad times and should have a reputation for gentleness rather than for vengeful retaliation.
Although nothing in the grammar connects these two admonitions to Paul’s statement that “the Lord is near,” that phrase nevertheless forms the logical basis for adopting the attitude and conduct that Paul advises. These words do not mean that the apostle mistakenly thought Christ was going to appear immediately. If he had thought this, it is hard to understand why he would reckon with the possibility of his own death in 1:18b–26, or why he would lay complex travel plans for Timothy, himself, and Epaphroditus in 2:19–30. Paul probably means, then, that the Lord is near in the sense that he is nearer now than when the Philippians first believed (cf. Rom. 13:11). The New Testament generally, and Paul’s letters especially, speak of the appearance of Christ as an incentive for obedience (see, e.g., Rom. 13:11–14; Phil. 1:10; 2:16; 1 Thess. 5:4–11). That is the way Paul speaks of it here, and we should not allow modern ridicule of apocalyptic thinking to lead us away from this legitimate and important incentive to ethical behavior.
Perhaps because he wants to forestall any notion that the believer must await the Lord’s return to have a vision of his sovereignty and to have access to his merciful provision for his people, Paul follows his reminder that the Lord is near with an admonition to pray. The believer should pray, Paul says, about every circumstance and should couple requests with thanksgiving. In the peace that passes all understanding which such prayers will produce, believers will experience God’s presence immediately, making the time of Christ’s appearing irrelevant to their spiritual well-being.15
Paul’s list of virtues in verse 8 assumes that the world contains many good qualities that merit the believer’s consideration and affirmation.16 It also assumes that the pagan world has some notion of good and bad, right and wrong, duty and irresponsibility, beauty and ugliness, honor and shame. Elsewhere Paul speaks of Gentiles who have the requirements of God’s law written on their hearts and says that occasionally they actually do these things (Rom. 2:14–15). He can also speak of the pagan authorities in government as God’s agents for adjudicating right and wrong in society at large (13:1–7). Paul assumes, in other words, that absolute moral standards exist, that people other than Jews and Christians have affirmed them, and that the believer can benefit from pondering examples of them wherever they occur, even in the pagan world.
Within the present climate of moral relativity, the modern church would do well to reaffirm this theological principle. Christian standards of morality and beauty are not simply expressions of subjective feelings but truths graciously revealed from God for the welfare of his people and of all creation.17 People other than Christians frequently recognize their validity, and when they do, Christians should support them, learn from them, and take comfort that what they acknowledge to be right on the basis of God’s Word the rest of the world often acknowledges to be right on the basis of their own understanding of how the world and society function best.
Christians would be remiss, however, if they allowed the unbelieving world to guide their ethical decisions. Elsewhere Paul acknowledges that because of the insidious effects of sin, unbelievers are often misguided about right and wrong—indeed, so misguided that they sometimes worship the creature rather than the Creator and seek human intimacy in precisely the wrong places (Rom. 1:21–27). Moreover, even when they retain a clear understanding of right and wrong, they are often incapable of doing it (Rom. 1:28–32; cf. Phil. 2:15). Thus, in verse 9 Paul reminds the Philippians of the importance of the specifically Christian witness to correct moral conduct. It is not simply contained in the Old Testament, although as Paul’s rather subtle use of Israel as a negative example in 2:14–16 shows, the Philippians must have been familiar with the Old Testament and, if the moral content of Paul’s other letters provides any insight into how he taught the Philippians, he must have reaffirmed much of the morality contained in it. Nevertheless, Paul’s own example and teaching, shaped by his knowledge of Christ (1 Cor. 4:17; 11:1), provided the Philippians with a sure moral compass within a “crooked and depraved generation” (Phil. 2:15).
The modern church, likewise, should applaud and learn from unbelieving expressions of truth and beauty. Mature Christians should feel no compulsion to read only literature written by other Christians, to view only movies and plays that fellow believers have produced, or to listen only to Christian music. Paul urges believers to discover and learn from the true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, and praiseworthy wherever it occurs. Not only will believers who do this shape their lives into the form that God desires, but they will uphold the truth within a relativistic age that claims truth cannot be known. Christians should nevertheless not forget that the touchstone of what is true and good is the Word of God and that every moral expression within the wider unbelieving world should be measured against the standard of the gospel as preserved in Scripture.18
Our task of bridging the ancient and the modern contexts is not complete, however, after simply identifying the general theological principles underlying this passage. Although the application of these general principles to the modern context is certainly legitimate, the passage is most clearly applicable to situations in the modern church that parallel the ancient Philippian situation of persecution. The temptation is as strong in modern contexts of persecution as it was in ancient times to lash out in retaliation at those who injure us and to wring our hands in anxiety about what will become of us, our families, and our property. The temptation is also strong to develop a dualistic view of the world—to think that everything outside the persecuted church is evil, including fellow Christians who for some reason are not experiencing persecution. If this is our context, Philippians 4:2–9 urges us to be gentle rather than vindictive, prayerful rather than anxious, and appreciative of the good within our culture rather than intellectually cloistered behind the fortified walls of a narrow ideology.
Two Interpretive Pitfalls to Avoid. Before leaving the mechanics of how to apply this passage, we must issue a warning against two interpretive pitfalls, both associated with the same element in the passage. This passage identifies two women as important participants in the life of the Philippian church, as fellow contenders with Paul in the cause of the gospel, and as fellow workers with Paul. These are impressive credentials. Paul’s only other use of the verb “contend together with” (synathleo; NIV “contended at my side”) appears in 1:27, where he tells the entire congregation that they should be “contending as one man for the faith of the gospel.” Since Paul is speaking of steadfastness in the face of persecution in 1:27, there is no reason to think that he refers to anything else in 4:2. Euodia and Syntyche, then, have bravely withstood persecution alongside Paul, perhaps during the time when he originally preached the gospel in Philippi.19
More impressive still, these women were Paul’s “fellow workers,” a word the apostle reserves for a circle of associates who have been especially helpful to him in fulfilling his calling to preach the gospel among the Gentiles. This company included such notables as Priscilla and Aquila (Rom. 16:3; cf. 16:9), Timothy (Rom. 16:21; 1 Thess. 3:2), Titus (2 Cor. 8:23), Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:25), Philemon (Philem. 1), Mark (Philem. 24), and Luke (Philem. 24).20 Since Paul takes the unusual step of admonishing Euodia and Syntyche by name, moreover, they probably held prominent positions within the Philippian congregation. Perhaps they were even among the “overseers and deacons” whom Paul has mentioned in the letter’s opening (1:1).
All of this has sometimes led interpreters of this passage down two widely divergent, but equally deviant, paths. Some have apparently been so amazed that Paul would attribute to women such important roles in his own ministry and in the life of the church that they have tried to make them men, or at least to make Euodia a man and Syntyche his wife. Thus the seventeenth-century Dutch jurist and theologian Hugo Grotius took both names to be masculine, and the fourth-century church father Theodore of Mopsuestia records a popular interpretation of the passage in his day that spelled Euodia as Euodias (a masculine form) and made Syntyche “his” wife. This tradition was apparently accepted by the translators of the King James Version.21 These efforts simply cannot succeed, since both names are feminine in the Greek text and Paul refers to the people who stand behind the names with feminine pronouns (hautais and haitines).22
Others, eager to find biblical precedent for the involvement of women in the ministry of the modern church, have assigned Euodia and Syntyche functions within the Philippian community that go beyond the evidence. Occasionally it is said that since Paul calls them fellow contenders and coworkers, they must have been preachers and teachers of the gospel.23 At the end of the day, however, it must be admitted that Paul’s reference to Euodia and Syntyche as his fellow contenders says nothing more of them than Paul says of the whole congregation in 1:27, and that the title “fellow workers,” although indicative of importance and perhaps leadership, is not precise enough to allow us to say that Euodia and Syntyche were preachers or teachers. The term certainly does not exclude such a role, but neither does it demand it.
In interpreting this passage it is best neither to change the text to correspond with our preconceived notions about a passive role for women in the church nor to enhance the text to supply greater support for the opposite position. No enhancement of the text is necessary to show that these women were not passive participants in their community and that they made a valuable contribution to the advancement of the gospel.24 Certainly women in the modern church should be encouraged to do no less than this, but the precise form their service should take cannot be decided on the basis of this passage. Paul’s interests in 4:2–3 lay elsewhere.
Applying 4:2–9: A Summary. This passage, then, speaks to situations where lip service is given to the great theological principles of the faith, particularly to the importance of Christian unity, but the practical application of those principles is not visible. More specifically, the passage shows the value of arbitration and the importance of evenhandedness in mediating between rival parties within the church. The passage also applies to those situations, particularly when they are produced by persecution, in which Christians are tempted to return evil for evil, to become anxious about the future, and to become so suspicious of the prevailing pagan culture that they stand in danger of an embattled denial that the world contains anything of value. On the other hand, the passage stands as a reminder to any who are tempted to embrace the world’s standards wholly that only a mind informed by the gospel tradition is fully equipped to discern where the world exemplifies what is good and where it has perverted the good in various ways.
As in 1:27–30 and 2:14–16, in this passage Paul has mingled concerns over the church’s internal dissension with concerns over its encounter with an unbelieving and hostile world. The passage speaks most powerfully, therefore, to equivalent situations in modern times.
Contemporary Significance
IT MAY COME as a surprise to many Western Christians that one of the deepest divisions in the church is racial. Since the term “segregationist” has finally developed the evil connotations in most communities that it should have had from the beginning, it is no longer socially acceptable to believe that people of northern European descent should not mix with people from African and Latin countries. Most white Christians today nod in the direction of racial equality and the need for unity, if they think about the issue at all, and many think that the problem no longer exists.
African-American believers usually disagree. They point not only to frustration with the silence of white believers on the plight of African-American people generally, but to anger over a persistent undercurrent of racism in their relationships with white Christians that appears to go unaddressed from the pulpit.25 An African-American family that belongs to a white church is not invited to go on a church outing to the beach because “we just felt that—well, you know that there aren’t very many black people at Myrtle Beach … and we just thought you would be uncomfortable.”26 An African-American pastor occasionally receives calls from white pastors in the area recommending to him families who might want to attend his church. Without fail, these referrals turn out to be efforts to send African-American families who have visited white churches to a predominantly African-American church instead.27 In addition, many African-American church leaders perceive white evangelicals to be so consumed with a conservative political agenda that they are not even aware of the plight of the African-American community and, when aware of it, are often unsympathetic.
How can the problem be addressed? Perhaps following Paul’s example of interposing a mediator between two rival groups would be a wise course. Paul himself acted as such a mediator in this letter by admonishing Euodia and Syntyche, evenhandedly and with ample encouragement, to agree with one another in the Lord. He also asked someone within the community to stand in the gap between these two women in his absence and to help them to be reconciled. Several such “loyal yokefellows,” who have understood the problem and who believe that the church has both the mandate and the ability to do what society seems unable to do, are emerging within today’s church. Christians should heed the call of these prophetic voices and should support them in their efforts.28 What better way could there be for the modern church to fulfill in its own time Paul’s hope that the Philippians would shine like stars in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation (2:15)?
The history of the church has shown that when Christians do act as a moral compass for society, they often act as a lightning rod as well. The Christians to whom Peter wrote were being slandered for their good behavior (1 Peter 2:16) and abused because they did not enter into the “same flood of dissipation” that their pagan neighbors found so entertaining (4:4). In the second and third centuries, Christians were regularly derided for their willingness to accept into their ranks members of the lowest social classes and were viewed as serious threats to the widely accepted (if oppressive) social order.29 Believers in Germany who during Hitler’s Third Reich opposed the treatment of the Jews and the mentally retarded were viewed as enemies of the state.30 Today, Christians who work for racial equality are sometimes ostracized, and those who attempt to bring their Christian convictions into public policy debates are lampooned and told to leave.
It is easy in such circumstances to punch back—if not literally, at least verbally and in demeanor. Whether fairly or not, Christians sometimes have the reputation of being irascible and touchy, of stalking from home to work to voting booth with a scowl on their faces. But Paul’s advice is for Christians in these circumstances to rejoice in the Lord and to make gentleness an obvious characteristic of their lives. He advises further that believers should dispense with anxiety and instead place troubling issues and situations before God in a spirit of gratitude.31 Whereas it is important to avoid a pietistic attitude that refuses to confront difficulties, it is also important to remember that the success of the gospel and the shape of our personal circumstances do not depend on our efforts but lie in the hands of an all-powerful and merciful God.
It is also important to remember that the world, although fallen, belongs to God. In the face of dramatic social changes that threaten the peaceful existence of evangelical piety in our culture, many evangelical Christians in recent decades have adopted a pessimistic attitude toward the world around them, retreating into an anti-intellectual stance. Instead of viewing the natural world as God’s creation and an appropriate object of investigation, evangelical Christians have sometimes focused solely on the supernatural. The result has been both a wistful yearning for the supposedly better days of a bygone era and an excited hope that the latest news from the Middle East will betoken Christ’s second coming and the end of the world as we know it. Thus, both Christian novels set in yesteryear and books outlining the latest revision of the end-time timetable continue to rank at the top of the religious bestseller lists.32
In this passage, however, Paul asserts the need for believers to cast their intellectual nets widely—to allow all that is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, and praiseworthy, wherever it is found, to shape their thinking. He then urges them to practice what they have learned from him of the Christian tradition. Christians today should not retreat from face-to-face encounters with the best unbelieving minds of the age, but should read them and hear them in the hope of learning truth, justice, and excellence from them and thereby becoming more obedient followers of Christ. At the same time, Christians should strive for minds so steeped in the Scriptures and Christian tradition that they are able to approach the values of the unbelieving world with a critical eye, an eye able to discern between what appears to be true but is, in subtle ways, false.
Christians have often in the course of their history had to endure social ostracism and outright persecution. But the proper response to these tragedies is not a retreat from the unbelieving world or a strictly reactionary response to it. It is instead a proactive attempt to embrace truth wherever it is found within the world and to integrate it with the truth found in Scripture.33
All of this is so important because the way we think determines how we act. Paul belies any attempt to separate thought from deed in verses 8–9 when he uses the term “think” in verse 8 and the expression “put into practice” in verse 9. Since the Philippians must think about his teaching and example in order to put them into practice, and since Paul will not believe that the Philippians have obeyed his command to think about the virtues he lists if they have not also acted on them, the two words have much the same meaning.34 Our thinking and our actions, then, are closely bound together. Indulging evil thoughts and tolerating sloppy thinking can have terrible consequences. Thus, if instead of loving my enemy I indulge the temptation to resent him, resentment turns to anger, anger to hatred, and the link between hatred and murder, as Jesus saw, is close (Matt. 5:21–22).35
The erudite biblical scholar Gerhard Kittel did not begin his career with the notion that he would promote the Jewish Holocaust, but by 1933, when Hitler seemed to be working miracles in his native land, he could give a public lecture in which he said,
The Jewish question is absolutely not a question of individual Jews but a question of Jewry, the Jewish Volk. And, therefore, whoever wants to get to the root of the question may not first ask what shall become of the individual Jew, but what shall become of Jewry.36
What we think as Christians does matter, for it will inevitably influence what we, and those under our influence, do.