25 Both the “and” and the word order (“and this convinced of”),7 with which Paul begins, reveal the close connection between this sentence and “what is more necessary for them” in v. 24, namely his release from imprisonment. That the preceding “soliloquy” is just that, expressing his personal longing but unrelated to his actual expectation, is demonstrated by the strength of the verb “convinced,” which expresses a persuasion that has evolved into conviction.8 This passage (and 2:24) makes it certain that the preceding has little to do with some “deep struggle” within Paul and everything to do with Paul’s eschatological outlook—and yearning—which he undoubtedly wants the Philippians to share.

His conviction is that “I will remain and will continue with all of you.”9 The paired, compound verbs (menō/paramenō; “will remain” and “will continue”) is a play on words10 which expresses, first, his conviction that he will “remain” in the sense of “remain alive” (v. 22), and second, his conviction that he will “remain” in the sense of “staying with you” (v. 24).11 The surprise comes from the qualifier, that “I will continue with all of you.” This otherwise unnecessary mention of “all”12 most likely points to the friction that is currently at work among them;13 that it occurs just before he takes up this issue seems scarcely accidental.

Paul concludes this first clause with the reason why this alternative is “more necessary for you,” namely, “for your progress and joy in the/your faith.”14 The “your,” which modifies both “progress” and “joy,” stands in the emphatic first position, thus putting the accent first of all on the Philippians themselves. It is for their sakes that he expects to be released, which he now elaborates to mean specifically for their “progress” and their “joy.” These two words together summarize his concerns for them in this letter: the first refers to the quality or character of their life in Christ, and especially to their “advancing,” moving forward, in such; the second denotes the quality of their experience of it. And both of these are “with regard to15 the faith,” which may refer to their own faith in Christ, as in 2:17, but in this context more likely refers to the gospel itself.16

This long reflection began (v. 12) on the note of the “progress of the gospel,” referring to evangelism; it ends on a similar note, only the concern now is more personal—with the Philippians’ own “progress” regarding the faith. In this letter that will include their “contending as one person for the faith of the gospel” (v. 27)—in the face of opposition and doing so “in one Spirit.” Such “progress regarding the faith” will manifest itself as their love for one another increases (1:10; 2:2), as in humility they consider the needs of others ahead of their own (2:3–4), as they “do all things without grumbling and complaining” (2:14), and as they keep focused on the eschatological prize (3:14–21). This is what it means for them to “continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (2:12).

The concomitant of such “progress” is “joy,” which they will experience as they “progress regarding the faith.” This is now the fourth mention of joy in the letter; the former three (vv. 4, 18 [2x]) had to do with Paul’s joy, first in the context of his thanksgiving and prayer for them, and second in the context of two expressions of opposition (by fellow believers [vv. 15–17] and by Rome [vv. 19–20]). His concern here is with the joy that is theirs in the gospel itself, although they will undoubtedly also experience joy in seeing Paul again.17

26 If the first reason Paul is convinced that he will “continue with all” of them focuses on the Philippians themselves—their own progress and joy regarding the gospel—the ultimate reason for all of this (his release and their progress) is expressed in terms of how it affects Christ.18

Here in particular the three-way bond that holds the letter together is in full evidence. Thus (literally): “your grounds for glorying19 will overflow20 in Christ Jesus in me.” Although a bit strained in its expression, the sense of this clause is straightforward enough. The occasion of Paul’s coming to them again (thus “in me”) will cause their “glorying/boasting” to overflow, and all of this takes place “in Christ Jesus.” This is how Christ’s being glorified “through life” (v. 20) is to find fulfillment.

The Greek word kauchēma (“grounds for boasting/glorying”; NIV, “joy”) is especially difficult to render into English. Although it can lean toward “joy,” there is no reason to think it here means other than what it ordinarily means in Paul, to “boast” or “glory” in someone. But “boast” is full of pejorative connotations in English—which it can also carry in Paul when one’s boasting is wrongly placed. Paul’s usage comes directly out of the LXX, especially from Jer 9:23–24, where the truly wise person “boasts” not in “wisdom, might, or wealth,” but “in the Lord.” “Boast,” therefore, does not mean to “brag about” or to “be conceited”; rather, it has to do first with putting one’s full “trust or confidence in” something or someone and thus, second, in “glorying” in that something or someone. Hence a false “boast” (in the flesh; 3:3–6) lies at the heart of Paul’s understanding of sin, whereas its opposite, “boasting/glorying in the Lord,” is the ultimate evidence of genuine conversion. In cases such as this one, where the boast is “in someone,” the “boast” is still “in Christ.” What he has done in and for Paul serves both as the ground for their “glorying in Christ” and the sphere in which such boasting overflows.21 Thus this part of the clause accents the relationship he and they have with Christ.

But such an overflow of glorying will be the direct result of the other bond, between him and them, that permeates the letter. In this case that finds expression in Paul’s parousia (= coming, or presence) with them yet once more. Thus this sentence (vv. 25–26) looks beyond the present moment to the time of their joyful reunion; but there is also an “in the meantime” that concerns Paul very much, which what he now turns to address in v. 27 (through to 2:18).

III. THE PHILIPPIANS’ “AFFAIRS”—EXHORTATION TO STEADFASTNESS AND UNITY (1:27–2:18)

In vv. 25–26 Paul concluded his “reflections on imprisonment” (vv. 12–26) with a perceptible shift of focus from himself to his relationship with the Philippians—in terms of an anticipated reunion. He follows that transitional passage by throwing the spotlight now entirely on them and their present circumstances (1:27–2:18). Two matters in the opening sentence (vv. 27–30) drive the whole—(1) concern for the Philippians’ steadfastness and unity, (2) in the face of opposition and suffering.1

This section is thus as obviously about “their affairs” as 1:12–26 was about his.2 In fact, a degree of formal similarity exists between the two sections. Each begins on the same note: “my affairs/your affairs.”3 First person pronouns and verbs dominated 1:12–26;4 second plural pronouns and verbs now dominate.5 “His affairs” concluded in a transitional way by focusing on them (vv. 24–26); this section concludes by focusing on Paul (2:16–18), also in a transitional way. And both sections conclude on the note of “joy” (theirs in 1:25; his in 2:17; and his and theirs together in 2:17–18). Finally, just as the heart of the previous section focused on Christ (vv. 21–23), so also with the heart of this section (2:5–11).

But there are three significant differences. First, the previous section was primarily narrative; this one is primarily imperative.6 If 1:12–26 is the stuff of a letter of friendship, this is the stuff of a letter of exhortation.7 Second, references to himself appear more frequently throughout this section than references to the Philippians did in 1:12–26, understandably so, since the appeal is based in part on their secure relationship. Third, the focus on Christ stands out in a unique way, in one of the most exalted passages in the NT, again understandably so. That is, if the focus on Christ in 1:21–23 was paradigmatic by implication, this one is explicitly so, as vv. 5 and 12–13 make plain; thus the “story” of Christ serves as paradigm for the “mindset” necessary for unity among them with regard to the gospel, both as they themselves “advance” in the faith (1:25) and as they hold fast the word of life for the sake of others (2:16).

One further formal note. Excluding 2:17–18, which serves as transition to the next section of the letter (vv. 19–30), the several parts of the argument fall out8 into a nearly perfect chiasm:

A Appeal to steadfastness and unity in the face of opposition (1:27–30)

B The appeal to unity, based on Paul’s and their common life in Christ (2:1–4)

C The appeal to Christ’s example (2:5–11)

B′ Application of the appeal, again based on their mutual relationship (2:12–13)

A′ Further application: unity in the face of opposition (for the sake of witness) (2:14–16)

These formal observations together tell the story. The stage is set by the appeal in vv. 27–30: the need for unity in the face of opposition—with its concomitant suffering—for the sake of the gospel. The Philippians are apparently being sorely tested, which now explains some of the emphases in the foregoing section.9 But they do not have their act fully together, which also explains some further emphases in the foregoing10—and the following. At issue for Paul, however, is not simply their own lives in Christ, but the cause of the gospel in Philippi (where Nero is acclaimed as kyrios, “lord”). Thus the reason for the further appeals in 2:1–18, all of which proceed from this initial “table-setting” paragraph.

The next paragraph (2:1–4), predicated on his and their long-term relationship in Christ and the Spirit, is a straightforward appeal to unity, set over against self-centered attitudes (“selfish ambition” and “vain conceit”) that destroy the community. That appeal is reinforced by the example of Christ (5–11), who as God and man displayed the opposites of “selfish ambition” and “vain conceit” by, first, “pouring himself out” in taking the form of a servant and, second, humbling himself to the point of death for the sake of others. But the Suffering One is now the Exalted One (future orientation again); not only so, he alone reigns as Kyrios, and at his name every knee shall bow and tongue confess (including “lord” Nero!). After applying all of this to their own situation (12–13; God himself at work among them for his own good purposes), Paul makes a final appeal to harmony (14–16), because believers alone “shine as (God’s) stars in the world”—in Philippi (“a crooked and depraved generation”)—even as they “hold fast/forth the word of life.” For the sake of all this, Paul concludes (vv. 17–18), he is quite prepared himself to suffer still more, being “poured out as a sacrificial libation” in conjunction with the “sacrificial offering” of their own faith (fulness).

With this section we come to the heart of matters, the primary reason for having written this letter—why he takes the occasion of Epaphroditus’ return to write to them, rather than waiting until he himself returns. And here in particular the three-way bond that holds the letter together stands out.11 The problem is not schism, but posturing and bickering—selfish ambition, empty conceit, complaining, arguing. At stake is the gospel in Philippi—Christ himself, if you will. Thus Christ and the gospel are Paul’s ultimate concern, now as always (point 1 in the diagram); the penultimate concern is with the Philippians’ relationship with Christ (line C), and thus for the Philippians themselves (point 3), whose united front for Christ is breaking down under outside pressure (“those who oppose you,” v. 28). Thus Paul appeals, on the one hand, to the example of both Christ (vv. 5–11; point 1) and himself (v. 17; point 2), and on the other hand, to his and their long-term and secure relationship in Christ and the Spirit (vv. 1–2; cf. 1:27; 2:12, 16–18; line B).

A. THE APPEAL—TO STEADFASTNESS AND UNITY IN THE FACE OF OPPOSITION (1:27–30)

27Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear12 about you13 in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in one spirit, contending as one [person]14 for the faith of the gospel 28without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you. This is a sign to them that15 they will be destroyed, but that you16 will be saved—and that by God. 29For it has been granted to you17 on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him, 30since you are going through the same struggle you saw I had, and now hear that I18 still have.

Paul now turns to “your affairs,” and does so by way of imperative. The whole is a single, nearly impossible, sentence in Greek, which probably assumes this form because Paul tries to include all of the urgencies of the letter (at least as far as their situation is concerned) in this opening word. Indeed, the weakness of some interpretations has been the failure to recognize the initial imperative as the key to the whole, and that everything else in the sentence functions as a modifier in some way. Here especially a structural display will help both to identify its various parts and to follow the train of thought (“stream of consciousness”?).19

Only

(1) worthy of the gospel of Christ,

live out your “citizenship”

so that

(2)

whether coming and seeing you

or being absent,

I hear about “your affairs,”

that

(a)

you stand firm

in the one Spirit,

(b)

as one person

contending together for the faith of the gospel

(3)

not being frightened in any way

by those who oppose you

[

which

(4)

is for them an “omen”

(a)

of destruction

but

(b)

of your salvation,

(c)

and this from God ]

because

(5)

it has been granted to you,

on behalf

of Christ,

(a)

not only to believe

on him,

but also to suffer

for him

(b)

having the same struggle,

which

you saw

in me

and now

you hear

in me

Thus, Paul’s concerns:

(1) The exhortation: that they live as worthy citizens of the gospel of Christ;

(2) The reasons: that in his current absence, he may hear about “their affairs”:

(a) that they stand firm in the one Spirit

(b) contending side by side as one person for the faith of the gospel

(3) The circumstances that called this forth: intimidation by their adversaries

(4) Which leads to an aside:

(a) Their doing 2 and 3 will become an “omen” of the opponents’ destruction;

(b) but evidence of the Philippians’ salvation,

(c) which has God as its source;

(5) A concluding theological explanation of their suffering (implicit in item 3):

(a) It is a “grace” given to those who believe

(b) It is consonant with Paul’s own struggles (past and present).

This paragraph thus holds the keys to much in this letter, especially regarding Paul’s concerns about things on their end, which have undoubtedly been reported to him by Epaphroditus. Although he does not explicitly say so (but cf. 4:2–3), 2:2–3 and 14 imply there are some internal tensions among them; at the same time there are some external pressures being applied, which bid fair to make their situation as God’s people in Philippi tenuous. Paul’s ultimate concern for them is directly related to his concern for the gospel in Philippi. His obvious hope, as 2:1–2 makes plain, is that his and their long-term friendship and participation together in the gospel will pull them through this twofold crisis.

27 With the adverb “only”20 Paul moves directly from “your [future] progress and joy in the faith” to the present scene in Philippi, which has all the potential for “regress” rather than “progress.” Thus: “Only—in light of what I have just said about my coming, but in the meantime before I get there—let this be what I hear you to be about,” namely, “living out your citizenship—the heavenly one of course—in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.” This imperative controls the argument from here to 2:18.

The rendering of the imperative as “conduct yourselves”21 is unfortunate22—and unnecessary.23 When Paul intends the general idea of conduct he uses the common Jewish metaphor of “walking.”24 Along with the noun politeuma in 3:20 (q.v.), Paul is here making a play on their “dual citizenship”—of the empire by virtue of their being Philippians; of heaven by virtue of their faith in Christ and incorporation into the believing community. On the one hand, the city boasted of its privileged status as a Roman colony, made so by Octavian (later the emperor Augustus) after his decisive victory on the plains of Philippi; hence its people thereby had Roman citizenship conferred on them, a matter in which they took considerable pride.25 The verb thus means (literally) to “live as citizens.” On the other hand, by joining it with the adverb “worthily,” Paul now uses the verb metaphorically, not meaning “live as citizens of Rome”26—although that is not irrelevant—but rather “live in the Roman colony of Philippi as worthy citizens of your heavenly homeland.” That, after all, is precisely the contrast made in 3:17–20, where “our ‘citizenship’ is in heaven,” in contrast to those whose minds are set on “earthly things.”

As Philippi was a colony of Rome in Macedonia, so the church was a “colony of heaven”27 in Philippi, whose members were to live as its citizens in Philippi. This suggests a missionary outlook on the one hand (they are “contending for the gospel” in Philippi; cf. 2:14–16), but a concern for the “welfare of the state”—the believing community itself—on the other. Thus this is the fitting verb for the setting. It would be full of meaning in light of their privileged status as Roman citizens, now addressing them as to their “civic” responsibilities to the new “polis,” the believing community, of which they are a part and whose responsibilities will be spelled out in what follows.28

With the modifier, “worthy of the gospel of Christ,” Paul defines both the parameters and the nature of the new “polis” of which they are citizens and to which they have obligation. As noted above (vv. 5, 7, 12), the gospel is the crucial matter. He and they have had a long-term participation together in the cause of the gospel (1:5), for the confirmation and defense of which Paul is now in prison (vv. 7, 15), an imprisonment which in its own way has fallen out for the “advance of the gospel” (v. 12). What was anticipated in the prayer (vv. 9–11) is now spelled out by way of imperative. Whatever they do or suffer in Philippi, they must live in a way that is “worthy of the gospel of Christ.”29 The phrase presupposes that the gospel had known ethical content,30 and that “selfish ambition, vain conceit, grumbling, and disputing,” for example, are not in keeping with their heavenly citizenship, since they do not reflect the ethical character of the gospel. In God’s time Paul will return to Philippi for their own “advance” in “the faith” (= the gospel); for now he writes to encourage the same. Thus, if Paul’s “affairs” are all about Christ and his being glorified, so he now urges the same on them, that whatever else, for them, too, “to live is Christ.”

The reason for this exhortation is given next, but in a way that has been complicated by Paul’s urgencies. He begins with a purpose clause that appeals to his and their relationship, whose content is finally given in the “that” clause that serves as the object of “I hear.” To get there he ties two concerns together (his coming [vv. 25–26] and their present situation). But he also writes in light of two (anticipated) realities: (1) that he is about to send Timothy to “learn about your affairs” (2:19), who will obviously come after this letter—and perhaps return to Paul31 before Paul himself comes; and (2) that Paul intends to come soon, when he can (2:24). This accounts for the grammatical awkwardness. He really is expecting to hear about “their affairs” before he comes; hence this is how the clause concludes: “or whether, being absent, I (nonetheless) hear about your affairs,” presumably from Timothy. But because of what was said in vv. 25–26, with the word about his own coming, he begins first with “whether I come and see you,” which in fact he expects to happen after he first “hears” about their situation.32

In the meantime he spells out specifically three coinciding matters he hopes to hear about “their affairs”: (1) that by standing firm in the one Spirit (2) they are contending together as one person for the faith of the gospel; and (3) that in so doing they are not themselves intimidated in any way by the opposition that is responsible for their present suffering.33

While the above seems clearly to be Paul’s point, the first of these matters is most often understood otherwise,34 not to refer to the Holy Spirit, but to a kind of “common mind” within the community. The primary reason35 put forward for this view is the close juxtaposition of this phrase with the “one soul” that begins the next clause. Thus (literally): “that you stand firm in one pneuma, [as] one psyche contending together36 for the faith of the gospel.” This is understood to be a piece of semitic parallelism (a distich), in which the second “line” is synonymous with, or explanatory of, the first.37 While that appears to have much going for it, several matters indicate that Paul is instead referring to their standing firm in the Spirit.

First, “in one spirit,” which seems to make perfectly good sense to us, in fact has no analogy in Greek literature, especially not in Paul and the NT. Whereas the term “one psyche” occurs frequently to describe oneness or unity between two or more people,38 the word pneuma is never so used. Indeed, it is not easy to determine exactly what “in one spirit” means.39 Ordinarily, it suggests something attitudinal,40 that is, a “community spirit”41 or (worse yet, in terms of Pauline usage) “a common mind.”42 But Paul himself never elsewhere uses pneuma in this way.43 What is altogether missing in Paul is any hint that “spirit” might be an anthropological metaphor for a community disposition. Although the French have a word for it (esprit de corps = “spirit of the body”), the Greeks apparently did not; and it is highly questionable whether Paul is here creating such a usage.

Second, also regarding a matter of known (especially Pauline) usage, whenever Paul uses the verb “stand firm” followed by the preposition “in,” the prepositional phrase is invariably locative; that is, it defines the “sphere” in which one is to stand firm.44 That regular usage works perfectly with “the one Spirit,” by whom they have all been incorporated into Christ, whereas “in one spirit” functions not as a locative but as a dative of “manner,” indicating how they are to stand firm. There is no Pauline analogy for such usage.

Third, in the resumption of the appeal that follows in 2:1–4, these two words are picked up again by Paul and used exactly as we are suggesting he uses them here. Thus in v. 1, he appeals to their common “participation in the Spirit” and in v. 2 argues that they be “soul brothers and sisters” in this matter. Thus, just as he has (indirectly) asked for their prayers that he might be supplied afresh with the Spirit of Christ as he faces his ordeal (v. 19), so now in the midst of their ordeal he urges them to stand firm in, and thus by, that same Spirit, the one and only Spirit whom they have in common.

Fourth, and most significantly, Paul himself uses this very language (“in one Spirit”) in another Prison Epistle (Eph 2:18; cf. 4:4) as well as in 1 Cor 12:13 to describe the Holy Spirit, precisely in passages where the emphasis is on believers’ common experience of the one Spirit as the basis for unity. No one would imagine in these cases that “in one Spirit” refers to the esprit de corps of the community. Paul’s point is that their being one in Christ is the direct result of the one Spirit’s presence in their individual and community life. So too in this case.

That leads, then, to the further contextual observation that such an understanding not only fits Pauline usage, but also fits the present appeal and his theology as reflected elsewhere. The present appeal is for their unity in the face of opposition. That Paul should twice urge them to hold firm and contend with unity of purpose makes for a much weaker appeal than that he should urge them first to stand firm in the “one Spirit,” and thereby to contend “as one person” against their opposition.45 It is, after all, an especially Pauline point of view that the Spirit is the key to unity in the church. This is expressly stated in such passages as 1 Cor 12:13 or Eph 4:4, and is the clear implication of many other texts (including 2:1 that follows). That he should qualify the Spirit as “the one Spirit” emphasizes the source of their unity. Only by standing firm in the one and only Spirit can they hope to contend as “one person” for the gospel against their opposition. We should therefore not be surprised that this is the first thing said in the long appeal for unity (1:27–2:18) that begins with this sentence.

The reason they need to “stand firm in the one Spirit” is so that they might “contend together46 as one person for47 the faith of the gospel.” The non-compounded verb (athleō) means “to engage in an athletic contest.” The compounded form, which occurs only here and in 4:3 in the NT, is strictly metaphorical, carrying the sense of “engaging side by side” or “helping one another,” in this case in the struggle for the gospel in Philippi. That he repeats the verb again in 4:3, when referring specifically to Euodia and Syntyche, who once “contended side by side with (Paul) in spreading the gospel” in Philippi but who are now at odds, indicates that that passage gives the particulars toward which the imperative in 1:27 is directed. Thus, even though we do not come upon reasons for this stress on unity until later (2:1–4; 4:2–3), the issue is one that the Philippians are privy to; there can be little question that they heard this emphasis in light of their present situation. This also helps to explain the earlier emphasis on “all of you,” especially in 1:25.

What Paul has said in 1:25 also explains the unusual expression, “for the faith of the gospel,” which is probably an appositional genitive (= “the faith, that is, the gospel”; or “the faith that is contained in the gospel”).48 As always the gospel is the urgency. Thus it turns out that their own “progress and joy in the faith” (mutual love and unity) is directly related to their contending side by side “for the faith of the gospel” in the face of current opposition in Philippi.

28 The second participial modifier, “without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you,” serves as the fulcrum between his appeal for unity in the face of opposition and the ensuing mention of suffering (vv. 29–30), which together serve as the primary “historical context” of the letter.49 At the same time this modifier furnishes us with some much-needed historical background in order to make sense of the matter of their suffering. There were those in Philippi who “stood in opposition to them.”50 Since the Philippians knew to whom Paul is referring, he does not elaborate; we can only surmise. But in light of several hints within the letter, especially the emphasis on Christ as “lord” and “savior,” and of the loyalty of this colony to the cult of the emperor, it seems very likely that the (Roman) citizens of Philippi, who would have honored the emperor at every public gathering, were putting special pressure on the Philippian believers; their allegiance had now been given to another kyrios, Jesus, who had himself been executed at the hands of the empire. The present context, in which Paul asserts that they are undergoing “the same struggle” he is now engaged in—as a prisoner of the empire—gives us good reason to believe so.

But since the Philippians did not need to be informed along these lines—after all, they knew better even than Paul what he is here referring to—why mention it at all? The answer lies first in the participle, “not being frightened51 in any way,” and second in the reassuring “aside” which immediately follows. Thus Paul urges that as they contend for the truth of the gospel against the opposition in Philippi, they not let the opposition intimidate them, formidable as it might appear. Now one can also better understand Paul’s sounding out the clear note that “to die is gain,” since death means to “depart and be with Christ.” People who hold firmly to such an eschatological orientation—the “mature,” after all, have this “mindset” (3:15)—will not be intimidated by opponents. They recognize that, in Luther’s words, “the body they may kill; God’s truth abideth still; his kingdom is forever.” This, then, is Paul’s (circuitous) way of urging them also to “glorify Christ,” whether “through life or through death.”

To plant that eschatological certainty firmly in their hearts, he offers a brief parenthetical moment, which seems to be much more straightforward than some interpreters have allowed. That the rest of our v. 28 is parenthetical most are agreed. At issue are two points of grammar: (1) that the clause is introduced by the (indefinite) relative pronoun, which does not seem to have an immediate antecedent; and (2) that the second clause is elliptical (something must be supplied to make it work), which has been considered to be problematic since the two pronouns (“to them” and “your” [“you” NIV]) are in different cases (dative and genitive respectively). But both of these have readily available explanations in terms of Pauline usage and Greek grammar, which point toward the understanding reflected in the structural analysis given above (pp. 159–60).52

The “which” (“this,” NIV) with which the clause begins is best understood as referring to the Philippians’ following through on the three matters he has just urged on them.53 If they do so, Paul says by way of encouragement, that will function with regard to the opposition54 as an “omen55 of destruction.”56 How so, Paul does not say, but the answer probably lies with the Philippians’ embracing the eschatological outlook just given in vv. 21–24. Such people cannot be intimidated by anyone or anything, since they belong to the future with a kind of certainty that people whose lives are basically controlled by Fate could never understand. Such a united front in spreading the gospel in Philippi, by people whose eschatological certainties give them uncommon boldness, will mean that those who oppose them can in no way intimidate them; indeed, such a disposition will serve as an omen with regard to the opponents of their destruction.

By the same token such resolve and unity in the face of opposition will fall out as salvation for the Philippians. Although the grammar is a bit sticky here, most likely Paul intends that their following through on his exhortations, which will serve as an omen regarding their opponents, will at the same time result in their own salvation,57 where the word “salvation” probably carries a sense very close to that in v. 19. Such salvation/vindication will not necessarily be manifest to the opponents, but it will become clear to the believers themselves. To drive this point of assurance home, Paul adds, “and this (i.e., your salvation/vindication)58 comes from none other than God himself.”

As often in Paul, God is both the first and last word. Salvation is at his initiative; it comes “from” him. Thus it is the first word. But in this sentence, in light of their need for reassurance, it is now the last word as well. Everything is from God; the Philippians can rest assured here. Which is also a necessary word in light of the final theological explanation regarding suffering that he is about to offer.

29 The final clause in this long sentence (which began in v. 27) offers a theological explanation for their suffering.59 The explanation is in two parts, corresponding to our current verse divisions. In v. 29 Paul puts the Philippians’ present suffering in terms of their relationship with Christ; in verse 30 in terms of their relationship with him.

Because of the parenthetical character of v. 28b, what Paul is setting out to explain is not immediately clear.60 Most likely these words were triggered by the combination of items in v. 28: his mention of the opposition and the strong affirmation of the Philippians’ salvation, as from God. Picking up on the latter, Paul proceeds to explain: … will serve as evidence of your salvation, because the God who has given you his salvation has with that gift also “graced” you to be Christ’s people in the world, which means that you will suffer for his sake just as he did for yours, and as I do as well. But what ultimately triggers all of this is the mention of the opposition, undoubtedly filtered through Paul’s knowledge of his readers’ present, very real, situation.

The keys to understanding the passage lie first in the text, and secondly in the larger context of the letter. About the text, two things stand out: Paul’s choice of the verb “graciously given,” and its striking Christocentric character. Thus Paul begins with an emphatic, “because to you has been graciously given.”61 Your salvation which comes from God, Paul explains, graciously given you through Christ, also includes another extension of grace, namely to suffer on his behalf. This may also be the clue to “sharing in God’s grace with me” mentioned in v. 7. In any case, suffering should not surprise or overwhelm them; it is rather evidence that “God looks upon you with favor.”62

What is even more striking to the Greek reader, which is not easily captured in English translation, is how thoroughly Christocentric this clause is, an emphasis that is created in part because of an awkward stylistic feature that probably resulted from dictation. Paul (apparently) began to dictate the subject (“to suffer on behalf of Christ”) immediately after the verb (“it has been graciously given”). But he got as far as “on behalf of Christ” and interrupted himself with a “not only” phrase, intending to emphasize their suffering for Christ, but within the context of what he has just said about their salvation.63 Paul’s point is easy enough to see. The God who has graciously given them salvation through Christ (“not only to believe in him”), has with that salvation also graciously given them “to suffer on his behalf.” But the interruption has created a striking focus on Christ: thus, “to you has been graciously given on behalf of Christ … to suffer on his behalf.”64

And herein lies the clue. What Paul is not doing is offering encouragement to believers about suffering in general.65 That too is our lot, as Paul explains in Rom 8:17–30. But here he is speaking specifically of their living for Christ in a world that is openly hostile to God and resistant to his love lavished on them in Christ. Those who have received this gracious love of God in Christ are also thereby given the grace to “shine out as stars in this wicked and perverse generation” (2:15). This accent on “for Christ’s sake” also explains why Paul goes on (in v. 30) to link their present suffering to his, to which he has just spoken. Indeed, in vv. 19–20, he had solicited their prayers for a fresh supply of the Spirit of Christ Jesus so that Christ will be glorified in his forthcoming trial whether through life or through death. Now the Philippians, too, are encouraged to “stand fast in the one Spirit” as they contend for the gospel in the face of similar opposition.

This emphasis in turn must also be understood in light of the “story “of Christ to which he will appeal in 2:5–11. They are to live “on behalf of Christ” in the same way Christ himself lived—and died—on behalf of this fallen, broken world. The Christ in whom they have believed for their salvation effected that salvation because as God he poured himself out by taking the form of a servant and as man he humbled himself to the point of death—death for theirs and the world’s sake—even death on a cross. That is why Paul can now explain that their salvation includes suffering “on behalf of Christ,” since those who oppose them as they proclaim the “faith of the gospel of Christ” are of a kind with those who crucified their Lord in the first place. And for believers, as with their Lord, the path to glorification leads through the suffering of the cross.

30 Paul now concludes this exhortation-turned-theological-explanation by reminding them that he and they are in it together. With these final words, “having66 the same struggle,” the reason for both the length and the content of the preceding narrative about “my affairs” (vv. 12–26) now falls into place. Three points are made.

First, their present “struggle”67 is of a kind with his, both that which they have known about in the past and that which he is currently experiencing. The accent falls on “the same,” which minimally points to their common suffering on Christ’s behalf brought on by those who oppose the gospel. Very likely, as was suggested above (p. 167), “the same” reflects the common source as well, the Roman Empire.

Second, he reminds them that their “struggle” is identical with that which “you saw I had.”68 Paul and his readers, one must sometime be reminded, lived in a real world of flesh and blood people who knew one another. Among the recipients of this letter, after all, are the jailer and his family and (perhaps) the young slave girl whose having been set free from Satan’s tyranny had resulted in the first of his sufferings on behalf of Christ that they “had seen.” Indeed, not long after that initial stay in Philippi he wrote to another Macedonian congregation and refers to his Philippian experience in terms of “suffering and being shamefully treated” (1 Thess 2:2). Nonetheless, the “struggle” was always with him, and every time he came through Philippi they saw more of the same, which in time took on a variety of forms.

But, third, and now back to vv. 12–26, he reminds them that their present suffering is precisely of a kind with his current Roman imprisonment. Whatever else, they are in this thing together. And it is that reality—and resource—that he will draw on as he now returns to the appeal that they stand firm in the one Spirit, contending side by side for the gospel (2:1–4).

Although our particulars may differ considerably, the theological concerns that emerge in this paragraph are greatly needed in the church today (especially in our current post-Christian, post-modern world), both in the Western church where the “struggle” is immense, but the suffering itself less so, and in churches in the emerging world, where suffering is often more prevalent but where sectarian strife all too often hampers the cause of the gospel.

One of the reasons most of us in the West do not know more about the content of vv. 29–30 is that we have so poorly heeded the threefold exhortation that precedes: (1) to stand firm in the one Spirit (overall our pneumatology is especially weak); (2) to contend for the faith of the gospel as one person (the “faith of the gospel” has been watered down in so many ways, on all sides [not just by “liberalism,” but by the blatant materialism that erodes the evangelical church], that it is sometimes not worth contending for; and our sectarianism has more often resulted in in-house furor than in contending for the gospel in the face of pagan opposition); and (3) to do so by not being intimidated in any way by the opposition (who tend to focus on our many weaknesses, so as continually to deflect our contending for the gospel of our crucified Savior per se).

The net result is that the content of Paul’s explanation is something contemporary Christians hear reluctantly, either out of guilt that so many of us look so little like this, or out of fear that it might someday really be true for us. The key is to return to Paul’s emphasis, “for the sake of Christ.” Our tendency is to focus on the suffering; what is needed is a radical paradigm shift toward Christ—and his apostle—as God’s ultimate paradigm for us. Through “death on a cross” he not only “saved us,” but modeled for us God’s way of dealing with the opposition—loving them to death.

What for Paul was exhortation to a concrete historical situation may well still function that way today in various local situations. But might it not also now take the form of prayer as we look at the church and the world in our day?

B. THE APPEAL RENEWED—UNITY THROUGH HUMILITY (2:1–4)

1If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any1 tenderness and compassion, 2then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose.2 3Do nothing out of selfish ambition or3 vain conceit, but in humility consider4 others5 better than yourselves. 4Each6 of you should look7 not only to your own interests, but also8 to the interests of others.

Both the “therefore” (omitted in the NIV) and the content of this paragraph—and those that follow—attest that the main issue in the preceding paragraph (1:27–30) is the exhortation with which it began (to live as “citizens” worthy of the gospel by standing firm in one Spirit against the opposition), not the theological explanation of suffering9 with which it concluded.10 To be sure, he begins the renewed exhortation by appealing to the encouragement and comfort that is theirs in Christ, which flows directly out of the context of suffering in vv. 29–30. But the present urgency is spelled out in the multiplication of synonymous phrases in v. 2, which together urge one thing—“that you have the same ‘mindset,’ ” that is, that they get along together in their “struggle” for the gospel, especially in the face of the opposition.

At the same time the paragraph points forward in a variety of ways, both linguistic and conceptual, to the Christ narrative that follows (vv. 5–11). Both paragraphs begin by urging on them the “same mindset”;11 the two sentences in vv. 6–8 (how Christ acted as God [6–7a] and man [7b-8]) respond directly to the vices singled out in v. 3 (“selfish ambition” and “vain conceit”); finally the verb in the second sentence (v. 8, “he humbled himself”) picks up on the “humility” that in v. 3 is offered as the opposite of those vices.12

As with 1:27–30, this too is a single (even more) complex sentence.13 As before, the way into—and out of—its complexities is through a visual display of the whole (again following Paul’s wording very literally):

		Therefore
(protasis)	[1] 1If any			encouragement
						in Christ
	[2] If any			solace
						of love
	[3] If any			sharing
						of Spirit
	[4] If any			compassions
					and
				mercies
(apodosis)		2fulfill my joy,
					so that
(explanation)			you set your minds on the same thing
(elaboration)				having the same love,
				united in soul setting your minds on the one thing
						3nothing according to selfish ambition
						nothing according to empty conceit
							but
						with humility
				considering one another
								more important than oneself
				4each not looking out					for one’s own concerns
					but
				each also					for others’ concerns

In form this is a “conditional” sentence, with a fourfold protasis (the “if” clauses) and elaborated apodosis (the “then” clause). The overall result is a sentence in four parts: a compound protasis (v. 1); the apodosis (2a); a result (or noun) clause explaining how the apodosis will be “fulfilled” (2b); and a series of modifying participles and nouns (2c–4) offering the means to fulfillment in contrast to some negatives (“selfish ambition/empty conceit”), which undoubtedly give content to the problem in Philippi. The “conditional” nuance, however, disappears as the sentence evolves. The “if” clauses turn out not to express supposition, but presupposition,14 and should therefore be translated something closer to “since there is …”; and the apodosis, instead of expressing the “then” side of a supposition, takes the form of an imperative based on the presuppositions.

This, at least, is how the sentence “works,”15 and for the most part (vv. 2–4) its sense is plain enough—perhaps too plain for most of us. The major difficulty in interpretation lies with v. 1, partly due to the meaning of some of the words and phrases and partly to the nature of the relationships presupposed by these phrases.

1 By the “therefore”16 with which this sentence begins, Paul ties what he is about to say to the preceding paragraph. The conjunction is inferential (= “in consequence of what I’ve just said”) and is probably intended to pick up on the whole of vv. 27–30.17 Thus with this word he first of all signals a resumption of the appeal to unity that began in vv. 27–28a; but he does so now in light of the Philippians’ suffering, in a struggle they have in common with Paul. “Therefore,” he says in light of that—and to return to the matter at hand—“if there be any ‘comfort’ in Christ, as indeed there is, … then complete my joy.”

But what Paul does next is not quite that simple. He begins by appealing to their common experience of Christ’s comfort, as a direct response to their common experience of suffering for Christ in the preceding clause (1:29–30). But right at that point, before dictating an apodosis, he adds three more “if” clauses, whose studied accumulation is part of the rhetorical effect18—but which turns out to be part of our difficulty, since what precisely Paul is appealing to in each case is less than clear. There are basically three options, depending on whether one sees the context as emphasizing (1) Christ and the Spirit’s prior work of grace in their midst,19 (2) the Philippians’ common life in Christ that they have experienced together heretofore,20 or (3) the relationship that they and Paul have together in the bonds of Christ and the fellowship of the Spirit.21

But part of our difficulty may also be related to the nature of dictation, in that what is written from dictation sometimes carries with it the rhetorical effects of oral speech.22 In this kind of rhetoric precision is a lesser concern than is the persuasive effect created by the accumulation of phrases.23 It is possible, therefore—probable, I would venture—that the emphasis shifts as Paul warms up to his rhetoric, even though each of the phrases undoubtedly has a primary direction to it, and very likely a secondary as well.24

Thus, at the beginning the focus is on Christ—and what is theirs by being “in Christ.” But as the preceding clause makes clear, and the “therefore” implies, “Christ’s comfort” is shared by him and them together. As Paul moves to the next two clauses, the primary focus again seems to be on the Philippians’ experience of God’s love and their participation in the Spirit; but again, he and they share these together as well. When he reaches the fourth clause, however, which noticeably lacks a genitive modifier, the direction seems to shift toward their relationship with him, thus leading directly to the imperative, “complete my joy.”25

A final note about the first three clauses. In light of their linguistic similarities to 2 Cor 13:13 (14) and conceptual parallels with Rom 5:1–5, these three clauses very likely also reflect an intentional Trinitarian substructure.26 If so, as with the benediction in 2 Corinthians, having begun with Christ, Paul proceeds with phrases expressing the primary qualities of the Father and the Spirit as to their relationship to the believing community. This, at least, seems to make good overall sense of the four clauses,27 to which we now turn individually.

1. “If there is any encouragement (comfort)28 in Christ.” This first clause is best understood as closely tied to vv. 29–30 and thus predicated on the three-way bond noted throughout. As one would expect in this letter, Paul first grounds his appeal in Christ. What he says about Christ responds directly to the motif of suffering just mentioned. Just as they are presently suffering on behalf of Christ, in the midst of their struggle there is also “encouragement in Christ,” in the sense of “comfort.” As the preceding clause makes clear, and the “therefore” implies, that “comfort in Christ” is shared by him and them together. Thus, while the focus is primarily on what Christ has done—or in this case, will continue to do—for them, the appeal presupposes that he and they share this comfort just as they do the struggle and the suffering.29

Very often, however, this clause has been understood otherwise, as stressing either “exhortation or appeal” or “encouragement,” but the latter quite apart from vv. 29–30. That is, the Philippians’ being “in Christ” is seen as the grounds for the following exhortations (vv. 2–16),30 or for encouragement per se.31 While either of these is possible, it seems more likely in context that Paul’s usage here reflects that of 2 Cor 1:5 (“just as the ‘sufferings’32 of Christ have overflowed unto us, so through Christ our comfort [paraklēsis] likewise overflows”).33

2. “If there is any solace34 of love.” What Paul intends by this phrase seems easy enough, namely, that the further basis of his appeal is the “solace afforded by love” (BAGD). Thus he continues the motif of comfort in light of their common struggle. But based on whose love for whom? On this there is no certainty.35 If our observations on the possible Trinitarian substructure of the passage are correct, then Paul is referring to the experience of God’s love, lavished on the Philippians—and him—in Christ and “shed abroad in their hearts” by the Spirit (Rom 5:5). Two things make one think so: that this clause falls between the mention of Christ and the Spirit, and with the same language (in the case of the Father and the Spirit), as in 2 Cor 13:13 (14);36 and that “love,” in keeping with Paul’s OT roots, is most often expressed as from God, whose “love” for his people is the ultimate predicate of everything that God has done on their behalf. It is that “same kind of love” to which he will appeal in the apodosis that follows.

Again, given the context and flow of the argument, there is every good reason to believe Paul also includes himself with them as a recipient of “love’s consolation.” Thus, the appeal in this context probably means something like, “if our common experience of comfort from God’s love has anything going for it at all, then express that same love toward me, by completing my joy by having the same love toward one another.”

3. “If there is any sharing37 in the Spirit.”38 With this phrase Paul returns specifically to the “one Spirit” in whom, and thus by whom, they are to stand united in contending for the gospel in Philippi (1:27). This clause readily follows the first two. It is the Spirit who put them “in Christ”; so also it is by the Spirit that God’s love, the ground of their being, has been shed abroad in their hearts (Rom 5:5). As in the benediction in 2 Cor 13:13 (14),39 the “fellowship with the Spirit” most likely refers to the “sharing in the Spirit” (NRSV) that believers have first with God, but by that very fact, secondly, with one another because they live and breathe by the same Spirit.40 By the Spirit, therefore, they are united to Christ, and in Christ to one another—and thus to Paul. Indeed, the Spirit is the empowering agent of all that God is currently doing among them, “both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (2:13). Thus, just as the comfort from being “in Christ” and the solace of experiencing God’s love serves as the ground for his appeal to their unity in Christ, so too (especially) with their common “participation in the Spirit.”

4. This (apparently) Trinitarian basis of appeal is followed by, “if any compassions and mercies,”41 which in some ways is the most difficult of all,42 since it appears tacked on as a final, passionate appeal based on deep feelings, and since there is no genitive qualifier. But that may also be the clue to what Paul intends. In 1:8 he has already based his longing for them on the “compassion of Christ”; and the word “mercies”43 is expressly said to belong to God in 2 Cor 1:3 and Rom 12:1. Nonetheless, in Col 3:12, probably written at an earlier stage of the present imprisonment, he had urged those believers to put on, among other Christian virtues, “bowels of mercy,”44 where the context is clearly that of community life. In light of the imperative that comes next, that is very likely the direction of this final appeal, but not simply toward one another; rather, as before, he is appealing to “compassion and pity” that he and they have toward one another,45 which leads directly to the imperative that follows. Paul thus concludes, “if God’s compassion and mercy have produced those same qualities in you toward me, as you know I have toward you, then complete my joy by having a single mindset among yourselves.”

Thus, from this view, the appeal is for their unity and love toward one another (vv. 2–4), based on their shared comfort and love that has its origins in God and found historical expression in Christ and the Spirit, and has been shared mutually by them and for one another. With that he turns to the appeal itself.

2 Just as part of the power of the appeal in the protasis lay in the compounding of “if” clauses, so in the apodosis there is an equally striking compounding of synonymous phrases46 of such nature that the “wayfaring person though a fool” could not possibly miss the point. Three (or four)47 times he says it:

that you set your minds on the same thing;

having the same love,

together in soul having your minds set on the one thing.

But to get there, in a way similar to the grammar of 1:27, he expresses the apodosis in terms of their relationship to him, in this case by way of an imperative, “complete48 my joy.” For the ultimate urgency of the appeal—their unity—this imperative seems unnecessary,49 since he could easily have gone directly from the fourfold ground of the appeal to its actual content (as he will in 4:2); this, after all, is his concern. But instead, in keeping with the tenor of the whole letter, he interjects this strong personal appeal. While on the surface this may sound self-serving,50 in reality it speaks volumes about Paul’s pastoral heart.51 His own life and apostleship are deeply bound up with his converts’ well-being, and especially with their perseverance so that they themselves will experience God’s eschatological joy (cf. vv. 16–18). Such perseverance calls for their standing firm in the one Spirit. Only so will his own joy be filled to the full; and in any case the entire letter presupposes the secure nature of his and their mutual affection and joy. Thus, he appeals, “If these various realities of life in Christ and the Spirit mean anything to you at all—indeed, if we share these together in Christ—and if there is any compassion and mercy as you think of me in this prison, then make my joy52 full by being of one mind,” that is, by responding to the exhortation of 1:27.

As the Philippians were hearing the letter read aloud, they could hardly have missed associating this imperative with the preceding expressions of joy: first in 1:4, where he makes his prayer and thanksgiving for them with joy—“complete that joy,” he now urges; and second in 1:18, where his twofold rejoicing served as the “center of gravity” for his “reflections on imprisonment.”53 Both in his present circumstances, trying as they are, and in anticipation of his trial, he has rejoiced and will continue to do so, since the gospel is being furthered and Christ is about to receive even greater glory. Now he urges them to bring that joy to its full completion, by advancing the gospel still more in Philippi (2:14–16). But to do so they must get their act together; the murmuring and bickering must cease, they must come to a common mind about life together in Christ and must show the same by their mutual love for one another (in fulfillment of his prayer for them in 1:9). If they who are already his “joy and crown” (4:1) are to remain so at the coming of Christ, they must give heed to the imperatives of this sentence (and to the similar ones in 4:1–3).

A few further words about the compounding of words and phrases by which they are thus to complete Paul’s joy:

a. The initial clause, “that54 you set your minds on55 the same thing,” has been rightly captured by the NIV, “that you be like-minded.” This verb, which he used in 1:7 to refer to his disposition toward them, is also used at the end of the letter of theirs toward him (4:10 [2x]). In between it dominates the imperatival moments in this letter.56 As noted before, the word does not mean “to think” in the sense of “cogitate”; rather it carries the nuance of “setting one’s mind on,” thus having a certain disposition toward something (e.g., life, values, people) or a certain way of looking at things, thus “mindset.”57 What he means by the “same” mindset will be explained in vv. 6–11, where Paul points them to that of Christ (v. 5). The emphasis is thus on the Philippians’ unity of purpose and disposition, unity with regard to the gospel and their heavenly citizenship58—exactly as in 4:2, where he qualifies it, “have the same mindset in the Lord”—not on their all having the same opinions about everything.59

b. The “same love” that he wants them to have points back to the second clause in the protasis, “if any solace from (God’s) love.” The phrase “the same” carries some ambiguity, perhaps purposefully so in this case. The context demands that he is first of all urging them to have “the same love for one another” that they already have experienced in God’s love for them—and in theirs and his for one another. But at the same time, he wants them to have shared love, each having “the same love” for the other. In 1:9 Paul told them he prays that their love might abound “still more and more.” Love, therefore, is not lacking in this community. At issue is the danger of its being eroded by internal friction, by their not “having the same disposition” about what it means to be God’s people in Philippi. Thus, they will fill his cup of joy to the full as they return to full and complete love for one another, which by definition means to care for another for her or his own sake. As someone well said: “Love begins when someone else’s needs are more important than my own,” which is precisely what Paul will urge in the elaboration that follows.

c. But before that he adds yet another participial phrase. With the rare compound adjective, “together in soul,”60 joined to a near repetition of the first clause,61 he now joins soul and mind together (feeling and thinking). Not only does he want their minds set on the same thing, but he wants them to do so with their whole being. This adjective harks back to “as one soul/person,” which modifies “contending side by side for the faith of the gospel” in 1:27,62 just as the third line in the protasis (“if there is any sharing in the Spirit”) harks back to the call in that same verse to “stand firm in the one Spirit.”63 Again, as in 1:27, the accent is on unity within the community of faith.

3 Paul’s sentence now begins to get away from him, as he piles modifiers upon modifiers.64 But even that has its own rhetorical effect. With a typical “not/but” contrast the phrases and clauses that make up our v. 3 give “shoe leather” to the appeal in v. 2. The contrasts are stark, which the NIV has rightly turned into yet another imperative: “Do nothing out of65 selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.” With these words Paul specifies what he knows—or suspects—is going on among them. The first item, “selfish ambition” or “rivalry,”66 was used in 1:17 to describe those in the Roman community who are preaching Christ out of envy, supposing thereby to give Paul grief. Significantly, the “selfish ambition” of the envious was explicitly contrasted to those who preach Christ out of “love” (1:16).67 “Selfish ambition” stands at the heart of human fallenness, where self-interest and self-aggrandizement at the expense of others primarily dictate values and behavior. People with such a “mindset” not only stand over against the apostle, their dear friend, but also over against God, whose Son fully displayed God’s character when he took on a servant’s role (cf. 2:7).

The second item, “vain conceit” (lit., “empty glory”68), denotes that kind of “empty glory” that only the self-blessed can bestow on themselves. This word occurs throughout the Greco-Roman world to describe those who think too highly of themselves, not those who might appear to have grounds for “glory,” but those whose “glory” is altogether baseless. It occurs elsewhere in Paul in Gal 5:26, also in the context of a church where people are “eating and devouring one another.”69 One does not wish to be too harsh on the sisters (Euodia and Syntyche) who are singled out in 4:2 as not getting along—and the two further words in 2:14 (“grumbling and disputing”) must also come into the picture—but Paul well understands that if these attitudes are allowed to continue unchecked, the believing community in Philippi is headed for serious trouble, far more serious than is probably currently present.70

At the same time these words point forward as the opposites of the “mindset” of Christ: who as God did the antithesis of “selfish ambition” by pouring himself out and becoming a servant, and as man the antithesis of “vain conceit,” by humbling himself unto death on a cross.71

In further anticipation of vv. 6–11, especially v. 8, Paul here contrasts “selfish ambition and rivalry” with, “in72 humility consider others better than yourselves.” “Humility”73 is a uniquely Christian virtue,74 which, as with the message of a crucified Messiah, stands in utter contradiction to the values of the Greco-Roman world, who generally considered humility not a virtue, but a shortcoming.75 Here Paul’s roots are in the OT—and in Christ. In the OT the term indicates “lowliness” in the sense of “creatureliness,” and the truly humble show themselves so by resting their case with God rather than trusting their own strength and machinations.

Humility is thus not to be confused with false modesty, or with that kind of abject servility that only repulses, wherein the “humble one” by obsequiousness gains more self-serving attention than he or she could do otherwise. Rather, it has to do with a proper estimation of oneself, the stance of the creature before the Creator, utterly dependent and trusting. Here one is well aware both of one’s weaknesses and of one’s glory (we are in his image, after all) but makes neither too much nor too little of either. True humility is therefore not self-focused at all, but rather, as further defined by Paul in v. 4, “looks not to one’s own concerns but to those of others.”

For Paul this perspective comes from Jesus, where “humility” explains both his own self-understanding and his opposition to pharisaism. Not only so, but in Jesus something essential about God’s character is revealed. Jesus’ invitation to the heavily laden to come and “learn of him” (Matt 11:29) is thus placed in a context where the Son alone knows the Father and so is revealed as “gentle and humble (tapeinos) in heart”—to “babes,” it should be noted, not to the “wise and learned” (11:25). Thus the main verb in the second sentence in the ensuing narrative about Christ (vv. 7b-8), describing his Incarnation (“he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death”), comes from the same root.

Thus, over against doing anything on the basis of “selfish ambition” or “vain conceit,” the Philippians are to have the same love for one another as God in Christ has for them, which will find its ultimate expression when “in humility” you “consider76 each other77 better78 than yourselves.” As with humility, this does not mean that one should falsely consider others “better.” As v. 4 will clarify, we are so to consider others, not in our estimation of them79—which would only lead to the very vices Paul has just spoken against—but in our caring for them, in our putting them and their needs ahead of our own. After all, this is precisely how Christ’s humility expressed itself, as Paul narrates in v. 8. Thus, it is not so much that others in the community are to be thought of as “better than I am,” but as those whose needs and concerns “surpass” my own. Here, of course, is the sure cure for “selfish ambition and vain conceit,” not to mention “grumbling and bickering” (v. 14).

It needs only to be noted, finally, that in Paul’s sentence this final participle modifies the main clause in v. 2, “that you have the same mindset.”80 Here is the road to true unity among believers; as the use of “one another” demonstrates (see n. 77), this passage deals with attitudes within the believing community. If “selfish ambition and vain glory” are sure bets to erode relationships within the church, then the surest safeguard to a healthy church is when “considering each other as more important than oneself” characterizes its people, especially those in positions of leadership.81

4 This final set of clauses, which again for the sake of readability have been made into a separate sentence in the NIV, is in fact a further participial modifier of the participle “considering” in v. 3. Which in turn means that this clause is not another in a series of exhortations; rather, it clarifies the preceding clause.82 Here is how one considers the others within the believing community to “surpass oneself,” by “looking [out]83 not for oneself, but especially for the needs of others.” Here is how he elsewhere describes those whose behavior is genuinely Christian; they “do not seek their own good, but that of others.”84 This is the way, Paul says in Gal 6:2, that we “fill to the full the law of Christ,”85 by “bearing each other’s burdens.”

The emphasis is on “each” and “others.” Here one finds a kind of tension between the individual and the community that occurs throughout Paul. As always in such passages, the accent rests on the community; it is only as a people of God together that God’s people fulfill his divine purposes. But in contrast to ancient Israel, where entrance into the community came through birth within the covenant community, in the people of God newly constituted by Christ and the Spirit, people enter one at a time. Therefore, the emphasis in Pauline paraenesis (exhortation) is primarily on the community, but obedience must begin with the individual (see v. 13 below). Thus, “each one” among them must have this care for the “others” among them.86 This emphasis is probably to remind some within the community who seem to be out of step with some others.

One must also be careful not to push this clause beyond Paul’s own intent, which is not concerned with whether one ever “looks out for oneself”—the “also” in the final line assumes that one will do that under any circumstances—but with the basic orientation of one’s life, a life touched by the grace of God that has been lavished on us through Christ and made an experienced reality through the Spirit. All such terms as “enlightened self-interest” belong to modern psychology, not to the basic orientation of life in Christ. While this language may serve as a corrective to the kind of obsequiousness noted on v. 3, all of that lies outside Paul’s concerns, that the basic orientation of Christian life regarding relationships with others is to be like that which he will describe in the Christ narrative that follows.

Here, then, is Paul’s basic response to the (apparently) petty grumbling and bickering going on among some within the believing community in Philippi, a kind of unrest that not only dulls their witness within that city but at the same times erodes their ability to “contend side by side” for the sake of the gospel in the face of strong opposition.

The basis of the appeal is twofold: (a) to their relationship with God as that has been manifest even in the face of suffering by Christ’s comfort and God’s love, as well as from their common participation in the Holy Spirit; and (b) to their longstanding relationship with Paul, who has not only experienced these same graces with them, but whose joy will now be filled to the full as they allow these realities to inform their present life together in Philippi.

The concern of the appeal is with their being a united people in Christ by the Spirit. Only so can they hope to “advance” in the faith themselves (1:25) and to advance the cause of the gospel (1:27).

The content of the appeal describes, first, those expressions of our human fallenness that altogether militate against unity within the household of faith, “selfish ambition” and “empty glory”; and, second, those virtues necessary for it to happen, “love” and “humility,” which find concrete expression as God’s people learn to live as Christ, to consider and care for the needs of others as the matter of first priority.

As Barth rightly pointed out, here is a vivid, miniature expression of the heart of Pauline ethics, not simply because its predicate is grace, but because it is grounded in the character of God as that has been revealed in Christ Jesus, which is the point to be taken up next. As with so much else in this letter, here, too, is a word for all seasons. One can only imagine what might happen if we were to rethink—and re-experience—the love and encouragement that is ours through the Trinity, and on that basis also rethink—and thus reorient—our life in Christ in terms of our relationships to one another. If we ourselves were more truly characterized by the content of this appeal, we might become a more effective people in the world.

C. THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST (2:5–11)

Without breaking stride, Paul turns from the appeal in v. 2, as elaborated in vv. 3–4, to a second imperative by which he will now define the “mindset” he is urging on them: “This mindset have among yourselves which was also found in Christ Jesus.” And with that he launches into a narrative about Christ that is at once one of the most exalted, most beloved, and most discussed and debated passages in the Pauline corpus.1 Here is one of Paul’s finest hours, which serves both to exalt Christ and to prod the Philippians to emulation (the issue of vv. 1–4), while reassuring them of Christ’s exalted position—including over Caesar himself.

Since the seminal work of Lohmeyer, the vast majority of interpreters have assumed the present passage to be an early hymn2 (whether by Paul or otherwise3) in honor of Christ. Whether hymn or not, and I have considerable doubts here,4 one can scarcely miss the poetic and exalted nature of much of this. But neither, by calling it a hymn, should one miss the narrative character of the passage, which begins with Christ’s pre-existence, followed by his incarnation, including his death on the cross, and concludes with his (assumed) return to heaven as the exalted Lord of heaven and earth. Indeed, of the many attempts to find the “original” strophic arrangement of the alleged hymn,5 the most satisfactory by far are those which follow Paul’s own sentence structures. Hence for the purposes of seeing how the narrative functions, and thus how Paul’s own dictated sentences6 work, the whole is set out in a structural display (again following Paul’s Greek very literally7):

5This mindset have
											among yourselves
which also
	in Christ Jesus:
[Part I]			6who
I1	being in the “form” of God,
		not harpagmon8			did he consider equality with God,
		7but himself			he emptied,
			taking			the “form” of a slave
			coming to be			in the likeness of human beings;
			8and
I2	being found in appearance as a human being,
		he humbled himself,
			becoming		obedient unto				death,
									death on a cross.
[Part II]		9Therefore also
	God		him has highly exalted
					and
				has granted him the name
							that is above every name,
			10so that
					at the name of Jesus
						every knee should bow
								in heaven
									and
								on earth
									and
								under the earth
							11and
						every tongue should confess that
									the Lord is Jesus Christ
									to the glory of God the Father.

The narrative is thus in two parts, corresponding to our vv. 6–8 and 9–11.9 The first part is a compound sentence, with two clauses joined by “and” (I¹ and I²),10 which are identical in form and in turn show how Christ’s “mindset” expressed itself first as God and second as “man.”11 Both of these clauses have a basic threefold structure: (a) each begins with a participial phrase indicating the “mode”12 of Christ’s existence (as God, as “man”), followed (b) by the main clause indicating what Christ did in each of these modes of existence (he poured himself out; he humbled himself); which (c) in turn is modified by a further participle indicating how Christ carried out what was said of him in the main verb (by “taking on the ‘form’ of a slave”; by “becoming obedient unto death”). In both cases this final participle is further modified, in the first clause by another clarifying participle (Christ’s taking the form of a slave has to do with his “being made in the likeness of human beings”) and in the second by a clarifying word about his death (“the death of the cross”). The first clause (I¹), it should be noted, also has a significant difference: the main verb is expressed, typically for Paul, with a “not/but” formulation,13 intended to set Christ’s “divine activity” into the starkest possible contrast (“being in the ‘form’ of God, he did not consider equality with God to be taken advantage of, but he emptied himself”). These parallels, plus the sheer power of some of the language, are what give the sense of poetry to this first part.

Part II (vv. 9–11) lacks both the poetry and the balanced clauses of Part I. Instead, it takes the form of basic Pauline argumentation. The ultimate consequence of Christ’s “mindset,” which led to his “humiliation,” Paul asserts, is that God has exalted him “to the highest place” (NIV), by bestowing on him the ultimate name of all: God’s own appellation of “Lord,” which, not incidentally, is also one of the appellations of Caesar (cf. Acts 25:26). In so doing God vindicated Christ’s “mindset” evidenced in vv. 6–8.

The context makes it clear that vv. 6–8 function primarily as paradigm.14 The two clauses stand in bold relief to the “selfish ambition” and “empty glory” of v. 3, the second clause exemplifying the humility that is likewise called for in that passage. The function of Part II has been debated. Most likely its purpose is twofold: first, to express divine affirmation of Christ’s way of expressing his “equality with God” in vv. 6–8; and, second, in keeping with a motif that runs throughout the letter, to affirm the Philippians’ certain future, with its divine vindication. It thus also places Christ in bold contrast to “lord Nero,” whose “lordship” they have refused to acknowledge in a city where the cult of the emperor undoubtedly played a significant role.

But quite apart from its function in the argument, this narrative has significance all on its own. Here is the closest thing to Christology that one finds in Paul;15 and here we see again why the “scandal of the cross” was so central to his understanding of everything Christian.16 For in “pouring himself out” and “humbling himself to death on the cross,” Christ Jesus has revealed the character of God himself. Here is the epitome of God-likeness: the pre-existent Christ was not a “grasping, selfish” being, but one whose love for others found its consummate expression in “pouring himself out,” in taking on the role of a slave, in humbling himself to the point of death on behalf of those so loved. No wonder Paul cannot abide triumphalism—in any of its forms. It goes against everything that God is and that God is about. To be sure, there is final vindication for the one who goes the way of the cross; but for believers the vindication is eschatological, not present. Discipleship in the present calls for servanthood, self-sacrifice for the sake of others. Hence Paul concludes the narrative with a further call to “obedience” on the part of the Philippians (v. 12), which will take shape as God works out his salvation among them for his own good pleasure (v. 13); but for God to do so, they must stop the bickering (v. 14) and get on with “having the same love” for one another (v. 2) as Christ has portrayed in this unparalleled passage.

1. As God He Emptied Himself (2:5–7)

5Your17 attitude should be18 the same as that of Christ Jesus:

6Who, being in very naturea God,

did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

7but made himself nothing,

taking the very natureb of a servant,

being made in human19 likeness.

Following the imperative in v. 5, Paul begins the narrative about Christ with his pre-existence,20 indicating both what his being God did not entail and what it did. The main thrust of the clause is simple enough: Christ’s being God was not for him a matter of “selfish ambition,” of grasping or seizing; rather it expressed itself in the very opposite. Thus in a single sentence Paul goes from Christ’s “being equal with God” to his having taken the role of “a slave,” defined in terms of incarnation. All of this to call the Philippians to similar self-sacrifice for the sake of one another (v. 4).

But the ideas are profound, full of theological grist, and the language not at all simple. Historically, the discussion has centered in four difficult wordings: morphē (NIV, “in very nature God”), harpagmon (“something to be grasped”); ekenōsen (“he made himself nothing”); and homoiōmati (“in human likeness”). Some preliminary observations are needed in order to put these matters into perspective. First, it is of some interest that these difficulties are concentrated in the sentence that deals with divine mysteries. That is, on the basis of what was known and came to be believed about Jesus’ earthly life, Paul is trying to say something about what could not be observed, yet came to be believed about Christ’s prior existence as God. Most of our difficulties stem from this reality, plus our prevailing desire to penetrate into the divine mysteries themselves. Second, Paul’s primary concern is not theological as such, but illustrative,21 what Christ Jesus did (in keeping with his “mindset”) in his prior existence as God (which of course does indeed say something theological). Therefore, third, while not primarily intended as such, by its very nature the passage is full of theology (especially Christology) that must be dealt with. And fourth, Paul’s actual choice of language22 is further dictated by two factors: (a) the “not/but” contrast, which dominates the whole, and which called for a word (morphē, in this case) that could serve equally well both expressions of Christ’s existence (as God and as a slave);23 (b) his primary concern in the passage is to illustrate the kind of selflessness and humility referred to in v. 3.

Each of these provisos must be kept in mind as we look more carefully at the details.

5 This opening imperative, which functions as a transition from vv. 1–4 to 6–11, demonstrates that the narrative that follows is intentionally paradigmatic. Although the sentence is elliptical,24 Paul’s point seems plain enough. He begins with an emphatic “this,” which is best understood as pointing backward,25 in this case to vv. 2–4. That is followed immediately by the imperative, “this think”26 (touto phroneite, “your attitude should be,” NIV), which purposely harks back to v. 2 (phronēte/phronountes). Thus the basic imperative sums up the whole of vv. 2–4: “This mindset (i.e., that which I have just described) have among yourselves.”

In Pauline paraenesis the prepositional phrase “among yourselves”27 occurs most often to express what must take place in the community,28 although that must be responded to at the individual level. Just as v. 4 particularizes (“each” is responsible to apply the imperatives in the context of “one another”), so here, each is to have this mindset in you, but it must also be evident among you. Thus, “within your community learn to develop attitudes of selflessness and humility, considering the needs of one another as top priority.”

This basic imperative is then qualified as that “which [was]29 also in Christ Jesus.” This clause needs a verb supplied, which has caused far more difficulty for interpreters than seems necessary. The key lies with the relative pronoun and its adverbial modifier, “which also.”30 The antecedent of “which” is “this,” and thus points back to the content of vv. 2–4, meaning that the frame of mind set forth in vv. 3–4 is precisely that which one also has seen in Christ Jesus; at the same time “also” begins to point forward. The phrase “in Christ Jesus” is thus to be understood as in parallel with “in/among you,” which is the natural reading of Paul’s sentence.31 To be sure, some would treat the “also” as “colorless” and argue that “in Christ Jesus” should have an alleged “technical” sense,32 thus making the whole sentence refer to the believers in Philippi: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is fitting [for those] in Christ Jesus.”33 While that might (just barely) work grammatically,34 it works very poorly contextually, where the issue is neither with soteriology35 nor with the Philippians’ “being in Christ Jesus,” but with behavior that is in keeping with Jesus’,36 which is what the next clause defines by way of poetic narration.

6 With the relative pronoun “who,”37 Paul proceeds from the foregoing imperative directly to the narrative about Christ.38 Again, even though the details are not easy, his overall concern seems plain enough. Beginning with Christ’s pre-existence, and by means of a striking “not/but” contrast39 (in keeping with the similar contrast of vv. 2–4), he portrays two ways of thinking, of “setting one’s mind,” one selfish, the other selfless. Thus he reminds the Philippians that everything Christ did in bringing them salvation was the exact opposite of the “selfish ambition” censured in v. 3.

The sentence begins with a participial phrase, “who being40 in the ‘form’ (morphe) of God.” Despite some recent interpreters, this language expresses as presupposition what the rest of the sentence assumes, namely that it was the Pre-existent One41 who “emptied himself” at one point in our human history “by taking the ‘form’ of a slave, being made in the likeness of human beings.” Very likely Paul used the participle rather than the finite verb because of Christ’s always “being” so.42 The participle also stands in temporal contrast with the two aorist participles at the end of the sentence. That is, prior to his “having taken the ‘form’ of a slave” he was already “in the ‘form’ of God.” Moreover, it also stands in contrast in a substantive way with the final participle, “being born/made in the likeness of human beings,” which only makes sense if “being in the morphē of God” presupposes prior existence as God.43

But what about morphē?44 Our difficulties here are twofold:45 discovering what Paul himself intended by this word, and translating it into English, since we have no precise equivalent.46 The key to understanding the word lies with Paul’s reason for choosing it, which in turn lies with what transpires in the sentence itself. His urgency is to say something about Christ’s “mindset,” first as God and second as man. But in the transition from Christ’s “being God” to his “becoming human,” Paul expresses by way of metaphor the essential quality of that humanity: he “took on the ‘form’ of a slave.” Morphē was precisely the right word for this dual usage, to characterize both the reality (his being God) and the metaphor (his taking on the role of a slave),47 since it denotes “form” or “shape” not in terms of the external features by which something is recognized,48 but of those characteristics and qualities that are essential to it. Hence it means that which truly characterizes a given reality.49

What the earliest followers of Christ had come to believe, of course, on the basis of his resurrection and ascension, was that the one whom they had known as truly human had himself known prior existence in the “form” of God—not meaning that he was “like God but really not,” but that he was characterized by what was essential to being God. It is this understanding which (correctly) lies behind the NIV’s “in very nature God.”50 And it is this singular reality, lying in the emphatic first position as it does, which gives such extraordinary potency to what follows, and therefore to the whole.

That Paul by this first phrase intends “in very nature God” is further confirmed by the clause that immediately follows, which also happens to be one of the more famous cruxes in the letters of Paul. “Being in the ‘form’ of God,” Paul begins. “Not harpagmon did Christ consider to be equal with God,” he adds next. But first a closer look at harpagmon will aid the discussion that follows.51

The difficulties are two:52 its rarity in Greek literature; and where it does appear it denotes “robbery,”53 a meaning that can hardly obtain here.54 This means that scholars have been left to determine its meaning on the basis either (a) of (perceived) context, or (b) of the formation of Greek nouns, or (c) of finding parallels which suggest an idiomatic usage. Also involved is the question as to whether “equality with God” was something Christ did not possess but might have desired or something he already possessed but did not treat in a harpagmon way.55

Although the jury is still out on this question, the probable sense of this word is to be found in one of two refinements—by C. F. D. Moule and R. W. Hoover—of earlier suggestions.56 The former based his conclusions on the formation of Greek nouns, in which nouns ending in -mos do not ordinarily refer to a concrete expression of the verbal idea in the noun but to the verbal idea itself.57 In this view harpagmos is not to be thought of as a “thing” at all (“something” to be treated by the verbal idea in the noun). Rather it is an abstract noun, emphasizing the concept of “grasping” or “seizing.” Thus, Christ did not consider “equality with God” to consist of “grasping” or being “selfish”; rather he rejected this popular view of kingly power by “pouring himself out” for the sake of others. In Moule’s terms, equality with God means not “grasping” but “giving away” (272). This view has much to commend it,58 and in any case, surely points in the right direction in terms of the overall sense of the noun in context.59

The alternative is to see the word as a synonym of its cognate harpagma (“booty” or “prey”), which in idioms similar to Paul’s60 denotes something like, “a matter to be seized upon” in the sense of “taking advantage of it.” This view has much to commend it and probably points us in the right direction, although it is arguable that the evidence for the interchangeability of harpagmos and harpagma is not as strong as its proponents suggest.61 In either case, it should be pointed out, the clause comes out very much at the same point.

Back then to Paul’s point with this “not” clause, which is twofold (= two sides of a single concern). First, he is picking up on, and thereby reaffirming, what he said in the initial participial phrase, that Christ before his incarnation was “in very nature God.” This reaffirmation is accomplished by means of two complicated points of grammar,62 which together make it clear that Paul intends the infinitive phrase (“to be equal with God”) to repeat in essence the sense of what preceded (“being in the ‘form’ of God”). Thus Paul intends (by way of a structured elabortation):

Being in the ‘form’ of God as he was,

Christ did not consider a matter of seizing upon to his own advantage,

this being equal63 with God we have just noted,

but he emptied himself.”

This, then, is what it means for Christ to be “in the ‘form’ of God”; it means “to be equal with God,” not in the sense that the two phrases are identical, but that both point to the same reality.64 Together, therefore, they are among the strongest expressions of Christ’s deity in the NT. This means further that “equality with God” is not that which he desired which was not his, but precisely that which was always his.65

Second, Paul is thereby trying to set up the starkest possible contrast between Christ’s “being in the ‘form’ of God” and the main clause, “he emptied himself.”66 Equality with God, Paul begins, is something that was inherent to Christ in his pre-existence. Nonetheless, God-likeness, contrary to common understanding, did not mean for Christ to be a “grasping, seizing” being, as it would for the “gods” and “lords” whom the Philippians had previously known; it was not “something to be seized upon to his own advantage,” which would be the normal expectation of lordly power—and the nadir of selfishness. Rather, his “equality with God” found its truest expression when “he emptied himself.”67

What is thus being urged upon the Philippians is not a new view of Jesus,68 but a reinforcement, on the basis of Paul’s view of the crucifixion, that in the cross God’s true character, his outlandish, lavish expression of love, was fully manifested.69 This is what Paul is calling them to by way of discipleship. The phrase, “not harpagmon,” after all, corresponds to “not looking out for one’s own needs” in v. 4. Here is Paul’s way of saying that Christ, as God, did not act so. Thus, as he has just appealed to them to have a singular “mindset” (phronēte), which will express itself in “humility” as they “consider”70 one another better than themselves, so now he has repeated the injunction to have this “mindset” (phroneite, v. 5) which they see in Christ Jesus, who did not “consider” (same verb as in v. 4) being equal with God as something to be taken selfish advantage of, something to further his own ends.

We should note finally that many have seen Paul here to be playing on the Adam-Christ theme71 that appears elsewhere in his letters.72 Most who hold this view understand Christ to be set in studied contrast with Adam, who, “being in God’s image,”73 considered his “equality with God” as something to be seized. Christ, on the contrary, disdained such “grasping” and did the opposite; as Adam tried to become “like God,” Christ, as God, in fact became man. This is an intriguing analogy, but it must be noted that its basis is altogether conceptual, since there is not a single linguistic parallel to the Genesis narrative.74 Whether the Philippians would have so understood it without some linguistic clue probably depends on whether Paul himself had used such an analogy at some point in his time with them.75

7 That leads us then to the most famous, but unnecessary, crux of all, the main clause of the present sentence, “but [in contrast to his considering equality with God as something to seize on to his own advantage] he emptied (ekenōsen) himself.” This is a crux, however, that has been generated by scholarship, not by Paul or by Pauline ambiguities. The debate has raged over the concept of “emptying himself,” i.e., what kenōsis means, and emerged either because of a faulty understanding of harpagmon or because it has been assumed that the verb requires a genitive qualifier—that he must have “emptied himself” of something.76 But that is precisely not in keeping with Pauline usage. Just as harpagmon requires no object for him to “seize,” but rather points to what is the opposite of God’s character, so Christ did not empty himself of anything; he simply “emptied himself,” poured himself out.77 This is metaphor, pure and simple.78 The modifier is expressed in the modal participle that follows; he “poured himself out by having taken on the ‘form’ of a slave.”

Pauline usage elsewhere substantiates this view, where this verb regularly means to become powerless, or to be emptied of significance.79 Here it stands in direct antithesis to the “empty glory” of v. 3, and functions in the same way as the metaphorical “he became poor” in 2 Cor 8:9. Rather than doing anything on the basis of “empty glory,” Christ on the contrary “emptied himself,” or as the KJV has it (memorably), “he made himself of no reputation,”80 whose sense the NIV has captured with its “made himself nothing.” As Wright put it well, “The real humiliation of the incarnation and the cross is that one who was himself God, and who never during the whole process stopped being God, could embrace such a vocation.”81 Thus, as in the “not” side of this clause (v. 6b), we are still dealing with the character of God, as that has been revealed in the “mindset” and resulting activity of the Son of God. The concern is with divine selflessness: God is not an acquisitive being, grasping and seizing, but self-giving for the sake of others.

That this is Paul’s intent is made even more certain by the two explanatory participial phrases that follow.82 The first explains the nature of Christ’s emptying himself, the way it expressed itself in our human history: “by taking83 on the ‘form’ of a slave.” “Form” (morphē) here means precisely what it did above, that in his earthly existence he took on the “essential quality” of what it meant to be a slave. We have already looked closely at the word “slave” in Paul’s self-designation in 1:1. Here it probably means something close to its corresponding verb in Gal 5:13 (= “perform the duties of a slave”).84 From Paul’s perspective this is how divine love manifests itself in its most characteristic and profuse expression.

It is often suggested that there is more to this word, that by using “slave” Paul has some other “background” in mind than simply slavery as such. Two have been proffered.85 Altogether unlikely is the suggestion that by becoming human Christ accepted “bondage” to the “powers,” so that through death he might destroy them.86 The obvious difficulty with such a view is that nothing in the text suggests as much; indeed, it is held basically by those who read the whole “hymn” as pre-Pauline and with a meaning in its prior existence, due to its background there, which Paul has then imperfectly imported into its present context. A more likely “background” is the Servant of the Lord of Isaiah 42–53, where some interesting linguistic and conceptual links do exist.87 In the LXX, however, Isaiah’s Servant is designated by a quite different Greek word.88 If, therefore, such ties exist, and they are at least as viable as the “cryptic reference to Adam” in v. 6, they most likely do so as general background; after all, Jesus himself interpreted his death in light of Isaiah 53, and Paul and the early church were quick to see that Christ’s “servanthood” was ultimately fulfilled in the “pouring out of his life unto death” (53:12) for the sake of others. It is hard to imagine that early Christians, therefore, would not rather automatically have heard this passage with that background in view, especially since that passage begins (52:13) the way this one ends, with the Servant’s exaltation by God.89

But in the present context the emphasis does not lie on Jesus’ messianism or on his fulfilling the role of the Servant of the Lord. Rather it lies primarily on the servant nature of Christ’s incarnation. He entered our history not as kyrios (“Lord”), which name he acquires at his vindication (vv. 9–11), but as doulos (“slave”), a person without advantages, with no rights or privileges, but in servanthood to all.90 And all of this, surely, with an eye to vv. 3–4.91

The second participial phrase simultaneously clarifies the first by elaboration92 and concludes the present sentence by paving the way for the next (v. 8; Part I²). Together these phrases give definition to Christ’s “impoverishment.” The phrase “in the form of a slave” comes first for rhetorical reasons—to sharpen the contrast with “in the form of God” and to set out the true nature of his incarnation. It thus reflects the “quality” of his incarnation. The second phrase indicates its “factual” side. Thus, Christ came “in the form of a slave,” that is, by his “coming to be93 in the likeness of human beings.”94

The word “likeness”95 has been the troubling word in this phrase, especially in light of the even more difficult word “appearance” in the first phrase of the next sentence. But again, the difficulty stems more from philosophical theology than from Paul. The word is used primarily because of Paul’s belief (in common with the rest of the early church) that in becoming human Christ did not thereby cease to be divine. This word allows for the ambiguity, emphasizing that he is similar to our humanity in some respects and dissimilar in others. The similarity lies with his full humanity; in his incarnation he was “like” in the sense of “the same as.” The dissimilarity, which in Rom 8:3 had to do with his being sinless while in the “likeness” of sinful flesh, in this case has to do with his never ceasing to be “equal with God.” Thus he came in the “likeness” of human beings, because on the one hand he has fully identified with us, and because on the other hand in becoming human he was not “human” only. He was God living out a truly human life, all of which is safeguarded by this expression. Even so, one should not miss that this phrase is also part of the contrast. Christ “made himself of no reputation” in becoming human—whether we humans like that or not.

In sum: In Christ Jesus God has thus shown his true nature; this is what it means for Christ to be “equal with God”—to pour himself out for the sake of others and to do so by taking the role of a slave. Hereby he not only reveals the character of God, but from the perspective of the present context also reveals what it means for us to be created in God’s image, to bear his likeness and have his “mindset.” It means taking the role of the slave for the sake of others, the contours of which are what the next clause will spell out.

2. As Man He Humbled Himself (2:8)

8And being found in appearance as a [human being],1

he humbled himself

and became obedient to death—

even death on a cross!

The narrative that began in v. 6 is continued by this sentence,2 whose close connection—and narrative quality—is highlighted by the paratactic “and.”3 Apart from the “not/but” contrast in v. 6, it is identical in form to the preceding sentence. It begins (1) with a participle emphasizing Christ’s present “mode” of being, in this case “as a human being,” followed (2) by the main clause (“he humbled himself”), precisely as in v. 6, followed (3) by a participial modifier, again modal, which spells out how he did so (“by becoming obedient unto death”), which in turn (4) is brought to rhetorical climax by specifying the kind of death (“the death of a cross”).

8 The opening phrase (“and being found4 in appearance as a human being”) picks up the flow of the narrative by reiterating the essential matter from the final phrase of the preceding sentence. At the same time, as with the opening participle in v. 6, it serves to specify the “mode of existence” for Christ’s action in this clause. “In the form of God” he emptied himself; now “in the appearance of a human being” he humbled himself.

The word “appearance”5 is yet another of the troubling words in this passage (vv. 6–11). Most likely the usage here is stylistic pure and simple, in which Paul picks up the idea from the preceding phrase (“in human likeness”) but says it in a slightly different way. The primary sense of the word has to do not with the essential quality of something, but with its externals, that which makes it recognizable. Thus, having said that Christ came in the “likeness” of human beings (v. 7b), Paul now moves the narrative on to its next point, by saying he “appeared” in a way that was clearly recognizable as human. Together the two phrases accent the reality of his humanity, just as the first two phrases in the preceding sentence accent his deity.6

As a human being “he humbled himself”; that is, in his human existence he chose, in obedience, to “take the lowest place” (etapeinōsen). This word deliberately echoes “in lowliness of mind” (tapeinophrosynē) in v. 3; at the same time it anticipates by way of contrast his being “exalted to the highest place” in v. 9. On the place of “humility” in the life of Christ and the believer see on v. 3.

The ensuing participle functions in the same modal way as its counterpart(s) in the preceding sentence, narrating how his humbling himself found expression, in this case “by becoming obedient unto death.” Although Paul does not often speak of Christ’s death in terms of “obedience” (cf. Rom 5:19), the language in the present instance is in keeping with the reason for the passage in the first place—to call the Philippians to “obedience” regarding the appeal in vv. 2–4.7 In any case, such language fully reflects Paul’s theological perspective. In keeping with the rest of the early church,8 he understood Jesus’ death not from the perspective of those who “crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8)—who acted on the basis of human “wisdom,” in sheer ignorance of God’s “mystery” revealed by the Spirit, that God chose to redeem our fallen race through the weakness (and therefore scandal) of the cross—but from the perspective of one who saw his death as an act of “obedience” to the divine will. “Obedience unto9 death,” therefore, points to the degree to which obedience took him, the readiness of him who, as one of us, chose the path that led to a death10 “decreed before the ages for our glory.”11 Which is quite in keeping with him who, as God, impoverished himself by taking on the role of a slave.

The final phrase, “death of a cross,” which concludes Part I of the narrative, fits the alleged “hymn” so poorly that many scholars have seen it as a Pauline “addition.” On the contrary, its rhetorical effect, both in its present clause and as concluding the whole, is so forceful that it is hard to imagine it to be a mere “tack on.”12 In its own clause its effect lies in the repetition of “death” back to back: “unto death, death, that is, of a cross.” At the same time it combines with “in the ‘form’ of God” (v. 6) to frame the narrative to this point with the sharpest imaginable contrast: God and the cross.

Here is the very heart of Pauline theology, both of his understanding of God as such and of his understanding of what God has done and is doing in our fallen world. Here is where the one who as “equal with God” has most fully revealed the truth about God: that God is love and that his love expresses itself in self-sacrifice—cruel, humiliating death on a cross13—for the sake of those he loves. The divine weakness (death at the hands of his creatures, his enemies) is the divine scandal (the cross was reserved for slaves and insurrectionists). No one in Philippi,14 we must remind ourselves, used the cross as a symbol for their faith; there were no gold crosses embossed on Bibles or worn as pendants around the neck or lighted on the steeple of the local church. The cross was God’s—and thus their—scandal, God’s contradiction to human wisdom and power: that the one they worshiped as Lord of all, including Caesar, had been crucified as a state criminal at the hands of one of Caesar’s proconsuls;15 that the Almighty should appear in human dress, and that he should do so in this way, as a “Messiah” who died by crucifixion.16 Likewise, this is the scandal of Pauline ethics: that the God who did it this way “gifts” us to “suffer for his sake” as well (1:29):

This is our God, the Servant-King,

Who calls us now to follow him,

To bring our lives as a daily offering,

Of worship to the Servant-King.17

3. God Has Exalted Him as Lord of All (2:9–11)

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place

and gave him the1 name that is above every name,

10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,

in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

11and every tongue confess2 that Jesus Christ is Lord,

to the glory of God the Father.

The basic paradigmatic concern of this “Christ story” has been expressed in vv. 6–8.3 But neither the narrative nor Paul’s overall concern for the Philippians in this context is finished. Thus he concludes on this note of exaltation, affirming that Christ’s self-emptying and death by crucifixion revealed true equality with God. In so doing, Paul both affirms the rightness of the paradigm to which he has called the Philippians and keeps before their eyes the eschatological vindication that awaits those who are Christ’s,4 a concern that runs throughout the letter and the note on which this whole section (from 1:27) concludes (2:16). For a suffering community whom Paul repeatedly reminds regarding the absolute centrality of Christ in everything—both present and future—here is the necessary concluding word. Believers in Christ, suffering though they may be, are in Christ both “already” and “not yet.” Already they know and own him as Lord of all; not yet have they seen all things brought under his subjection. Here, then, is the eschatological reminder of who, and whose, they are: glad followers of him who is King of kings and Lord of lords, before whom at God’s eschatological wrapup every knee shall bow to pay him the homage due his name.

Although the passage has the ring of doxology to it, it lacks the poetry that has preceded, which was abetted primarily by the participial constructions.5 Indeed, everything has changed. In Part I, Christ is the subject of all the verbs and participles; here God is the subject and Christ the object, who is recipient both of the divine “name” and of the worship offered by “every knee” and “every tongue,” all to the glory of God.6 If this is part of a hymn, it has no known parallels, either in Judaism, Hellenism, or in Paul.7 The parallelism that does exist (in vv. 10–11) is the direct result of another piece of “intertextuality” in this letter;8 indeed, the whole has been formulated to echo the oracle in Isa 45:18–24, where Yahweh (LXX, the “Lord”), Israel’s savior, declares his exalted status over all gods and nations.9

9 With an inferential “therefore also”10 Paul draws the preceding narrative to its proper conclusion. Although he mentions neither the resurrection nor the ascension,11 these two realities are presupposed by what he does say.12 Paul’s immediate interest lies elsewhere. Nor is what follows to be understood either as a reward for Christ’s previous action13 or as an assertion of his victory over the powers.14 Rather it asserts the divine vindication of Christ’s emptying himself and humbling himself in obedience by dying on a cross. As God’s “yes” to this expression of “equality with God,” God the Father “exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name.” Although expressed as a twofold action, most likely Paul intends the two verbs to point to a single reality: that God highly exalted Christ by15 gracing16 him with “the name.” Both parts of the sentence, however, raise issues that need closer examination.

First, in asserting that God has “highly exalted”17 Christ, Paul uses a compound of the ordinary verb for “exalt” with the preposition hyper, whose basic meaning is “above.” On the basis of a certain understanding of v. 6 (what Christ did not “seize” was something not previously his), some see Paul as stressing that Christ has been rewarded for his humiliation by having been given a higher “position” than he had heretofore.18 Others see an emphasis on his victory over the powers, although that concern is foreign to the narrative and must be inferred on the basis of an (almost certainly) incorrect understanding of “in heaven and on earth and under the earth.” But the verb “highly exalted” implies neither of these. Paul virtually holds the copyright on hyper compounds in the NT, and in the vast majority of cases they magnify or express excess,19 not position. No one would imagine, for example, a positional interpretation for the similar compound in Rom 8:37 (“we are more than conquerors [probably Pauline coinage] through Christ”). Likewise here, God has “highly exalted” Christ, meaning exalted him to the highest possible degree.

But what does Paul intend by “the name that is above every name”? Here the options are basically two,20 “Jesus” or “Lord.” On the one hand, there is much to be said for “the name” to refer to his earthly name “Jesus.”21 That, after all, is what is picked up in the next phrase, “at the name of Jesus.” If so, then Paul does not mean that he has now been given that name, but that in highly exalting him, God has bestowed on the name of Jesus a significance that excels all other names. Moreover, “Jesus” is in fact a name, whereas “Lord” could be argued to be a title.22

On the other hand, most believe that the bestowing on him of the name “Lord,” as the equivalent of Yahweh, is how Jesus has been exalted to the highest place.23 Indeed, were it not for the phrase “at the name of Jesus” in the next clause, this would be the universal point of view. In favor of it is the second part of the result clause (v. 11), that every tongue will confess that “the Lord is Jesus Christ.” But what favors it the most is the clear “intertextuality” that is in process here.24 The twofold result clause that makes up our vv. 10 and 11 is a direct borrowing of language from Isa 45:23, where Yahweh (the Lord) says that “before me (the Lord) every knee shall bow and every tongue will swear (LXX, confess)” that “in the Lord alone are righteousness and strength.” This emphasis on Yahweh, “the Lord,”25 as the one unto whom all shall give obeisance, seems to certify that what Paul has in mind is none other than the name, Yahweh itself, but in its Greek form of “the Lord,” which has now been “given” to Jesus.26 On the meaning and significance of this name, see on v. 11.

We should note finally that this declaration of Jesus as “Lord” would probably not be lost on believers in a city whose inhabitants are Roman citizens and who are devotees of “lords many,” including “lord Caesar.” Paul well knows to whom he is writing these words, especially since he is now one of the emperor’s prisoners and the Philippians are suffering at the hands of Roman citizens as well.

10 The result27 of God’s exaltation of Jesus is expressed in two coordinate clauses taken directly from the LXX of Isa 45:23,28 both of which stress that the whole creation shall offer him homage and worship, presumably at his Parousia. Thus the narrative covers the whole gamut: It begins in eternity past with Christ’s “being in the ‘form’ of God,” then focuses on his incarnation, and finally expresses his exaltation as something already achieved (v. 9), thus presupposing resurrection and ascension; now it concludes by pointing to the eschatological future, when all created beings shall own his lordship.29

First, then, “at30 the name of Jesus31,” the Lord, “every knee shall bow.” The whole created order shall give him obeisance. The “bowing of the knee” is a common idiom for doing homage, sometimes in prayer, but always in recognition of the authority of the god or person to whom one is offering such obeisance.32 The significance of Paul’s using the language of Isaiah in this way lies with his substituting “at the name of Jesus” for the “to me” of Isa 45:23, which refers to Yahweh, the God of Israel. In this stirring oracle (Isa 45:18–24a) Yahweh is declared to be God alone, over all that he has created and thus over all other gods and nations. And he is Israel’s savior, whom they can thus fully trust. In vv. 22–24a Yahweh, while offering salvation to all but receiving obeisance in any case, declares that “to me every knee shall bow.” Paul now asserts that through Christ’s resurrection and at his ascension God has transferred this right to obeisance to the Son; he is the Lord to whom every knee shall eventually bow. There is in this language no hint that those who bow are acknowledging his salvation; on the contrary they will bow to his sovereignty at the End, even if they are not now yielding to it.

Also in keeping with the Isaianic oracle, but now interrupting the language of the citation itself, Paul declares the full scope of the homage that Christ will one day receive: every knee “of those in the heavenlies and of those on earth and of those under the earth” shall bow to the authority inherent in his name.33 In keeping with the oracle, especially that “the Lord” is the creator of the heavens and the earth (45:18), Paul is purposely throwing the net of Christ’s sovereignty over the whole of created beings.34 Those “of heaven” refer to all heavenly beings, angels and demons;35 those of earth refer to all those who are living on earth at his Parousia, including those who are currently causing suffering in Philippi; and those “under the earth” probably refer to “the dead,” who also shall be raised to acknowledge his lordship over all.

11 Second, not only shall every creature bend the knee and offer the obeisance that is due Christ’s name, but “every tongue”36 shall express that homage in the language of the confessing37—but currently suffering—church: Jesus Christ is Lord. In its Pauline occurrences this confession always takes the form, “the Lord is Jesus,” to which he here adds “Christ.” For Paul this confession is the line of demarcation between believer and nonbeliever (Rom 10:9). Such confession, he argues in 1 Cor 12:3, can come only by way of the Spirit; hence the crucial role of the Spirit in conversion. This confession in Rom 10:9 is linked with conviction about the resurrection of Jesus; that same combination is undoubtedly in view here. When at the End all creation beholds the risen Jesus, they will on that basis declare that Kyrios is none other than the Jesus who was crucified and whom Christians worship. But the confession will not then be that of conversion, but of final acknowledgment that “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36).

Despite an occasional demurrer, there can be little question that this confession arose in the early Jewish Christian community,38 as the Aramaic “Maranatha” in 1 Cor 16:22 bears striking evidence. Thus, in the very earliest Aramaic-speaking communities, the language that belonged to God alone is now being addressed to Christ in corporate invocation. One can scarcely gainsay the christological implications of this confession in the present passage. On the one hand, in the Jewish synagogue the appellation “Lord” had long before been substituted for God’s “name” (Yahweh). The early believers had now transferred that “name” (Lord) to the risen Jesus. Thus, Paul says, in raising Jesus from the dead, God has exalted him to the highest place and bestowed on him the name of God—in the Hebrew sense of the Name, referring to his investiture with God’s power and authority.39 On the other hand, Paul’s monotheism is kept intact by the final phrase, “unto the glory of God the Father.”40 Thus very much in keeping with 1 Cor 8:6, where there is only one God (the Father, from whom and for whom are all things, including ourselves) and only one Lord (Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him), so here, this final sentence begins with God’s exalting Christ by bestowing on him “the name” and concludes on the same theological note, that all of this is to God the Father’s own glory.41

In the light of the grandeur of this passage (all of 2:6–11), one can easily forget why it is here. Paul’s reasons are twofold: first, as throughout the letter, to focus on Christ himself, and thus, second, in this instance to point to him as the ultimate model of the self-sacrificing love to which he is calling the Philippians.42 That Paul himself has not forgotten where he is going becomes evident in the application that immediately follows, where the Philippians are called upon to “obey,” just as the self-abasing One “obeyed” the will of his Father. But we should note further that both of Paul’s concerns transfer fully into the ongoing life of the church and the believer.

First, whatever else the Christian faith is, and whatever Christian life is all about, it finds its central focus ever and always on Christ. Here we have spelled out before us in living color both the what and the why of Paul’s affirmation, “for me to live is Christ.” This narrative puts it into focus: Paul believed that in Jesus Christ the true nature of the living God had been revealed ultimately and finally. God is not a grasping, self-centered being, but is most truly known through the one who, himself in the form of God and thus equal with God, poured himself out in sacrificial love by taking the lowest place, the role of a slave, whose love for his human creatures found its consummate expression in his death on the cross. That this is God’s own nature and doing has been attested for all time by Christ Jesus’s divine vindication; he has been exalted by God to the highest place by having been given the name of God himself: The Lord is none other than Jesus Christ. This is therefore why for Paul “to live is Christ.” Any faith that falls short of this is simply not the Christian faith.

But second, Paul’s point is, in the words of the poet, “’Tis the way the Master went, should not the servant tread it still?” That Christ serves for us as a paradigm for Christian life is not, as some fear, a betrayal of Paul’s gospel.43 On the contrary, it reinforces a significant aspect of his gospel, namely that there is no genuine life in Christ that is not at the same time, by the power of the Holy Spirit, being regularly transformed into the likeness of Christ. A gospel of grace, which omits obedience, is not Pauline in any sense; obedience, after all, is precisely the point made in the application that follows (v. 12). To be sure, the indicative must precede the imperative, or all is lost; but it does not eliminate the imperative, or all is likewise lost.

The behavioral concern of this passage is precisely in keeping with the Pauline paraenesis found everywhere. Paul’s gospel has inherent in it that those who are in Christ will also walk worthy of Christ (1:27). Thus, in Pauline ethics, the principle is love, the pattern is Christ, the power is the Spirit, and their ultimate purpose the glory of God—all of which has been provided for in the death and resurrection of Christ. The appeal in the present passage is to a unity in Christ that for Paul was a sine qua non of the evidential reality of his gospel at work in his communities. The bases of the appeal, Christ, God’s love, and the Spirit, are set forth in v. 1. The Christian graces absolutely necessary for such behavior are selflessness and humility, in which one looks not only to one’s own interests but also—especially—to those of others (vv. 3–4). Here is where the example of Christ comes in. Those who are Christ’s (v. 1) must also have his “mindset” (vv. 5–11).

However, to insist that in context the basic thrust of this passage is “Christ as paradigm” of a certain mindset does not mean that there are no other agenda, including paradigmatic ones. Both the length and pattern of the passage suggest that Paul is laying a much broader theological foundation, probably for the whole letter. In the first place, the mention of Christ’s death on the cross as paradigm at the same time reminds them of the basis of their faith in the first place. It is that death, after all, that lies at the heart of everything. To put it another way, the appeal to Christ’s example in his suffering and death makes its point precisely because it presupposes that they will simultaneously recall the saving significance of that death.

Moreover, there is also an emphasis in this letter on imitatio with regard to suffering (1:29–30; 3:10, 21). Those who are privileged to believe in Christ are also privileged to suffer for him; indeed to share in those sufferings is part of knowing him. Hence, this passage, with Christ’s humbling himself to the point of death on the cross, will also serve as the theological ground for that concern. That, indeed, seems to make the best sense of the otherwise unusual emphasis in 3:10 that knowing Christ includes the “participation in his sufferings, being conformed44 to his death.” Thus Christ’s death once again serves as paradigm.

Finally, the note of eschatological glory in vv. 9–11 is also struck more than once in this letter (1:6; 1:10–11; 1:21–24; 3:11–14; 3:20–21). For this, too, Christ serves both as exalted Lord and as example or forerunner. His vindication, which followed his humiliation, is found in his present and future lordship, to which both the Philippians and (ultimately) their opponents bow. But that vindication also becomes paradigm. Those who now suffer for Christ, and walk worthy of Christ, shall also at his coming be transformed into the likeness of “the body of his (present) glory” (3:21).

Thus the narrative summarizes the centrality of Christ in Pauline theology. His death secured redemption for his people; but at the same time it serves as pattern for their present life in the Spirit, while finally we shall share in the eschatological glory and likeness that are presently his. And all of this “to the glory of God the Father.”

In the final analysis, therefore, this passage stands at the heart of Paul’s understanding of God. Christ serves as pattern, to be sure; but he does so as the one who most truly expresses God’s nature. As God, Christ poured himself out, not seeking his own advantage. As man—and not ceasing to be God—he humbled himself unto death on the cross. That this is what God is like is the underlying Pauline point; and since God is in process of recreating us in his image, this becomes the heart of the present appeal. The Philippians—and we ourselves—are not called upon simply to “imitate God” by what we do, but to have this very mind, the mind of Christ, developed in us, so that we too bear God’s image in our attitudes and relationships within the Christian community—and beyond.

D. APPLICATION AND FINAL APPEAL (2:12–18)

Because of the splendor of the preceding passage, it is easy to forget its aim. But Paul has not forgotten. At issue is the gospel in Philippi: first of all their own “salvation” (v. 12), evidenced by continuing “obedience”—like that of their Savior (v. 8)—but as always, second, with an eye toward evangelism, the effect of the gospel in the world (v. 16). Thus, he returns to his present concern—“obedience” expressed through a common “mindset,” for the sake of Christ and the gospel—by applying to their situation what he has just written in 2:6–11.

The application is in three sentences (vv. 12–13, 14–16, 17–18), which together form a single appeal, reflecting a threefold concern: (1) that they return to their common cause, partly (2) for the sake of the gospel in the world, and partly also (3) for Paul’s sake, and thus for their mutual eschatological joy. The first two sentences are imperatives, urging first that they show their “obedience” by getting their corporate act together (working out their salvation, is Paul’s way of putting it). To which imperative, and lest he be misunderstood, he immediately appends a theological word, a word of ultimate encouragement: God has committed himself to effecting their “obedience” for his own good pleasure. In the second imperative, echoing language from the Pentateuch and Daniel,1 Paul forbids “complaining and arguing”—for the sake of the “crooked and depraved” Philippi in which they “shine as lights” as they hold fast the message that brings life. That sentence concludes on the note of Paul’s own ministry among them—that if they thus obey, it will not have been in vain—which leads to the final sentence (vv. 17–18), where he returns to the themes of his suffering, their faith, and mutual joy.

With these final words the argument begun in 1:27 thus comes full circle.2 It began on the note of their walking worthy of the gospel whether Paul is present or absent. This concluding appeal begins on that theme (v. 12) and ends on the motif of their rejoicing together in their mutual suffering (vv. 17–18; cf. 1:18). And that leads directly to vv. 19–30, in which he goes on to “what’s next” regarding his and their circumstances—that he expects to hear further about “their affairs,” now in light of the present letter, after they have first learned further about “his affairs,” and both from the same source, Timothy.

1. General Application—An Appeal to Obedience (2:12–13)

12Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only3 in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, 13for it is God4 who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.

On the basis of what he has just said about Christ, Paul returns to the appeal to harmony that has been the primary concern since 1:27. Picking up the word “salvation” from 1:28, he urges that they flesh it out in their life together in Philippi. At least that is where the appeal is ultimately heading, as vv. 14–16 disclose. This first imperative thus serves as the “theme” sentence for the appeal,5 by reminding them of three realities: (1) Paul’s affection for them and their long-term relationship with him; (2) their own long-time “obedience” as far as the gospel is concerned; and (3) God’s work in them effecting their obedience for his own good pleasure—the same God who exalted Christ, and for whose glory the whole world will pay homage to his Son.

Everything in the sentence echoes something that has gone before: The vocative “my beloved” recalls the tenderness and affection of 1:8; the reminder of their long-time “obedience” recalls 1:5 (“their partnership in the gospel from the first”), but now comes hard on the heels of Christ’s obedience mentioned in v. 8; Paul’s “presence or absence” recalls the same kind of interruptive word in 1:27; their common “salvation” that is to be “worked out” among them picks up the language of 1:28; God as the one who is at work in them for this end echoes their salvation as “from God” (1:28); and God’s prompting and leading their obedience for his own “good pleasure” is reminiscent of the immediately preceding “to the glory of God.” Although Christ is not mentioned directly in this imperative—indeed, in light of vv. 6–11, is there any need?—everything is once again predicated on the three-way bond that holds the letter together: between him, them, and Christ and the gospel (salvation).

12 This has long been a difficult passage, especially for evangelical Protestants,6 who, on the one hand, tend to individualize Paul’s corporate imperatives (such as this one) and, on the other hand, cannot imagine Paul suggesting that salvation is something the individual must “work out” for oneself—even though it is with God’s help. But Paul’s concern lies elsewhere. The “so then”7 with which this sentence begins indicates that he is about to apply the appeal of 1:27–2:5, now by way of vv. 6–11, to the case specific situation of the believing community in Philippi. What follows this imperative (in vv. 14–16) makes that certain.

But it takes a while in Paul’s sentence for him to get to the imperative,8 because first he will remind them of his affection for them and of their long history of “obedience.” His affection is expressed in the vocative, “my beloved friends.”9 Even though this vocative occurs elsewhere in Paul, its three occurrences in this letter, as in Phlm 16, should be understood in light of the very personal and warm affection that Paul holds for these friends.10 That is further evidenced by the appeal to his and their long-term relationship, expressed in terms of their “obedience” both when he is present and absent from them.11

Hence he begins, “just as12 you have always obeyed.”13 But to whom has such obedience been given? On the one hand, Paul can urge “obedience” to his own words (2 Thess 3:15), a sense that probably lies close at hand elsewhere as well (e.g., 2 Cor 2:9; 7:15; Phlm 21). On the other hand, the combination in 2 Cor 10:5–6 of “every act of disobedience” as having to do with “obedience to Christ” probably gives us the clue for all of these passages, including the present one. As his letter to the Romans makes clear,14 for Paul faith in Christ is ultimately expressed as obedience to Christ, not in the sense of following the rules, but of coming totally under his lordship, of being devoted completely to him. This is the only “obedience” to his own words that Paul cares anything about.15 That this is the sense here seems certain, since it follows so closely the twofold reminder of Christ’s own obedience that led to the cross and of his present status as Lord of all. Thus Paul starts on this note of reminder, that they have always given evidence of their faith by their obedience to Christ.

But before he goes on to the “so now,” the geographical distance factor which keeps popping up in this letter16 finds expression once more. The repetition of this language from 1:27, plus the fact that this is what is taken up next (2:19–24), indicates a point of obvious concern. He longs to be with them, not only for mutual joy, but also for their “progress” in the faith (1:25); but he is now absent from them, at a time when some mending is needed. Thus, on the basis of his and their close relationship, Paul speaks this way while “absent from them” as his way of appealing to them, as though he were actually present. This in turn best explains the unusual way of putting it here: “not as (though)17 in my presence only.” They have had a long history of obedience to Christ and the gospel, whether Paul was present or absent; now that he cannot be present, and some differences among them have arisen, he urges them to get on with their obedience “all the more so”18 in his absence,19 so that it would not appear as if his presence alone prompted them to obey.

That brings him finally to the imperative, what all of this was aiming at in the first place: “Work out20 your own21 salvation.” This choice of language is predicated on his prior use of “salvation” in 1:28, which, he asserted, is “from God.” But “salvation” is not only something they receive; it is something they do. A great deal of unnecessary ink has been spilt over this passage, as to whether “salvation” has to do with the individual believer22 or with the corporate life of the community. But that is a false dichotomy. The context makes it clear that this is not a soteriological text per se, dealing with “people getting saved” or “saved people persevering.” Rather it is an ethical text, dealing with “how saved people live out their salvation” in the context of the believing community and the world. What Paul is referring to, therefore, is the present “outworking” of their eschatological salvation within the believing community in Philippi.23 At issue is “obedience,” pure and simple, which in this case is defined as their “working or carrying out in their corporate life the salvation that God has graciously given them.” That they must comply with this injunction at the individual level is assumed, and that their final eschatological salvation will be realized personally and individually is a truth that does not need stating, because that is not at issue here. In Pauline theology people are saved one by one to be sure (which is the point of discontinuity with election in the OT), but (in continuity with the OT) they are saved so as to become a “people for God’s name.” The concern in this passage is with their being his people in Philippi, as v. 15 makes certain (“that you may become blameless and pure, God’s children without fault in a crooked and depraved generation”).

That “working out your salvation” has to do with “obedience” is verified both by the grammar and context. First, the imperative must be taken seriously for what it is, the apodosis (the “so then” clause) of a comparative sentence (“just as … so now”),24 whose protasis (“just as”) offers the primary clue as to what “working out their common salvation means”; it means to continue in their obedience to Christ. This is then picked up in the next clause; what God empowers in/among them is to will and do regarding the obedience spoken to in this first clause. And contextually that means that they stop whatever squabbling is going on and get on with being “God’s blameless children” in pagan Philippi. Thus everything about the sentence and its context indicates that Paul with this imperative is not referring to the “salvation” of individual believers, but the salvation that God has wrought in making them a people of God for his name in Philippi, and that at issue is their getting on with it. Even though as before (vv. 4–5) they will have to respond individually, the imperative itself has to do with what takes place in their community life, as they return to their common cause with regard to the gospel.

Finally, they are to work out their salvation in this way “with fear and trembling.” This unusual phrase, taken over from the OT,25 occurs in some odd moments in Paul, so that it is not at all certain what he intends by these words—especially since the OT sense of “dread” seems to be missing altogether. In its first occurrence (1 Cor 2:3), which probably should give direction to our understanding it in other places, its meaning is especially difficult to pin down. But whatever it might mean specifically in that instance, its being closely connected with “weakness” as further exemplifying the “weakness of the cross” indicates that at the very least it reflects human vulnerability. What people see in one who lives “in fear and trembling” is not self-assurance, but defenselessness. But for that very reason it seems quite wrong, as some have done,26 to suggest that “fear and trembling” is therefore an attitude that believers have toward one another. On the contrary, while the vulnerability of each will be apparent to the others, the OT background of this language calls for an understanding that has to do with existence vis-ō-vis God. The context in this case seems to demand such a view.

This phrase, then, first of all reminds the Philippians of the grandeur of the final words in vv. 9–11. If the whole universe of created beings is someday (soon, from their perspective) to pay homage to their Lord, then they themselves need to be getting on with obedience (= working out their salvation) as those who know proper awe in the presence of God. One does not live out the gospel casually or lightly, but as one who knows what it means to stand in awe of the living God.27 On the other hand, nothing of failure or lack of confidence is implied.28 The gospel is God’s thing, and the God who has saved his people is an awesome God. Thus “working out the salvation” that God has given them should be done with a sense of “holy awe and wonder” before the God with whom they—and we—have to do.

13 Paul’s concern is obviously with the preceding imperative, that the believers in Philippi get on with being God’s people in all respects. But he has stated the imperative in such a way as to make possible a betrayal of his theology. So, typically,29 he immediately places the imperative within the context of God’s prior action. “For,” he goes on to explain,30 “God is the one who empowers you in this regard.” They are indeed to “work at” it (katergazesthe); obedience, after all, takes “willing and doing.” But they are able to do so precisely because God himself is “at work” (energōn) in and among them. This verb, as elsewhere, does not so much mean that God is “doing it for them,” but that God supplies the necessary empowering.31 Thus, even though their obedience must be within the context of proper “fear and trembling”—and it is difficult to escape the motivational aspect of that phrase32—they are herewith reminded that even so, their obedience is ultimately something God effects in/among them. Paul’s real point, therefore, is not to protect himself theologically, but to encourage the Philippians that God is on the side of his people, that he not only has their concern at heart, but actively works in their behalf for the sake of his own good pleasure. The rest of the sentence gives us the “who, where, what, and why” of that empowering.

The who is easy. Just as in the preceding paragraph, which concluded by noting that even the worship of Christ as Lord is ultimately “to the glory of God,” so here the emphasis is altogether on God. Even though the name “God” functions as the predicate nominative,33 it appears first in the clause by way of emphasis. Thus, “the one supplying the power for your obedience is none other than the living God.”34

The where is “in/among you.”35 As before (vv. 1:6; 2:5), when using this phrase in a corporate context, he primarily means “among you”; but for that to happen it must begin “in you,” that is, in the resolve of each of them to see to it that God’s purposes are accomplished in their community.

The what is loaded with theology. Not only does God empower their “doing” (energein, the infinitive of the verb just used to describe God’s own activity), but also the “willing” that lies behind the doing. This is fully in keeping with Paul’s understanding of Christian ethics, which has not to do with obedience to a set of rules that regulate conduct, but first of all with a “mind that is transformed” by the Spirit. Such a mind is “conformed” not to this age, but to the character of God, so that behavior is a reflection of God’s will, what is good and pleasing and perfect to him (Rom 12:1–2). The “doing of salvation” for Paul therefore lies in the “willing,” which means the radical transformation of life by the Spirit. The believer is not one who has been begrudgingly “caught by God,” as it were, so that obedience is basically out of fear and trembling over what might happen if one were to do otherwise; rather, being Christ’s means to be “converted” in the true sense of that word, to have one’s life invaded by God’s Holy Spirit, so that not simply new behavior is now effected, but a new desire toward God that prompts such behavior in the first place.36

But Christian ethics lies not just in the “willing.” In Rom 7:18, in his description of life before and outside of Christ,37 but looked at from the perspective of life in the Spirit, Paul described pre-Christian life with these same verbs. To “will,” he said, was present with me; he recognized the good and spiritual thing that the Law truly is. But without the Spirit, he goes on, “carrying out (katergazesthai) the good” does not happen. As a believer, however, Paul will have none of that (i.e., of their not being able to carry out the good that they will); hence he urges the Philippians to “work it out” precisely because God (by his Spirit, is implied) is present with them both to will and to do “the good.”38

The why (“according to his good purpose,” NIV) is debated; indeed, the phrase is perfectly ambiguous.39 The word translated “good purpose” occurred in 1:15, as the motivation for those among Paul’s friends who preach Christ out of love and “goodwill” toward Paul. In light of what is about to be urged (v. 14), that meaning could prevail here as well; that is, God is at work in them both to will and to do what promotes goodwill in the community.40

More likely, however, given Paul’s theology and the emphasis of the present sentence, he intends the definite article to function as a possessive and thus to refer to God’s empowering their obedience for his own eudokia. In which case this word probably leans toward “good pleasure,”41 in the sense that God does this for his people precisely because it pleases him so to do. This also means further that the preposition hyper bears its regular sense of “for the sake of.”42 This does not mean that God, despite v. 6, is a self-gratifying being after all. Rather, all that God does he does for his pleasure; but since God is wholly good, his doing what pleases him is not capricious, but what is wholly good for those he loves. God’s pleasure is pure love, so what he does “for the sake of his good pleasure” is by that very fact also on behalf of those he loves. After all, it delights God to delight his people.

Thus, with v. 13 Paul puts the imperative into theological perspective. What follows is to be understood as flowing directly out of this word; there he will specify how they are to “work out their common salvation” as God works in and among them for his own good pleasure. What pleases God in this instance, of course, is that they cease the in-fighting that is currently going on among some of them.

2. Specific Application—Harmony for the World’s and Paul’s Sake (2:14–18)

14Do everything without complaining or arguing, 15so that you may become1 blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe 16as you hold outa the word of life—in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing. 17But even if2 I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you. 18So you too should be glad and rejoice with me.

With yet another imperative, Paul spells out how in particular they may “obey” (= work out their salvation) while he is currently absent from them. At the same time he concludes this section of the letter (from 1:27) by bringing into focus all of its various motifs—those that are up front as well as those that form the background situation in Philippi.3 In the opening imperative (1:27) he had appealed to them to comport themselves in a manner worthy of their heavenly citizenship, which should take the form of (1) standing fast in the one Spirit, (2) contending as one person for the gospel, and (3) not being frightened in any way by the opposition. Along the way it became clear that steadfastness in the face of opposition is also needed because things are not altogether in good order among them, which not only affects their own life in Christ, but their effectiveness as God’s people in Philippi as well. All of that is brought together in this final appeal, which concludes by bringing his and their relationship back into the picture, with a final word about suffering and joy.

The net result is a sentence whose flow is easy enough to discern but whose concluding logic is less so. The Philippians first of all are urged to “do all things without murmuring and arguing” (v. 14). This is followed by a purpose clause, whose primary focus is on their role in the world: that they be “the blameless children of God” (15a) and thus “shine as stars” in pagan Philippi by “holding firm the word of life” (15b-16a). That much is manageable. But at this point the sentence takes an unexpected—and abrupt—turn, whose ultimate purpose appears to be transition: namely, to return to the narrative about his and their affairs that was broken off at 1:26. But its immediate aim is less easy to discern. In contrast to vv. 11 and 13, which conclude with God’s glory and good pleasure, the final goal4 of the imperative is for Paul’s eschatological “boast” in them (16b), evidence that his ministry will not have been in vain (16c). But never one to leave an admonition on what could be perceived as a down note,5 he concludes by reflecting on an alternative possibility, that his ministry might be viewed as a drink offering poured out in conjunction with their own sacrificial faith (17a), thus bringing the theme of suffering back into the foreground. If indeed this is the case, he concludes, and it is, so much the more cause for him and them to rejoice together (17b-18). Paul is clearly exhorting what he has been praying: that they be pure and blameless for the day of Christ (1:10).

The abrupt way his ministry is brought into the sentence, with its eschatological focus—also a recurring theme in the letter—is perhaps best explained on the basis of its most striking feature: the sudden and profuse influx of echoes from the OT, which is quite unlike anything else in the Pauline corpus. So unique is this that one scarcely knows what to make of it. A maximal view would see it as intentional intertextuality,6 with distinct language from a series of LXX texts that recall the story of Israel from its origins, through the desert, to its eschatological hope. A minimal view would see it as the outflow of a mind steeped in Scripture and Israel’s story as it has been regularly applied to the new people of God.

The data: It begins in v. 14 with Israel’s “murmuring” (Exod 16:12 et al.); the Philippians are urged not to do so. The reason for the prohibition is first expressed in the words God spoke to Abraham at the renewal of the covenant in Gen 17:1; as with the father of the covenant, the Philippians are to “become blameless” before God. This concern is then repeated in the language of Deut 32:5, where in the Song of Moses Israel is judged on account of its rebellion as “blameworthy children, a crooked and perverse generation” (LXX); but for the new covenant people of Philippi all of this is now reversed: by heeding the prohibition against “murmuring,” they become “God’s blameless children,” and the opposition in Philippi the “crooked and perverse generation.” Finally, in Dan 12:3 Israel’s eschatological hope takes the form: “the wise shall shine as luminaries (phōsteres),” with the parallel clause in the Hebrew (MT) adding, “and those who lead many to righteousness as the stars” (for which the LXX has, “those who hold strong to my words”); from the perspective of Paul’s “already/not yet” eschatological framework, the Philippians, as they live out their calling as God’ blameless children, already “shine as stars” as they “hold firm the word of life.” The eschatological context of Daniel in turn accounts for Paul’s concluding with a word about the “not yet” side of eschatological realities: the Philippians must persevere (now) in this kind of obedience or Paul will have no “boast” at the end; indeed, he will have “labored in vain” (yet another clause echoing OT language [esp. Isa 65:23, “my chosen ones will not labor in vain”]). Finally, in contrast to that, and now with no specific text in view, he images his ministry and suffering, and their faith and suffering, in terms of the levitical sacrifices.

But what to do with this phenomenon? On the one hand, both its uniqueness in the corpus and the sudden profusion of language not found elsewhere in Paul7 suggest something more intentional than otherwise; moreover, it seems to “work” too well to be mere chance or coincidence. On the other hand, this might be just our discovery, with nothing intentional on Paul’s part at all; after all, he is a man steeped in the story of Israel and is quick to see its application to the people of God newly constituted by Christ and the Spirit. Perhaps there is a middle way, that this reflects something sermonic or some former teaching (and is thus intentional in that sense), of a kind that Paul can draw on at will and weave into a single, meaningful sentence that specifies the kind of obedience he is calling them to, while at the same time placing the imperative within a larger biblical framework that assures the Philippians of their place in God’s story.

14 Both the asyndeton (lack of a connecting or nuancing particle) and the language of this imperative indicate that it has the closest possible tie to what has just been said.8 Following the verb “obey,” meaning to “work your salvation out,” because God “works” in/among you to will and to “work” for his good pleasure, Paul now urges, “Do all things.” The “do” picks up on the verbs, “obeying” and “working”; the “all things” is all inclusive, having to do with everything that makes up their common and corporate life in Philippi, but especially “working out their salvation” by standing firm and contending together for the gospel in the face of opposition.

The first of the two qualifying nouns, “without complaining,”9 is undoubtedly an intentional echo10 of the grumbling of Israel in the desert,11 made certain by (a) that the only other occurrence of the word in Paul is in 1 Cor 10:10 (“and neither grumble as some of them grumbled”), which explicitly recalls Num 14:1–38, (b) that in the next clause Paul unmistakably echoes the language of Deut 32:5, which recalls the recalcitrance of Israel in the desert, and (c) that Paul adds another noun to clarify what their “grumbling” consists of. Here, then, is the place for them to start “working out their salvation with fear and trembling”: to stop being like the murmuring Israelites.

But since Israel’s grumbling was against Moses and God, and since there is no hint in this letter that the Philippians are doing the same (that is, murmuring against Paul or God),12 Paul adds another clarifying noun, which puts their “grumbling” into the Philippian context: “and without controversies.”13 Here, most likely, is the tell-tale word, for which “grumbling” offers a biblical frame of reference. Although it ordinarily means something like “disputatious reasoning,” that is, reasonings that have ulterior and malicious design, here, as in 1 Tim 2:8, it refers to the disputes or controversies themselves.14 In light of the final appeal in 4:1–3, this word very likely spells out negatively what Paul urged in 2:2, that they have the same mindset, the same love for one another which they have experienced from God in Christ.

15–16a This clause offers the positive purpose behind the opening imperative, and there are no surprises in terms of concerns. As in the prayer report (1:9–11) he wants them, first, to be blameless with regard to their observable behavior, so that they might be recognized for what they are, “the children of God,” and that they might thus be blameless for the day of Christ. The arena for such behavior is pagan Philippi, now described in the language of Deut 32:5: “a crooked and depraved generation.” But being blameless is the penultimate concern. The ultimate concerns are two: first, the gospel in Philippi, almost certainly in the interest of evangelism, as throughout the preceding narrative about “his affairs” (1:12–26); and second, their own successful eschatological conclusion, expressed in terms of their being Paul’s “boast” with the day of Christ in view.15 Each of these parts of the clause needs closer examination.

1. “That you might become blameless and pure” is a compound which in terms of language is unique, but in terms of concept appears in 1:10. Both contexts reflect Paul’s “already but not yet” eschatological framework, the former emphasizing the day of Christ itself, this one emphasizing present conduct, with the day of Christ clearly in view. The first part, “become blameless,” is precisely how God begins the renewal of the covenant with Abraham.16 The word has primarily to do with observable conduct, which one can “find no fault” with. Since Paul will repeat this idea with another word in the next phrase, where the context is toward people, very likely this first occurrence, as in the Genesis account, is “blameless toward God.” “Pure”17 is directed more toward the heart, not in the sense of “clean” but of “innocent.”

2. With “children of God without fault” Paul begins his “echoes” of Deut 32:5 (LXX). The term “children of God,”18 which is full of familial overtones (God as Father, believers as children, hence brothers and sisters), is especially appropriate for those who are being urged “to obey.” The OT text says that Israel “no longer” has the right to this name, to which the LXX adds the adjective “blameworthy” (mōmeta), a term that reflects a cultic setting (= full of blemishes). Paul picks up this adjective, negates it (amōma = without fault), and adds “in the midst of”19 before continuing the rest of the “citation.”20 He thus converts the whole phrase into its opposite with regard to the Philippians.21 They are indeed God’s children, and as they stop their internal bickering they will thus be “without fault.”

3. By his addition of the preposition “in the midst of,” Paul also transforms the next words of Deut 32:5 into their opposite. Originally “a crooked and depraved generation” described “blameworthy” Israel. But since God’s Philippian children will become “blameless” as they stop their bickering, they must be so in the context of pagan Philippi, who now receive the epithet, “crooked and depraved generation.” Although this language is dictated by the LXX text Paul is citing, it is nonetheless a fair reflection of his view of pagan society,22 a view he has in common with most of the rest of the NT writers.23 But in the context of 1:27–2:18, for which this passage functions both as a conclusion and as something of an inclusio with 1:27–30,24 it is hard to escape the implication that the term is a purposely pejorative reference to “those who oppose” you in 1:28.25 As we noted there Paul is most likely referring to the general pagan populace in Philippi, who took their devotion to Caesar as “lord” seriously and found those who advocated another “Lord” more than just a little nettlesome. In the midst of such “a crooked and depraved generation” the Philippian believers are to conduct themselves in a way that is otherwise (i.e., ethically) without blame.

4. Having reminded the Philippians of the arena in which they are to live out the gospel, he now turns to the final apocalyptic vision of Daniel26 (12:1–4) to describe their role in pagan Philippi: “among whom you shine27 as stars28 in the world29.” It is probably the eschatological context of the Daniel passage that makes his own transition to their eschatological future so easy. But before that, he is concerned still with the “already.”

5. The modal qualifier,30 “as you hold out/on to31 the word of life,” brings us face to face with the inherent ambiguity of this final part of the sentence, which in turn reflects one of the repeated ambiguities of the NT: that the people of God are to “shine” in the world “over against” its darkness, while simultaneously they are to illumine that darkness.32 That is, by their attitudes and behavior they are to be clearly distinguishable from, and in opposition to, the world around them, while they are also to be God’s messengers, bringing the word of life to the dying. It is this tension that one also senses here. The language “crooked and depraved generation among whom you shine as stars in the world,” on the one hand, looks very much as if Paul meant “over against” the world; the present phrase, on the other hand, implies their evangelistic mission. The verb itself, which does not necessarily imply as much, is probably a further reflection of the passage from Daniel, being chosen as a more appropriate synonym for the LXX phrase “those who hold strong to my words,”33 which appears in the second clause (the synonymous parallel in 12:3). In which case it most likely carries the sense of “hold firm” the word of life.

But what suggests evangelism as the ultimate intent of their “holding firm” the gospel is (a) the word order (“the word of life holding firm,” immediately following “in the world”); (b) the unique language for the gospel, “word of life,” which occurs only here in Paul, and makes very little sense if does not carry the thrust of bringing life to others; and (c) the context of Dan 12:3, in which the second line in the Hebrew reads: “and those who bring many to righteousness (shall shine) as the stars for ever and ever.” Thus, it is not some kind of defensive posture that is in view (as in, “hold the gospel fast so that the enemy does not take it away from you”), but evangelism, that they clean up their internal act so that they may thereby “hold firm” the gospel,34 the message that brings life to those who believe. Their role in Philippi, by the very nature of things, puts them in strong contrast (hence, in opposition) to the paganism of Philippi, while at the same time they offer “life,” the life that Christ has provided through his death and resurrection, to those who will take the time to hear.