Authorship. Given the personal allusions and style, the vast majority of *New Testament scholars accept Philippians as an authentic letter (or letters) by Paul.
Unity. Some scholars have divided Philippians up into smaller units (more common in the past than today). The division of Philippians is not impossible: short letters were often sent in antiquity, and Paul maintained regular contact with the Philippians. Conversely, letters often had multiple subjects, especially when they were as long as Philippians. Two factors ultimately support the letter’s unity: (1) the burden of proof is on those who would divide it, because different letters are usually distinguishable in letter collections; (2) the arguments for division are based on modern letter-writing conventions that overlook ancient *rhetorical and epistolary conventions.
Structure. Chapter 1 addresses topics of Paul and the Philippians’ common labor in the *gospel (using motifs from ancient friendship letters). Chapter 2 provides models for imitation (in which he includes letters of recommendation). Chapter 3 includes a *digression (common in ancient letters). Chapter 4 turns to the main business of the letter (a thank-you note eager to avoid any suggestions of the common ancient *patron-*client ideology).
Situation. Paul states that the purpose of Philippians is to thank them (4:10-20); but writing from prison (probably in Rome, as a majority of scholars think), he also wishes to address some other issues, including the likely further persecution the *church will face and an exhortation to work together. As much as the Philippian church (probably made up of several house churches) loved Paul, its members were divided among themselves; thus the recurrent exhortations to unity (1:27; 2:2, 14) and mutual service (2:3-11). Exhortations to unity were commonplace in antiquity, but usually corresponded to genuinely present and no less common divisions. At least part of the division here revolves around disagreement between two of Paul’s fellow laborers, possibly leaders of separate house churches (4:2-3). If opposition to Paul exists, it probably involves Jewish Christians who advocate circumcision, if Paul believes they have already arrived in Philippi (3:2-21).
Commentaries. Useful commentaries for background include Gordon D. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995); Gerald F. Hawthorne, Philippians, WBC 43 (Waco, TX: Word, 1983); and Ben Witherington III, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011). On a less technical level, see, e.g., Ben Witherington III, Friendship and Finances in Philippi (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1994).
1:1. The title “servants” is not necessarily demeaning in either a Jewish setting (the prophets had been called “servants of God”) or a Greco-Roman one (slaves of the emperor and other high officials wielded far more power than independent free persons). On “overseers” and “deacons,” see comment on 1 Timothy 3:1, 8, where these terms also occur together. Some letters opened by naming multiple authors, yet continued as if written only by the first one (e.g., *Cicero, Letters to Friends 16.11.1).
1:2. Paul here Christianizes a customary ancient greeting form (see comment on Rom 1:7).
Thanksgivings were common in ancient letters; Paul is particularly fond of them, omitting them in congregational letters only to the Galatians, and there for obvious reasons.
1:3-4. Jewish language sometimes connects prayers with “memorials” or “rememberings” before God (as in Rom 1:9); here Paul may mean that he thanks God during his regular prayers for the Philippians (cf. Phil 4:6). Letter writers often remarked that they had joy when thinking of or hearing about the recipient.
1:5. The term translated “participation” (NASB) or “partnership” (NIV) was often used in an economic sense for those who “share” (cf. NRSV) monetarily. Here it includes the financial help the Philippians have given (4:10-20).
1:6. “Day of *Christ Jesus” adapts *Old Testament language for the “day of the Lord,” and so assumes that Christ is divine. Writers or speakers of exhortations or requests often expressed confidence that the recipient would do well; Paul’s confidence in their perseverance is based on 1:5, 7.
1:7. Letters of friendship often mentioned sharing one another’s feelings (including sorrows). Given his imprisonment and legal situation, Paul also naturally uses language common in legal proceedings: the “defense” and “confirmation,” or vindication, acquittal. His situation was relevant to their own (see comment on Phil 1:19). People often abandoned their friends if the latter were imprisoned or otherwise shamed, but loyalty was respected.
1:8. Letters of friendship often displayed affection and mentioned the writer’s longing for his friends. Ancients commonly called on a deity as a witness, assuming the deity’s knowledge; to lie under such conditions was to invite the deity’s wrath.
1:9-11. As Paul does here, philosophers also stressed the need to discern what was good from what was bad. On the source of “righteousness” (v. 11), see also comment on 3:9.
Greek philosophers typically declared that neither imprisonment nor death mattered; only one’s attitude did. Paul partly agrees with this view but for very different reasons: God’s sovereign use of hardship for his glory (1:12-14, a Jewish and *Old Testament belief) and the superiority of undistracted devotion to Jesus (1:21, 23). Letters often filled in readers on recent news; public documents and speeches usually included a *narrative component leading up to the circumstances of writing.
1:12. *Stoic philosophers argued that imprisonment, like death, was not a bad thing; Jewish faith recognized that God was sovereign even in sufferings (cf., e.g., Joseph’s imprisonment).
1:13. Some commentators have suggested that “palace” or “praetorium” here may refer to a provincial governor’s residence, such as the place of Paul’s detention in Caesarea (Acts 23:35); Paul was often detained (2 Cor 11:23), and a detention in Asia or in Syria-Palestine would clarify the presence of so many helpers in Colossians 4:10-15. Others, taking “Caesar’s household” (4:22) literally, think that “praetorium” here refers to detention in Rome by the “praetorian guard” (NASB), as in Acts 28:16; the centrality of Rome in the empire attracted many people, which could account for the presence of the ministers in Colossians 4:10-15. No army was allowed in Italy, but the Praetorian Guard consisted of several thousand free Italian soldiers in twelve cohorts of as many as a thousand each. They were the emperor’s elite bodyguard under the praetorian prefect. Viewed as *clients of the emperor (thus part of his extended household), they were kept loyal with the highest pay in the Roman military; they were also kept loyal by the leadership of a prefect who could never legally become emperor (being a knight rather than a senator).
1:14-17. Despite the disapproval of some philosophers, competition for honor was a central value for men in much of society, including, conspicuously, Rome and its colonies. Jewish teachers allowed that serving God from impure motives was better than not serving him at all. They also unequivocally insisted, however, that those who used the *law only for their own gain would not share in the world to come. Ancient writers and speakers sometimes outlined alternatives (1:15) before elaborating them (1:16-17).
1:18. “What then?” was a common phrase for furthering an argument or transitioning to a conclusion. One could repeat a word or phrase for emphasis (thus here Paul’s rejoicing, though he varies the verb tense and voice; ancient hearers also appreciated variation).
1:19. “This will turn out for my deliverance” precisely echoes Job 13:16 in the *Septuagint, although Paul, unlike Job, sees God as his defender here. “Salvation” (KJV) often meant physical “deliverance,” sometimes from prison, and in this context it must have this meaning. Not all residents of Philippi were citizens, but those who were Philippian citizens (who would often be the most prominent members of the *church) were also Roman citizens (see comment on 3:20) and as such enjoyed certain legal protections. Paul’s fate in court as a Christian who was also a Roman citizen would set a legal precedent that could affect their own legal standing, so they would have more than one reason for concern about how his case turned out.
1:20-23. Ancient speakers sometimes contemplated their options in front of their audiences (though the choice here is not really Paul’s). Philosophers often argued that death was neutral, not evil; it was either annihilation or the migration of the soul from one place to another. They contended that it could be either advantageous or not, and that one could choose accordingly. Paul sees death as an evil (1 Cor 15:26) and not something to be chosen, but also, when it comes in God’s plan, as a way to pursue *Christ undistracted (2 Cor 5:4-10). Most Judeans emphasized the future *resurrection of the bodies of the righteous but believed that the souls of the righteous dead were meanwhile in heaven with God; Paul agrees with them. Many Greco-Roman writers expressed a desire to die and so be free from sufferings; Old Testament writers did not usually take this position (Ps 30:9), but some became discouraged enough to express this sentiment (1 Kings 19:4), or even to wish that they had never lived (Job 3:1-19; Jer 15:10; 20:14-18).
1:24. Ancient thinkers sometimes argued that one should use reason to determine whether it was more profitable to die or to continue to endure suffering for the good one could accomplish (e.g., *Cicero, Letters to His Brother Quintus 1.3.1-2; Pliny, Epistles 1.22.9-10). Although Paul’s death, if it happened, would not be voluntary, he reasons nonetheless; his remaining would help them by virtue of his continuance as a teacher, and perhaps also for legal precedent: see comment on 1:19. Speakers commonly cited “necessity” as a reason for a choice; a writer who affirmed that he clung to life for another’s sake (Phil 1:24) thereby also demonstrated love for them (e.g., *Seneca, Epistle to Lucilius 104.2-3; Fronto, Ad M. Caesarem 5.33/48).
1:25-26. “Progress” was commonly used for educational or moral advancement. (Although Stoics viewed people as either perfect or not, according to ideal types, on the practical level even they emphasized “progress” toward virtue.) Nero was not particularly interested in legal questions, and in A.D. 62 he freed Jewish prisoners that the procurator Felix had previously sent him (Josephus, Life 16). Paul was likely released at this time (see comment on Acts 28:30-31).
1:27. “Conduct yourselves” uses Greek terminology sometimes applied to a citizen in a free state (cf. 3:20), language that Jewish writers used to describe their people obeying God’s *law (as in Acts 23:1; 2 Maccabees 6:1; *3 Maccabees 3:4; *4 Maccabees 2:8; 5:16). On the athletic image (here undoubtedly implied in the Greek word that KJV and NASB translate “striving together”), see comment on 1:30. Exhortations to unity commonly included calls to be “of one mind” or the like.
1:28. The confidence that Paul suggests here alludes to the *Old Testament and Jewish hope that God would destroy his people’s enemies in the end time but vindicate and save his people. Cf. Wisdom of Solomon 5:1-2; Baruch 4:24-25.
1:29. Although Jewish people sought to avoid persecution when possible, they extolled the martyrs who preferred death to disobeying God. (One could perhaps distinguish public attitudes, such as praise for past heroes, from personal attitudes, such as the price individuals paid in daily life for their convictions. In the case of Paul, however, he was daily confronted with the personal choice and in his own life modeled commitment to the point of martyrdom.) Paul regards suffering for Christ as a privilege (cf. similarly Acts 5:41). The idea of sufferings indicating the nearness of the end (as in Jewish thought) might also be present here.
1:30. Although the term had also developed a more generic use, Paul probably applies the language of ancient athletic competitions (“contest” or “conflict”—KJV, NASB) to the life of the moral person, as do many Greek moralists. Here the issue is persecution; on the Philippians’ sharing in Paul’s fate, see comment on 1:19.
Paul continues his exhortation of 1:27-30, advocating unity (1:27) and fearlessness in the face of martyrdom’s reward (1:28; 2:9-11; cf. 3:20-21). Ancient moral writers often adduced examples to prove their points, and Paul here adduces Jesus (2:5-11), himself (2:17-18), Timothy (2:19-24) and Epaphroditus (2:25-30). Correspondences between 2:6-11 and 3:20-21 indicate the extent to which Paul uses *Christ as a model for believers here. (The majority of scholars accept Phil 2:6-11 as a pre-Pauline hymn, based on the structure and language of the passage. Others point out that Paul could be responsible for the hymnic features himself. Greek authors peppered their writings with quotations from Greek poetry, and Paul’s use of an earlier Christian hymn is possible, although it cannot be regarded as proven. Despite its *rhetorical patterns, the material need not be a hymn per se; ancient writers and speakers often used exalted prose, sometimes even with rhythm, to describe deities.)
2:1-4. Competition for honor was heavy in Roman society, a behavior if anything more pronounced in Philippi. Paul borrows language commonly used in Greek homonoia speeches, which advocated harmony and unity among the hearers. Most philosophers advocated preferring the larger good to one’s own. Jewish teachers also had maxims such as, “Value your fellow’s honor no less than your own” (cf. Mishnah Avot 2:10; Avot of Rabbi Nathan 15, 19 A; 29, §60B). One could urge a person to act on the basis of affection, e.g., sometimes for the exhorter (Fronto, Ad M. Caesarem 5.1: “If you have any love at all for me . . . ”).
2:5-6. Some intellectuals urged being of “one mind” with the gods, having the correct, divine perspective. Some scholars suggest that Christ’s being in the “form of God” alludes to Adam being formed in God’s image (Gen 1:26). Unlike Adam, who being human sought divinity (Gen 3:5), Jesus, being deity, relinquished his rightful position of honor. Also and probably even more to the point here is that Jewish texts described divine Wisdom as the perfect, archetypal image of God (“form” may mean “role” more than “image” here; cf. 2:7b, “form of a servant,” although this phrase parallels “likeness” in 2:7c; cf. comment on Col 1:15). (One might contrast Jesus’ voluntary surrender of status with the emperor during Paul’s time, Nero, who aspired to divinity.)
2:7. The “servant” of Isaiah 53 also was “poured out” or “emptied himself,” though not in incarnation but in death (Is 53:12; cf. Phil 2:8). (Paul uses a more specific Greek word for “slave” [so NRSV] here than appears for the servant in the *LXX of Isaiah 53; elsewhere, however, cf. Is 49:5, 7.)
2:8. Judaism prized obedience to the point of death in stories about its martyrs. Crucifixion was the most degrading form of execution, reserved for non-Roman criminals who were slaves or free persons of the lowest status. Writers and speakers sometimes repeated a word (here “death”) to reinforce the point.
2:9. Some commentators have seen in the language of this verse an allusion to the exaltation of Isaiah 52:13. If, as is likely, that verse refers to suffering more than glory (Is 52:14–53:11), Paul either does not refer to it here (the term in Isaiah is very common in the *Septuagint) or contrasts the exaltation accomplished by God with the suffering Jesus experienced among people.
2:10-11. Isaiah 45:23 (“every knee will bow . . . every tongue will declare”) refers to the final submission of all nations to God; that Paul applies the text to Jesus (especially with an *Old Testament divine title, “Lord,” in v. 11) is telling. Those “in heaven” would include the angels, probably including the rebellious angels who rule the *Gentile nations (see comment on Eph 1:21-23). Greeks worshiped gods in the heavens, earth, sea and underworld; traditional Greek mythology also placed the shadowy existence of departed souls in the underworld. Paul announces that whatever categories of beings there are, they must acknowledge Christ’s rule, because he is exalted above them. One often bowed the knee in obeisance before a ruler or deity.
Paul here continues his exhortation to the believers to live in unity (2:1-11).
2:12-13. Letters were often used as proxies for one’s presence; Paul thus entreats the Philippians through the letter to obey his teaching as if he were present. They secure their ultimate “salvation” by persevering together (see 1:27-28). The reward of this obedience is implied by the parallel with Jesus’ obedience in 2:8-9. The teaching that they are enabled to obey by God’s power is at best rare in pre-Christian literature outside *Old Testament teachings on the *Spirit; see comment on Galatians 2:19-20. “Fear and trembling” appear together often in the Old Testament and Jewish sources (cf., e.g., Ps 55:5; *4 Maccabees 4:10; *1 Enoch 14:13).
2:14. “Grumbling” and “disputing” (NASB) had characterized Israel in the wilderness and were condemned in the Old Testament; philosophers who emphasized the wisdom of the gods did not approve either. See comment on 1 Corinthians 10:9-10.
2:15. “Crooked and perverted generation” closely echoes Deut 32:5, which complains that rebellious Israelites are not God’s children; here, by contrast, believers are God’s children. Jewish tradition often compared the righteous with “lights” in a dark world; cf. especially Daniel 12:3 (the term Paul uses here was especially applied to heavenly bodies, reflecting an image like the one Daniel uses).
2:16. The “day of Christ” is modeled after the Old Testament “day of the Lord” (see comment on 1:6). The expression “labor in vain” was not uncommon; on athletic metaphors, see comment on Phil 1:30; 3:12-14.
Paul continues to model the servant lifestyle by examples.
2:17-18. Israel had drink offerings (e.g., Lev 23:18, 37), and other ancient religions also regularly poured out libations to the gods, usually wine but sometimes water or another substance. *Gentiles also poured libations at the beginning of banquets and could pour them in memory of person who had died. Paul is being poured out (cf. 2:7) as such a “drink offering” to the true God, a willing offering on their behalf that joined their own sacrifice.
2:19. Travelers regularly carried news and letters.
2:20-21. Both Greek philosophers and *Old Testament prophets complained about the scarcity of those fully devoted to the cause. Paul offers many “letters [or passages] of recommendation,” a common ancient form of writing (see comment on Rom 16:1-2), but he places Timothy, his special emissary, in a category by himself, offering the highest commendation. Those writing letters of recommendation often offered such superlative praises (occasionally for more than one person). Thus *Cicero can claim, “There is no one like him” (e.g., Letters to Friends 13.1.5; 13.18.2; 13.26.1); or “This is the most special recommendation” (Letters to Friends 13.32.2; 13.34.1; 13.35.1).
2:22. Messengers were often sent as personal representatives, to be received with the same honor accorded the sender (e.g., 2 Sam 19:37-38). Teachers and *disciples often developed an intimate relationship described in terms of “father” and “son.”
2:23. News was difficult to send, because it had to be carried by an available traveler and otherwise by a messenger—a sometimes dangerous undertaking given travel conditions at various times of the year (cf. 2:30). Paul therefore wants to wait until he can give a full report of the outcome of his trial.
2:24. Letters were used as surrogates for one’s presence but also often announced one’s coming.
People often wrote letters of recommendation, often supporting the carrier; Paul includes this recommendation in his larger letter. Epaphroditus had been the Philippians’ messenger, bringing their gift to Paul in prison (4:18); he no doubt carried Paul’s letter back to them. Travel conditions were dangerous and harsh, especially at sea in late fall and early spring, and these conditions decreased one’s resistance to antiquity’s many diseases (vv. 26-27). Because “Epaphroditus” is a common name, no firm conclusions about his ethnic origin may be drawn from it, but the context suggests that he was from Philippi. Soldier metaphors (2:25) appear elsewhere, and military images were common (see comment on Rom 13:12).
People often reported on theirs or others’ health in personal letters, as well as expressing concern for others’ health. We cannot know the cause of Epaphroditus’s ill health, but malaria, for example, was very common, and typhoid existed. *Gentiles prayed to their gods for healing (especially certain deities associated with healing, most notably Asclepius); Jewish people prayed to and praised the true God as the healer of body as well as the forgiver of sin. Jewish prayers for healing were sometimes described as prayers for “mercy.” “Risked” (in “risked his life,” v. 30) was often used as a gambling term, and some scholars have noted that gamblers invoked Venus, goddess of gambling, with the term epaphroditus; on this view Paul could be making a wordplay on his friend’s name. Although God usually healed those in the Bible who prayed to him, his activity could not be taken for granted; even some of his most faithful servants had died from sickness (2 Kings 13:14; cf. 1 Kings 1:1; 14:4).
The section from 3:1 to 4:1 is a *digression. Some scholars have suggested that it was a different Pauline letter accidentally inserted into the middle of Philippians (though in papyri such accidents must have been extremely uncommon), or one combined with several other Pauline letters to the Philippians. But digressions were common in ancient speaking and writing, and literary connections with the rest of the letter strengthen the suggestion that it is part of a unified letter.
3:1. The expression often translated “finally” here sometimes indicated the end of a letter (cf. GNT: “in conclusion”), but just as often functioned as a transition device within a letter (cf. 1 Thess 4:1; 2 Thess 3:1; cf. Testament of Reuben 5:5). (Less relevantly, “ending” twice also could fit the casual nature of some letters; cf., e.g., apparent plans to end in Pliny, Epistles 3.9.26-27, 37; *Seneca, Epistle to Lucilius 119.9, 16.) One might also say again a point that bore repeating (and even say so, e.g., *Cicero, On Friendship 22.85). Reminders were common in moral exhortation.
3:2. The threefold repetition of “beware” is *rhetorical anaphora, opening repetition to highlight a point. The opponents here are not Jewish persecutors, who would be unlikely in Philippi, which apparently had a very small Jewish community (cf. Acts 16:13). Rather, they are like the traveling Jewish Christian teachers Paul had encountered in Galatia who want to circumcise *Gentiles. Scholars debate whether they have already visited Philippi or are simply traveling about; if the latter, Paul is warning that they may come there.
“Dog” was a familiar insult, sometimes implying dogs’ vulgar public sexual, excretory or (cf. 3:8, 19) dietary habits. *Cynic philosophers were regularly called “dogs,” but given the specific error Paul refutes in this passage, he clearly does not use it as a reference to these philosophers; that use merely illustrates to what a great extent the term was one of disdain. Philosophers called those ruled by passions “beasts.” Probably more to the point, Jewish teaching considered dogs unclean and sometimes sexually immoral; the *Old Testament might apply the title to male cult prostitutes (Deut 23:17); especially to enemies in Psalm 22:16. Such a title would certainly make the pietists who were demanding circumcision recoil. There were “beware of dog” signs even in ancient Rome, where they were pets and watchdogs (*Petronius, Satyricon 29), no doubt reinforcing the biting sarcasm of Paul’s phrase. Here Paul uses another word for “circumcision” (NASB), which means “mutilation” (NIV, NRSV; cf. the *LXX of 1 Kings 18:28); see comment on Galatians 5:12 for the cultural significance of this idea. Plays on words were common; cf. mutilation (katatome) here and circumcision (peritome) in 3:3.
3:3. Paul says that spiritual circumcision (Deut 10:16; 30:6; cf. Lev 26:41; Jer 4:4; 9:25-26) is what really matters to God. Because ancient Judaism usually associated the *Spirit with *prophecy, “worship in the Spirit” (NASB, NRSV) may refer to charismatic worship of the sort depicted in 1 Chronicles 25:1-6; because most Jewish people believed that the Spirit was no longer available in that fullness in their own time, Paul lays claim to an experience for the *church that confirms the *Messiah’s arrival and that most of his Jewish contemporaries (possibly excepting other “fringe” groups such as the *Qumran sectarians) would not pretend to match.
3:4. Lists of virtues or vices were common in epideictic (praise and blame) speeches, and in *narrative form they characterized epideictic biographies. Self-commendation was considered appropriate if one were defending oneself or using oneself as a legitimate model for others. By claiming to have greater merit than his opponents even on their own terms, he turns this self-commendation into an occasion to undermine them; professional speakers and writers often used the standard rhetorical technique of “comparison” to accomplish this end.
3:5. Gentile lists of praises (cf. Menander Rhetor 2.3, 385.5-9) could begin with nature and nurture (cf. Phil 3:5) and proceed to accomplishments and actions, the latter including the four cardinal virtues (which included justice; cf. 3:6). Gentile lists of a person’s virtues typically included items such as noble birth or beauty as well as character traits like prudence or steadfastness. Those born Jewish males were circumcised the eighth day; by this virtue Paul eliminates any competition from *proselytes converted by his opponents later in life—in practice proselytes had lower social status in Judaism than those born Jewish. “Hebrew of Hebrews” could indicate a Palestinian Jewish origin, although this is not clear; however, that Paul lived in Judea before his conversion is clear from the fact that he was a *Pharisee (in Acts, cf. comment on 22:3). Although Pharisaic piety was known elsewhere, Pharisees themselves seem to have lived only in Palestine and been concentrated around Jerusalem. They were noted for being the most meticulous observers of the *law—something Paul’s opponents now claimed to be.
3:6. “Zeal” for the law did not always or necessarily include violence, but the chief models for such zeal included Phinehas (Num 25:7-13) and especially the *Maccabees, and Jewish patriots called themselves “*Zealots” in the war against Rome not long after Paul wrote these words. By defining his legalistic righteousness in terms of his persecution of Christians, Paul associates his opponents’ position of “zeal” for the law with opposition to the Philippian Christians’ faith.
3:7. Appealing to the Christian faith shared by himself, his readers and (according to themselves) even his opponents, Paul dispenses with his worldly credentials—and thus the only credentials to which his opponents could lay claim at all; see comment on 2 Corinthians 11:16-18. “Gain” (or “gains”—NIV; or “profit”—GNT) and “loss” are marketplace terms, like other terms later in the letter (4:10-20); Paul had to sacrifice all his former spiritual assets to follow Christ, who was what really mattered.
3:8. “Dung” (KJV) or “rubbish” (ESV, NASB, NRSV; “garbage”—NIV) usually meant either excrement or food to be thrown away, which dogs might enjoy (3:2). (Ancient speakers valued skill in producing insolent insults.)
3:9. As in 3:6, the problem is not the law but that the righteousness is Paul’s own, hence inadequate. Both biblical psalmists and later Jewish ones whose hymns appear in the *Dead Sea Scrolls waited on God for their vindication or acquittal, and Paul likewise had to receive his justification, or righteousness, from God alone, but Paul understands that this is found in Christ.
3:10. The ultimate revelation in the Old Testament was to “know” God (Ex 33:13), a relationship available to all the people of the new covenant (Jer 31:34). This language reflects both the covenant relationship (on the corporate level) and intimate fellowship with God (on the personal level experienced by the prophets). But Paul also connects knowing *Christ with sharing his sufferings and glory. On the imitation of God, see comment on Ephesians 5:1.
3:11. The ultimate sharing of Christ’s *resurrection occurs at the future resurrection of the righteous (in which most Jews believed). Many Jewish people believed that a period of sufferings would precede the resurrection, and this seems to be Paul’s view as well (clear in Rom 8:18-22), though Paul speaks here of his own sufferings (Phil 3:10-11).
3:12-13. In the language of athletic competition—often used metaphorically by ancient moralists (e.g., *Epictetus, Discourses 2.17.29; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.34) and Greek-speaking Jews (e.g., *Testament of Job 4:10; *Josephus, Against Apion 2.217-18)—Paul describes his striving for the future hope of 3:11. Greco-Roman sages generally admitted that they were not yet “perfect” (in contrast to the ideal sage) but were making progress. Nevertheless they sometimes spoke of themselves as the “mature,” the wise, as opposed to those who were still novices. (Older commentators note that the *mystery cults described the highest stage of initiation as “perfection” or “completion,” but this is probably less relevant here than the language of sages.) “What is behind” (NIV) belongs to Paul’s image of the race; to win, one must keep one’s eyes on the finish line; Greek runners often ran in a straight line and back.
3:14. At the end of each race, officials had their heralds proclaim the winner and call him up to receive his prize (in the Olympic games, a palm branch). (“Above” or “upward” also alludes to Christ in heaven, 3:20; cf. Col 3:1-2.) In Paul’s metaphor, the prize is the full revelation of Christ at the resurrection (3:10-11).
3:15. In philosophy, those who were advanced in learning, as opposed to novice students, could be described as “mature” (NIV, NRSV; “perfect”—KJV, NASB). (This was, however, mostly “in principle”; *Stoics depicted the ideal so starkly that even sages did not claim to have attained it themselves.)
3:16. Although not looking back to one’s past (3:13) and not yet complete (3:11-12), they were to maintain what they had already achieved. “Live” here can mean “walk” (KJV) or “keep to a straight line”; possibly here Paul adapts his race metaphor from 3:12-14 (races were often in straight lines and back), although this is by no means certain.
Teachers like Paul would make it to the *resurrection of the righteous by staking their righteousness on nothing but Christ (3:9-11); his opponents, however, like dogs interested in dung (3:2, 8), were headed for destruction, as were those who followed them (3:18-19).
3:17. *Disciples often learned by imitating their teachers; examples were important for learning. (Paul had given four examples, using himself for one, in chapter 2, and again used himself in 3:4-14.)
3:18. Displays of emotion were considered appropriate in public speaking, both expressions of outrage (3:2) and “weeping,” which often invited audiences to feel the same. Letter writers could also mention their tears (e.g., *Cicero, Letters to His Brother Quintus 1.3.3; Pliny, Epistles 5.21.6). “With tears” (NIV, NRSV, GNT) or “weeping” (KJV, NASB) indicates his love for his opponents.
3:19. Greco-Roman philosophers and non-Palestinian Jewish writers (especially Philo) repeatedly railed against those ruled by their passions, often remarking that they were ruled by their “belly” (KJV, NRSV) or their (sexual or culinary) “appetite” (NASB), disdaining their neglect of eternal things. Gluttony especially became part of Roman culture, and its practice by the aristocracy was a frequent butt of satirists’ humor. But being ruled by one’s “belly” meant more than gluttony; it was used to mean any fleshly indulgence (cf. “bodily desires”—GNT). This would be a serious insult to those who thought they were zealous for the *law (*Diaspora Jews emphasized how the law enabled them to master passions); but Paul had already “shamed” their “glory” by his own example in 3:4-8.
3:20. Citizens of Philippi, a Roman *colony, were automatically citizens of Rome, sharing all the rights and privileges of Roman citizens even though most of them had never been there. (Not everyone who lived in Philippi was a full citizen of Philippi, but the citizenship held by some of the church, especially owners of many or most of the homes in which it met, would raise the status of the whole movement there.) Paul’s readers in Philippi therefore understand quite well what it means to be citizens of the supreme city while not yet living there. Philosophers sometimes declared themselves citizens of the world rather than any mere city-state. Citizenship in heaven was more important than descent from a tribe in Israel (3:5). (“Citizenship” is not “conversation,” as in the KJV.)
Many deities in Philippi were called “*saviors,” as was the emperor; although this title for Jesus derives from *Old Testament language for God (e.g., Is 45:21), it provides a stark contrast with the paganism Christians outside greater Judea had to confront daily.
3:21. Paul’s view of the *resurrection is that it involves the body, but one distinct in nature from the current body (Greek culture considered the idea of a bodily resurrection vulgar superstition, but many Jews valued the whole person; see comment on 1 Cor 15). Many Jewish conceptions of the resurrection body differed from the current body (cf. Dan 12:2-3). As in Judaism, the resurrection occurs at the time of the ultimate battle, when God subordinates all his enemies (cf. also 1 Cor 15:25-28).
4:1. Letters often expressed longing to see the recipient in person. That the Philippians are Paul’s “crown” indicates that they are in some sense his prize (potentially fitting his recent athletic metaphor; cf. 3:14; 1 Thess 2:19 and comment on 1 Cor 9:24-25). They must stand firm against Paul’s opponents and persevere if Paul is to receive the reward he seeks for his labor for them—their salvation. There were different sorts of crowns. Heroes could be rewarded with public crowns, but the term applied especially to athletes’ wreaths; Judaism also used the image for rewards at the end time.
Moral writers often strung together short, unrelated statements of moral advice. Paul similarly lists several admonitions in 4:4-9 here, although a common theme runs among them.
4:2. “Euodia” and “Syntyche” are Greek names; because Philippi was a Roman *colony, their Greek names might indicate that they are foreign merchants like Lydia (Acts 16:14; see comment on Acts 16:21), although this is only a surmise (some commentators suggest that one of them is Lydia). Their prominence as Paul’s coworkers may have been more acceptable at Philippi than it would have been in some other parts of the empire. Macedonian and Roman women had more freedoms than women in more traditionally Greek areas, and inscriptions indicate heavy involvement of women in the religious activities of this city.
4:3. Ancients appreciated mediators who could reconcile estranged parties (see, e.g., *Cicero, Letters to Atticus 1.3; also 1.5; 1.10; *Tacitus, Histories 2.5). Clement may be the author of 1 Clement, a late-first-century Christian letter from Rome to Corinth, as tradition suggests, although Clement is a common Roman name. The “book of life” is an *Old Testament image further developed in ancient Judaism (e.g., Ex 32:32-33; Dan 12:1; Mal 3:16; the *Essene CD 20.19; *Jubilees 36:10).
4:4. One could repeat a word or phrase for emphasis (see comment on Phil 1:18). Constant rejoicing, like constant gratitude (cf. 4:6), reflects confidence in God (see comment on Eph 5:20).
4:5. “The Lord is near” could refer to the Second Coming (3:20-21; cf. Is 13:6; Ezek 30:3; Joel 1:15; 3:14; Zeph 1:7) or that the Lord is close to his people and hears their cries (see Deut 4:7; Ps 34:18; 145:18).
4:6-7. “Peace” (v. 7) could indicate tranquility (vs. the anxiety in v. 6), a trait valued by many philosophers, although in the context of unity it may also have its usual meaning of peace with one another (as in Greco-Roman homonoia speeches; cf. 4:2). If any connotations of the latter use are present, the image of such peace “standing guard” (if pressed in a military sense) over hearts and minds is striking. Jewish prayers (some based on Num 6:24-26) often asked God to keep his people from harm and grant peace. On the mind, cf. 4:8 and 2:5.
4:8. Like many writers, Paul resorts to a full list of virtues, including arete, “excellence,” which was central to the Greek concept of virtue. Throughout this list he borrows the language of Greek ethics, although nothing he says would have been objectionable to traditional Jewish hearers. (He omits some traditional Greek virtues, like “beauty” and “goodness” per se, but the last omission need not be viewed as significant, because such lists were never intended to be complete.) Greek and Roman philosophers repeatedly emphasized thinking such virtuous thoughts, and Jewish writers repeatedly borrowed their language the same way Paul does to communicate to Greek-speaking Jewish readers.
4:9. Teachers often exhorted students to live what they had been taught and to follow the example set by the teacher.
Paul avoids a direct “thank you” in this section (which could portray him as a dependent on the *church’s benefaction) while expressing his appreciation. Paul acknowledges their gift graciously, without sounding as if he is requesting more. (Gratitude may have been particularly valued in Macedonia, of which Philippi was a part; in earlier times an ungrateful man was said to have been liable to prosecution there—*Seneca, On Benefits 3.6.2.) In the ancient world, *patrons showed hospitality to and looked out for their *clients; if Paul had said “thank you” forthrightly, he might have cast himself in the role of a subordinate, dependent client.
4:10. Letters of friendship, when responding to a friend’s letter, often opened with a statement of joy about receiving that friend’s letter (e.g., Oxyrhynchus papyri 1676.4-5). Writers also often assured letters’ recipients that the writers trusted the readers’ intentions.
4:11-13. Greek moralists, influenced by *Stoic thought, praised those who could be content with little as well as with much. (*Cynics went so far as to prove their contentment in little by making certain that was all they ever had.) It was said that the wise man needed no one but himself and was completely independent. But although Paul uses the language of contentment in all circumstances (being able to do “all things,” as in 4:13) common among Stoic philosophers and others, the idea of persevering and enduring for God’s sake was commonly lived out by the *Old Testament prophets, Jewish martyrs and other servants of God.
Paul’s “abundance” (NASB) would have been meager and simple by modern standards; artisans were better off than the poor, but far below the standard of living enjoyed by the modern Western middle class or by the well-to-do of antiquity. (“Moderation”—seeking a mean between two extremes—was central to most Greek discussions of virtue, especially in *Aristotle; it also appears in *Diaspora Jewish ethics. But Paul nowhere seeks such a mean; like the best of Greek philosophers, he can live in any situation. His language is thus closer to the dominant philosophic school of his day [Stoicism] rather than to the Peripatetic [Aristotelian] school. Unlike such philosophers, who depended only on themselves, however, he is “self-sufficient” only by virtue of Christ, who works in him.)
4:14-16. The language of “sharing” (partnership, 4:14-15) is the language of ancient business documents; it may even suggest a special account from which the Philippians sent Paul help when he was in need. “For my needs” (NASB, NRSV) also occurs in business documents specifying the purposes of a disbursement. The form he uses for the title “Philippians” is normally bad Greek but was what the Roman citizens of Philippi called themselves; it is thus a mark of sensitivity to their local traditions and culture.
4:17. “Profit” (NASB, NRSV, GNT), “what may be credited to your account” (NIV), is literally “fruit” (KJV), but because many business transactions involved crops this was a natural extension in ancient documents. Paul trusts that God will reward the Philippians with interest for their sacrifice on his behalf.
4:18. “I have received” was very common, perhaps the most common standard phrase, in receipts; Paul acknowledges their gift in regular business terms. But he also uses Old Testament language for a sacrifice (“sweet-smelling,” GNT; “acceptable”; sacrificial language was sometimes applied figuratively); in being partners with this missionary, they are partners with the God who sent him.
4:19-20. Verse 19 may be a wish-prayer, as some commentators have suggested (see comment on 1 Thess 3:11); others take it as a statement. On either reading, the point is much the same: Paul cannot pay back the Philippians, but he trusts that God will. Although ancient writers often used wealth as a metaphor for spiritual riches like wisdom, in this context Paul no doubt means that he trusts that God will reward them for their faithfulness to his work (cf. Deut 15:10; Prov 19:17). “Needs” in the case of most of the Philippian Christians were genuine, basic needs (see 2 Cor 8:1-2), not mere “wishes” (as some readers take it today). “In glory” (KJV, NASB, NRSV) can be translated “in a glorious way” or “glorious riches.”
4:21. Greetings were common in ancient letters. Because Paul knows most of the believers in Philippi, he keeps his greeting general. Letters also commonly included greetings from others (in this case probably believers in Rome), because mail had to be sent via travelers and thus could not be sent frequently.
4:22-23. The “household of Caesar” could refer to anyone in the Roman civil service directly dependent on Caesar, including all his slaves and freedmen; it always indicated great prestige. It most likely refers here to the Praetorian Guard (see comment on 1:13); if Paul was in Rome at this point, anyone who guarded him (Acts 28:16, 30) would naturally be exposed to his teaching. Even Caesar’s slaves wielded more power and prestige than most well-off free persons; the Praetorian Guard itself held the prestige of the Roman military’s elite, often rewarded by Caesar himself. Paul’s greeting would impress his readers: his imprisonment has indeed advanced the gospel (1:12-13).