ing to ἱερός, that the former was adopted by the LXX translators as the common rendering of Ὕρ, while the latter is very rarely used by them in any sense: see esp. Lev. xi. 44 ἀγιασθήσεσθε καὶ ἅγιοι ἔσεσθε ὅτι ἅγιός εἰμι ἐγώ. ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ to be connected with ἁγίοις. For the omission of the article see the notes on 1 Thess. i. 1. ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις] 'the presbyters and deacons.' The contributions were probably sent to St Paul in the name of the officers, as well as of the church generally: comp. Acts xv. 23. Hence St Paul mentions them in reply. It seems hardly probable that this mention was intended, as some have thought, to strengthen the hands of the presbyters and deacons, their authority being endangered. The dissensions in the Philippian Church do not appear to have touched the officers. On ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος, as interchangeable terms, see the detached note, p. 95. 2. χάρις ὑμῖν κ.τ.λ.] On the form of salutation see the note on 1 Thess. i. 1. 3. The thanksgiving in this epistle is more than usually earnest. The Apostle dwells long and fondly on the subject. He repeats words and accumulates clauses in the intensity of his feeling. As before in the omission of his official title, so here in the fulness of his thanksgiving, the letters to the Thessalonians present the nearest parallel to the language of this epistle: see introduction p. 66. 3 5. 'I thank my God for you all at all times, as I think of you, whensoever I pray for you (and these prayers I offer with joy), for that you have co-operated with me to the furtherance of the Gospel from the day when you first heard of it to the present moment.' The arrangement of the clauses in these verses is doubtful. They may be connected in various ways, and the punctuation will differ accordingly. On the whole however the words πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν seem naturally to run together; and if so, we have the alternative of attaching them to the foregoing or to the following words. I have preferred the former for two reasons. (1) The structure of the passage is dislocated and its force weakened, by disconnecting clauses pointed out so obviously as correlative by the repetition of the same word πάσῃ, πάντοτε, πάσῃ, πάντων; see Lobeck Paral. p. 56. (2) The words μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος seem to stand apart, as an explanatory clause defining the character of the foregoing πάσῃ δεήσει; for there would be great awkwardness in making one sentence of the two, ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος. For the connexion εὐχαριστεῖν πάντοτε (in most cases with περὶ or ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν) see 1 Cor. i. 4, 1 Thess. i. 2, 2 Thess. i. 3, ii. 13, Ephes. v. 20, and perhaps also Col. i. 3, Philem. 4: comp. also Ephes. i. 16 οὐ πνεύμασι εὐχαριστῶν. τῷ Θεῷ μου] 'my God.' The singular expresses strongly the sense of a close personal relationship: comp. Acts xxvii. 23 'whose I am and whom I serve': see also the note on Gal. ii. 20, and comp. iii. 8. ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ] 'in all my remembrance,' not 'on every remembrance (ἐπὶ πάσῃ μνείᾳ),' which would point rather to isolated, intermittent acts. On μνεία and εὐχαριστῶ see the notes 1 Thess. i. 2. 4 πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει μου ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος, 5 ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἀπὸ [τῆς] πρώτης ἡμέρας ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν· 4. ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν] should be connected rather with εὐχαριστώ than with ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει, for the following reasons. (1) The words are more naturally taken as independent and coordinate with all the preceding clauses, ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ, πάντοτε, ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει, than as dependent on any one singly. (2) The stress of the Apostle's statement is rather on the thanksgiving for all than the prayer for all, as he is dwelling on their good deeds. (3) In the parallel passages already quoted the common connexion is εὐχαριστεῖν ὑπὲρ (οἱ περὶ) ὑμῶν. There is a studied repetition of the word 'all' in this epistle, when the Philippian Church is mentioned: see i. 2, 7 (ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, πάντας ὑμᾶς), 8, 25, ii. 17, iv. 21. It is impossible not to connect this recurrence of the word with the strong and repeated exhortations to unity which the epistle contains (i. 27, ii. 1-4, iv. 2, 3, 5, 7, 9). The Apostle seems to say, 'I make no difference between man and man, or between party and party: my heart is open to all; my prayers, my thanksgivings, my hopes, my obligations, extend to all.' See the introduction, p. 67. μετὰ χαρᾶς κ.τ.λ.] 'Summa epistolae,' says Bengol, 'gaudeo gaudete': comp. i. 18, 25, ii. 2, 17, 18, 28, 29, iii. 1, iv. 1, 4, 10. The article before δέησιν refers it back to the previous δεήσει. 5. ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ κ.τ.λ.] The previous clause μετὰ χαρᾶς τὴν δέησιν ποιούμενος being a parenthesis, these words are connected with εὐχαριστώ. For εὐχαριστεῖν ἐπὶ see 1 Cor. i. 4. The words signify not 'your participation in the Gospel' (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, comp. ii. 1, iii. 10), but 'your cooperation towards, in aid of the Gospel' (εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον). For the construction see 2 Cor. ix. 13 ἀπλάτητε τῆς κοινωνίας εἰς αὐτούς, Rom. xv. 26 κοινωνίαν τινὰ ποιήσασθαι εἰς τοὺς πτωχούς. In the passages just quoted κοινωνία has a restricted meaning, 'contributions, almsgiving' (as also in 2 Cor. viii. 4, Hebr. xiii. 16; so κοινωνεῖν, Rom. xii. 13; κοινωνικός, 1 Tim. vi. 18; see Fritzsche Rom. iii. p. 81); but here, as the context shows, it denotes cooperation in the widest sense, their participation with the Apostle whether in sympathy or in suffering or in active labour or in any other way. At the same time their almsgiving was a signal instance of this cooperation, and seems to have been foremost in the Apostle's mind. In this particular way they had cooperated from the very first (ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἡμέρας) when on his departure from Philippi they sent contributions to Thessalonica and to Corinth (iv. 15, 16 ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου), and up to the present time (ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν) when again they had despatched supplies to Rome by the hands of Epaphroditus (iv. 10 ἤδη πότε). πρώτης] 'the first.' The article is frequently omitted, because the numeral is sufficiently definite in itself: comp. Mark xii. 28-30, xvi. 9, Acts xii. 10, xvi. 12, xx. 18, Ephes. vi 2. Here some of the oldest xss read τῆς πρώτης, but the article might perhaps be suspected, as a likely addition of some transcriber for the sake of greater precision. 6, 7. 'I have much ground for thanksgiving; thanksgiving for past experience, and thanksgiving for future hope. I am sure, that as God has inaugurated a good work in you, so He will complete the same, that it may be prepared to stand the test in the day of Christ's advent. I have every reason to think thus favourably of you all; for the remembrance is ever in G-2 ⁶πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο, ὅτι ὁ ἐναρξάμενος ἐν ὑμῖν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐπιτελέσει ἄχρι[s] ἡμέρας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ⁷καθὼς ἐστιν δίκαιον ἐμοὶ τοῦτο φρονεῖν ὑπὲρ πάντων ὑμῶν, διὰ τὸ ἔχειν με ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ ὑμᾶς ἐν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς 6. ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. my heart, how you—yes, all of you— have tendered me your aid and love, whether in bearing the sorrows of my captivity or in actively defending and promoting the Gospel: a manifest token that ye all are partakers with me of the grace of God.' 6. πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο] 'since I have this very confidence.' This assurance, built on the experience of the past, enables the Apostle to anticipate matter for thankfulness. For αὐτὸ τοῦτο comp. Gal. ii. 10, 2 Cor. ii. 3, 2 Pet. i. 5 (with a v. l.). The order alone seems sufficient to exclude another proposed rendering of αὐτὸ τοῦτο, 'on this very account,' i. e. 'by reason of your past cooperation.' ὁ ἐναρξάμενος] The words ἐνάρχεσθαι, ἐπιτελεῖν, possibly contain a sacrificial metaphor: see the notes on Gal. iii. 3, and compare ii. 17 εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ. For the omission of Θεὸς before ὁ ἐναρξάμενος compare Gal. i. 6, 15 (notes). ἔργον ἀγαθόν] By this 'good work' is meant their cooperation with and affection for the Apostle. By the workers of this work St Paul doubtless means the Philippians themselves. Nevertheless it is God's doing from beginning to end: He inaugurates and He completes. This paradox of all true religion is still more broadly stated in ii. 12, 13, 'Work out your own salvation, for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to work etc.' ἄχρις ἡμέρας Ἰησοῦ] refers to the foregoing notes of time, ἀπὸ πρώτης ἡμέρας and ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν; but the expression implies something more than a temporal limit. The idea of a testing is prominent: 'God will advance you in grace, so that you may be prepared to meet the day of trial.' On the meaning of ἡμέρα and on the absence of the definite article see the notes on 1 Thess. v. 2. As 'the day of Christ' is thus a more appropriate limit than 'the day of your death,' it must not be hastily inferred from this expression that St Paul confidently expected the Lord's advent during the lifetime of his Philippian converts. On the other hand, some anticipation of its near approach seems to underlie ἄχρις here, as it is implied in St Paul's language elsewhere, e. g. in ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες 1 Thess. iv. 17, and in πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα (probably the correct reading) 1 Cor. xv. 51. 7. This confidence is justified by their past cooperation, which is indelibly stamped on the Apostle's memory. The stress of the reason (διὰ), which is the foundation of this assurance, reats not on ἔχειν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ but on συνκοινωνοὺς τῆς χάριτος, not on the act of remembering but on the thing remembered. καθὼς] See the note Gal. iii. 6. τοῦτο φρονεῖν κ.τ.λ.] 'to entertain this opinion concerning you all.' On the difference between ὑπὲρ and περὶ see the note on Gal. i. 4, and comp. Winer § xlvii. p. 466. διὰ τὸ ἔχειν με κ.τ.λ.] 'because I have you'; not, as it is sometimes taken, 'because you have me.' The order of the words points to this as the correct rendering; and the appeal which follows, 'for God is my witness,' requires it. ἐν τε τοῖς δεσμοῖς κ.τ.λ.] Are these words to be taken with the foregoing or with the following clause? According as they are attached to the μου καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ καὶ βεβαιώσει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου συγκοινωνούς μου τῆς χάριτος πάντας ὑμᾶς ὄντας· 8 μάρτυς γάρ μου ὁ Θεός, ὡς ἐπιποθῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς ἐν σπλάγone or the other, their meaning will be different. (1) If we connect them with what precedes, ἡν will be temporal, and the sense will then be, 'I bear this in mind, both when I am in bonds and when I am pleading my cause in court.' But even if there were ground for supposing that the trial had already begun, the clause is thus rendered almost meaningless. (2) On the other hand, if they are attached to the following words, the sense is easy: 'participators with me both in my bonds and in my defence and maintenance of the Gospel,' i.e. 'If I have suffered, so have you; if I have laboured actively for the Gospel, so have you': comp. vv. 29, 30. τῇ ἀπολογίᾳ κ.τ.λ.] The two words, being connected by the same article, combine to form one idea. As ἀπολογία implies the negative or defensive side of the Apostle's preaching, the preparatory process of removing obstacles and prejudices, so βεβαίωσις denotes the positive or aggressive side, the direct advancement and establishment of the Gospel. The two together will thus comprise all modes of preaching and extending the truth. For ἀπολογία see ver. 16; for βεβαίωσις 1 Cor. i. 6. συγκοινωνούς μου κ.τ.λ.] 'partakers with me in grace.' The genitives are best treated as separate and independent, so e.g. ii. 30: comp. Wiuer § xxx. p. 239. In this case ἡ χάρις with the definite article stands absolutely for 'the Divine grace,' as frequently: e.g. Acts xviii. 27, 2 Cor. iv. 15, Gal. v. 4, Ephes. ii. 8. 'Grace' applies equally to the 'bonds,' and to the 'defence and confirmation of the Gospel.' If it is a privilege to preach Christ, it is not less a privilege to suffer for Him: comp. ver. 29 ὑμῖν ἐχαρίσθη τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μόνον τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύειν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πάσχειν. A more special condering of the passage is sometimes adopted, 'joint contributors to the gift which I have received': see e.g. Paley's Hor. Paul. vii. 1. But though χάρις sometimes refers specially to abus living (e.g. 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 2 Cor. vili. 4), such a restriction here seems to sever this clause from the context and to destroy the whole force of the passage. ὑμᾶς] repeated: comp. Col. ii. 13 (the correct reading), and see Wiuer § xxii. p. 184. 8. 'I call God to witness that I did not exaggerate, when I spoke of having you all in my heart.' The same form of attestation occurs in Rom. i. 9: see also 2 Cor. i. 23, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 10. ἐπιποθῶ] 'I yearn after.' The preposition in itself signifies merely direction; but the idea of straining after the object being thereby suggested, it gets to imply eugerness: comp. Diod. Sic. xvii. 101 παρόντι μὲν οὐ χρησάμενος ἀπόντα δὲ ἐπιποθήσας. It is a significant fact, pointing to the greater intensity of the language, that, while the simple words πόθος, ποθεῖν, etc. are never found in the New Testament, the compounds ἐπιποθεῖν, ἐπιποθία, ἐπιπόθησις, ἐπιπόθητος, occur with tolerable frequency. ἐν σπλάγχνοις κ.τ.λ.] 'Did I speak of having you in my own heart? I should rather have said that in the heart of Christ Jesus I long for you.' A powerful metaphor describing perfect union. The believer has no yearnings apart from his Lord; his pulse beats with the pulse of Christ; his heart throbs with the heart of Christ. 'In Paulo non Paulus vivit,' says Bengel, 'sed Jesus Christus'; see the note on Gal. ii. 20. Comp. Test. xii. Patr. Levi 4 ἐν σπλάγχνοις υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ. Theophilus χνοις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ· ⁹καὶ τοῦτο προσεύχομαι, ἵνα ἡ ἀγ- άπη ὑμῶν ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύη ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει, ¹⁰εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ δια- φέροντα, ἵνα ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι εἰς ἡμέραν 9. μᾶλλον περισσεύση. (ad Autol. ii. 10, 22) ases σπλάγχνα and καρδία as convertible terms, speak- ing of the Word in one passage as ἐνδιάθετον ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις σπλάγχνοις (τοῦ Θεοῦ), in another as ἐνδιάθετον ἐν καρ- δίᾳ Θεοῦ. The σπλάγχνα are properly the no- bler viscera, the heart, lungs, liver etc., as distinguished from the ἕντερα, the lower viscera, the intestines: e.g. Æsch. Agam. 1221 σὺν ἑντέραις τε σπλάγχνα. The σπλάγχνα alone seem to be re- garded by the Greeks as the seat of the affections, whether anger, love, pity, or jealousy. On the other hand no such distinction is observed in He- brew. The words מֵעִים, חֲמִים, and even קָרַב, which occur commonly in this metaphorical sense, seem to cor- respond rather to ἕντερα than to σπλάγχνα: whence even κοιλία and ἔγκαια are so used in the LXX. The verb σπλαγχνίζεσθαι seems not to be classical, and was perhaps a coinage of the Jewish dispersion, the metaphor being much more common in Hebrew than in Greek. 9. 'I spoke of praying for you (ver. 4). This then is the purport of my prayer (τοῦτο προσεύχομαι), that your love may ever grow and grow, in the attainment of perfect knowledge and universal discernment.' ἵνα] introduces the clause which de- scribes the purport of τοῦτο. For this connexion of τοῦτο ἵνα compare 1 Joh. iv. 17: see also 3 Joh. 4 μειξο- τέραν τούτων οὐκ ἔχω χαρὰν ἵνα ἀκούω κ.τ.λ., Joh. xv. 13 μείζονα ταύτης ἀγά- πην οὐδεὶς ἔχει ἵνα τις τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ θῇ κ.τ.λ. For such later usages of ἵνα, which in older classical Greek always denotes motive or design, see the notes on 1 Thess. ii. 16, v. 4, Gal. v. 17. ἡ ἀγάπη] 'love,' neither towards the Apostle alone nor towards one another alone, but love absolutely, the inward state of the soul. ἔτι μᾶλλον κ.τ.λ.] An accumulation of words to denote superabundance, as below ver. 23. The present (περισ- σεύη), perhaps better supported than the aorist (περισσεύση), is certainly more in place, as expressing the con- tinuous growth. ἐπιγνώσει] 'advanced, perfect know- ledge.' The intensive preposition (ἐπὶ) before γνώσει answers to the adjective before αἰσθήσει. Comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 12 ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους τότε δὲ ἐπι- γνώσομαι: see also the distinction of γνῶσις and ἐπίγνωσις in Justin Dial. p 220 D. The substantive, which ap- pears in St Paul in the Epistle to the Romans (i. 28, x. 2) for the first time, is found several times in the letters of the captivity and afterwards. Its more frequent occurrence thus corre- sponds to the more contemplative as- pect of the Gospel presented in these later epistles. See Col. i. 9 (note). πάσῃ αἰσθήσει] 'all perception.' Love imparts a sensitiveness of touch, gives a keen edge to the discriminating fa- culty, in things moral and spiritual. While ἐπίγνωσις deals with general principles, αἴσθησις is concerned with practical applications. The latter word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, but αἰσθητήρια is used si- milarly to denote the organs of moral sense, Hebr. v. 14 τῶν διὰ τὴν ἑξιν τὰ αἰσθητήρια γεγυμνασμένα ἐχόντων πρὸς διάκρισιν καλοῦ τε καὶ κακοῦ: comp. Jer. iv. 19 τὰ αἰσθητήρια τῆς καρδίας. 10. τὰ διαφέροντα] not 'things which are opposed,' as good and bad (so for instance Fritzsche Rom. I. p. 129)— for it requires no keen moral sense to discriminate between these—but Χριστοῦ, "πεπληρωμένοι καρπὸν δικαιοσύνης τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς δόξαν καὶ ἔπαινον Θεοῦ. "Γινώσκειν δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι, ἀδελφοί, ὅτι τὰ κατ' ἐμὲ μᾶλλον εἰς προκοπὴν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐλήλυθεν, 'things that transcend,' 'ex bonis meliora' in Bengel's words. The phrase δοκιμάζειν τὰ διαφέροντα occurs also Rom. ii. 18. εἰλικρινεῖς] signifies properly 'distinct, unmixed,' and hence 'pure, unsullied.' The probable derivation and first meaning of the word (a strategical term, εἴλη, εἰληδόν, 'gregatim,' comp. φυλοκρινεῖν) are suggested by Xen. Cyrop. viii. 5. 14 καὶ διὰ τὸ εἰλικρινῆ ἕκαστα εἶναι τὰ φύλα, πολὺ μᾶλλον ἦν δῆλα, καὶ ὑπότε τις εὐτακτοῖς καὶ εἴ τις μὴ πράττοι τὸ προσταττόμενον. A different account of the word however (deriving it from εἴλη, 'sunlight') is generally received. ἀπρόσκοποι] might be either intransitive, 'without stumbling,' as Acts xxiv. 16 ἀπρόσκοπον συνείδησιν ἔχειν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, or transitive, 'not causing offence,' as 1 Cor. x. 32 ἀπρόσκοποι καὶ Ἰουδαίοις γίνεσθε καὶ Ἑλλήσιν. If the former sense be taken, εἰλικρινεῖς and ἀπρόσκοποι will be related to each other as the positive and the negative: if the latter, they will denote respectively the relation to God (εἰλικρινεῖς) and the relation to men (ἀπρόσκοποι). The former is to be preferred; for it is a question solely of the fitness of the Philippians to appear before the tribunal of Christ, and any reference to their influence on others would be out of place. Comp. Jude 24, 25, τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ φυλάξαι ὑμᾶς ἁπταίστον καὶ στήσαι κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους κ.τ.λ. εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ] not 'until,' but 'for the day of Christ'; comp. ii. 16, and see also i. 6. 11. καρπὸν δικαιοσύνης] The expression is taken from the Old Testament, e.g. Prov. xi. 30, Amos vi. 12, and occurs also James iii. 18. For the accusative after πληροῦσθαι comp. Col. i. 9: similarly Luke xi. 46 φορτίζετε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους φορτία δυσβάστακτα. See Winer § xxxii. p. 287. τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ] added to guard against misunderstanding. The Apostle means 'righteousness in Christ,' as contrasted with 'righteousness by law': comp. iii. 9. Only so far as the life of the believer is absorbed in the life of Christ, does the righteousness of Christ become his own. Thus righteousness by faith is intimately bound up with the life in Christ: it must in its very nature be fruitful; it is indeed the condition of bearing fruit. Comp. John xv. 4 'As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me.' εἰς δόξαν κ.τ.λ.] The only true aim of all human endeavours: comp. ii. 11. 'The glory,' the manifestation of His power and grace; 'the praise,' the recognition of these divine attributes by men: comp. Ephes. i. 6 εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ, ib. i. 12, 14. 12. 'Lest you should be misinformed, I would have you know that my sufferings and restraints, so far from being prejudicial to the Gospel, have served to advance it. My bonds have borne witness to Christ, not only among the soldiers of the imperial guard, but in a far wider circle. The same bonds too have through my example inspired most of the brethren with boldness, so that trusting in the Lord they are more zealous than ever, and preach the word of God courageously and unflinchingly.' τὰ κατ' ἐμί] 'my circumstances,' as Col. iv. 7, Ephes. vi. 21: comp. Tobit x. 8, 1 Esdr. i. 22. μᾶλλον] 'rather' than the reverse, as might have been anticipated. [L. 13, 14 ¹³ ὥστε τοὺς δεσμοὺς μου φανεροὺς ἐν Χριστῷ γενέσθαι ἐν ὕλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, ¹⁴ καὶ τοὺς πλείονας τῶν ἀδελφῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου περισσοτέρως τολμᾶν ἀφόβως τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ προκοπήν] The verb προκόπτειν is strictly classical; not so the substantive, which is condemned in Phrynichus (Lobeck, p. 85). It is however common in writers of this age. 13. φανεροὺς κ.τ.λ.] 'have become manifest in Christ,' i.e. 'have been seen in their relation to Christ, have borne testimony to the Gospel.' ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ πραιτωρίῳ] 'throughout the praetorian guard,' i.e. the soldiers composing the imperial regiments. This seems to be the best supported meaning of πραιτώριον. If a local sense is assigned to it, it will probably signify the 'praetorian camp,' but clear examples of this sense are wanting: see the detached note, p. 93. On St Paul's intercourse with the praetorian soldiers see the introduction, pp. 7 19. τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν] 'to all the rest': comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 2; a comprehensive expression, which must not be rigorously interpreted: see the introduction, p. 32 sq. The translation of the Authorised Version, 'in all other places,' will not stand. 14. τοὺς πλείονας] 'the greater number.' St Paul excepts a minority, who through cowardice or indifference held back. ἐν Κυρίῳ] to be taken with πεποιθότας τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. Similarly Gal. v. 10 πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν Κυρίῳ, 2 Thess. iii. 4 πεποίθαμεν δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ ἐφ' ὑμᾶς. Comp. also below ii. 24, Rom. xiv. 14. The words ἐν Κυρίῳ are thus emphatic by their position. They cannot well be attached to τῶν ἀδελφῶν, as τῶν ἀδελφῶν alone designates the Christian brotherhood, and the addition would be unmeaning. The instances quoted in favour of this connexion (Col. i. 2, iv. 7, Ephes. vi. 21) are no correct parallels; for in none of these passages does the preposition depend directly on ἀδελφός. For πέποιθα, with a dative of the thing in which the confidence reposes (τοῖς δεσμοῖς), see Philem. 21. περισσοτέρως] This word seems never to lose its comparative force: see the note on Gal. i. 14. Here it denotes the increased zeal of the brothren, when stimulated by St Paul's endurance. The Apostle accumulates words expressive of courage, πεποιθότας, περισσοτέρως, τολμᾶν ἀφόβως, as above in ver. 9 (see the note). τοῦ Θεοῦ] These words, which are wanting in the received reading, have a decided preponderance of authority in their favour, and should probably stand in the text: comp. Acts iv. 31 ἐλώλουν τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ μετὰ παρρησίας. 15-17. 'But though all alike are active, all are not influenced by the same motives. Some preach Christ to gratify an envious and quarrelsome spirit: others to manifest their goodwill. The latter work from love, acknowle-lging that I am appointed to plead for the Gospel: the former proclaim Christ from headstrong partisanship and with impure motives, having no other aim than to render my bonds more galling.' These antagonists can be none other than the Judnizing party, who call down the Apostle's rebuke in a later passage of this letter (iii. 2 sq.) and whose opposition is indirectly implied in another epistle written also from Rome (Col. iv. 11): see above, pp. 17, 18. They preach Christ indeed, but their motives are not single. Their real object is to gain adherents to the law. The main-spring of their activity λαλεῖν· ¹⁵τινὲς μὲν καὶ διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν, τινὲς δὲ καὶ δι' εὐδοκίαν τὸν Χριστὸν κηρύσσουσιν· ¹⁶οἱ μὲν ἐξ ἀγάπης, εἰδότες ὅτι εἰς ἀπολογίαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου κεῖμαι, ¹⁷οἱ is a factious opposition to the Apostle, a jealousy of his influence. They value success, not as a triumph over heathendom, but as a triumph over St Paul. It enhances their satisfaction to think that his sufferings will be made more poignant by their progress. But how, it has been asked, can St Paul rejoice in the success of such teachers? Is not this satisfaction inconsistent with his principles? Does he not in the Epistle to the Galatians for instance wholly repudiate their doctrine, and even maintain that for those who hold it Christ has died in vain? This apparent incongruity has led some writers to deny any reference to the Judaizers here; while to others it has furnished an argument against the genuineness of the whole epistle. But the two cases are entirely different. In the one, where the alternative is between the liberty of the Gospel and the bondage of ritualism, he unsparingly denounces his Galatian converts for abandoning the former and adopting the latter. Here on the other hand the choice is between an imperfect Christianity and an unconverted state; the former, however inadequate, must be a gain upon the latter, and therefore must give joy to a high-minded servant of Christ. In Rome there was room enough for him and for them. He was content therefore that each should work on independently. It was a step in advance to know Christ, even though He were known only 'after the flesh.' καὶ διὰ φθόνον] 'even from envy,' monstrous as this will seem. For διὰ φθόνον see Matt. xxvii. 18, Mark xv. 10. Philemon the comic poet (Meineke, IV. p. 55), πολλὰ με διδάσκεις ἀφθόνως διὰ φθόνον, has been quoted in illustration of this passage. καὶ δι' εὐδοκίαν] 'also out of goodwill'; this second καὶ must be differently translated from the former. The substantive εὐδοκία may mean either (1) 'purpose, design, desire,' Ecclus. xi. 17 ἡ εὐδοκία αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα εὐδοκίαν, Rom. x. 1 ἡ εὐδοκία τῆς ἐμῆς καρδίας καὶ ἡ δέσαις πρὸς τὸν Θεόν; or (2) 'satisfaction, contentment, happiness,' Ecclus. xxxv. 14 οἱ ἀρθρίζοντες εὑρήσουσιν εὐδοκίαν, 2 Thess. i. 11 πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης; or (3) 'benevolence, goodwill,' Ps. 1. 20 ἀγάθυναν, Κύριε, ἐν τῇ εὐδοκίᾳ σου τὴν Σιών, cv. 4, and perhaps Luke ii. 14. These different significations arise out of the object to which εὐδοκία is directed. In the first case it refers to things future, in the second to things present, in the third to persons. Fritzsche (Rom. II. p. 371) has separated the different meanings of this word, but is not happy in his examples. In the present passage the opposition to διὰ φθόνον καὶ ἔριν seems to require the third meaning. 16, 17. The order of the clauses is reversed by the figure called chiasm, so that the subject last introduced is discussed first; as e.g. Gal. iv. 4, 5. In the received text the verses are transposed, with a view to remedying this supposed irregularity. ἐξ ἀγάπης] 'the one preach Christ out of love'; and ἐξ ἐριθείας must be similarly taken. Others connect οἱ ἐξ ἐριθείας, οἱ ἐξ ἀγάπης, 'the factious,' 'the loving,' comparing Rom. ii. 8 τοῖς δὲ ἐξ ἐριθείας (see also iii. 26, Gal. iii. 7, 9); but the order in the second clause is very awkward with this arrangement, which makes τὸν Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν unduly emphatic. κεῖμαι] 'I am appointed,' as Luke ii. 34 οὗτος κεῖται εἰς πτῶσιν καὶ ἀνάστασιν πολλῶν, 1 Thess. iii. 3 αὐτοὶ γὰρ δὲ ἐξ ἐριθείας [τὸν] Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν οὐχ ἁγνῶς, οἰόμενοι θλίψιν ἐγείρειν τοῖς δεσμοῖς μου. $^(18)$τί γάρ; πλὴν ὅτι παντὶ τρόπῳ, εἴτε προφάσει εἴτε ἀληθεία, Χριστὸς καταγγέλλεται, καὶ ἐν τούτῳ χαίρω· ἀλλὰ καὶ χαρήσομαι· $^(19)$οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι τοῦτό μοι ἀπο- 19. οἶδα δὲ ὅτι. οἶδατε ὅτι εἰς τοῦτο κείμεθα: comp. Josh. iv. 6. The idea of prostration, if implied at all, can only be subordinate. 17. ἐξ ἐριθείας] The interests of party were predominant with the Judaizers: their missionary zeal took the form of a political canvass. For the proper meaning of ἐριθεία, 'partisanship,' see the note on Gal. v. 20. The words τὸν Χριστὸν καταγγέλλουσιν seem to be added to bring out the contrast between the character of their motives and the subject of their preaching; for there is a moral contradiction between ἐριθεία and Χριστός. οὐχ ἁγνῶς] 'with mixed, impure motives,' explained afterwards by προφάσει. The insincere, selfish, and even sordid motives of the Judaizers are denounced in other passages also: 2 Cor. xi. 13, 20, Gal. vi. 12. θλίψιν ἐγείρειν] 'to make my chains gall me,' where the metaphor in θλίψις is clearly seen. This word, though extremely common in the LXX, occurs very rarely in classical writers even of a late date, and in these few passages has its literal meaning. The same want in the religious vocabulary, which gave currency to θλίψις, also created 'tribulatio' as its Latin equivalent. On the accent of θλίψις see Lipsius Gramm. Unters. p. 35. The reading ἐγείρειν, besides being better supported, carries out the metaphor better than ἐπιφέρειν of the received text. The gathering opposition to the Apostle's doctrine of liberty, the forming of a compact party in the Church bound to the observance of the law, were the means by which they sought to annoy and wound him. 18. τί γάρ;] 'What then,' as Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 2, 3, iii. 3. 6, and commonly in classical writers: comp. also LXX, Job xvi. 3, xxi. 4. πλὴν ὅτι] 'only that,' as Acts xx. 23; comp. Plut. Mor. p. 780 A, Plato Phœd. p. 57 B, Theœt. p. 183 A. This seems on the whole the most probable reading. Some texts have πλὴν alone, others ὅτι alone; both which readings appear like attempts to smooth the construction. The latter however, which is supported by one excellent authority, may possibly be correct. προφάσει] 'as a cloke for other designs,' i.e. using the name of Christ to promote the interests of their party and to gain proselytes to the law. On πρόφασις, 'an ostensible purpose,' generally but not necessarily implying insincerity, see the note on 1 Thess. ii. 5. The opposition of πρόφασις and ἀλήθεια is illustrated by numerous examples in Wettstein and Raphel. ἐν τούτῳ] 'herein,' i.e. ἐν τῷ καταγγέλλεσθαι Χριστόν. ἀλλὰ καὶ χαρήσομαι] 'yea and I shall rejoice.' The abruptness reflects the conflict in the Apostle's mind: he crushes the feeling of personal annoyance, which rises up at the thought of this unscrupulous antagonism. The A. V. however, 'I will rejoice,' brings out the idea of determination more strongly than the original justifies. 19, 20. 'Is not my joy reasonable? For I know that all my present trials and sufferings will lead only to my salvation, and that in answer to your prayers the Spirit of Christ will be shed abundantly upon me. Thus will be βήσεται εἰς σωτηρίαν διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως καὶ ἐπιχορηγίας τοῦ πνεύματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ²⁰κατὰ τὴν ἀποκαραδοκίαν καὶ ἐλπίδα μου, ὅτι ἐν οὐδενὶ αἰσχυνθήσομαι, ἀλλ' ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ ὡς πάντοτε καὶ νῦν μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν τῷ σώματί μου, εἴτε διὰ ζωῆς εἴτε διὰ fulfilled my earnest longing and hope, that I may never hang back through shame, but at this crisis, as always, may speak and act courageously; so that, whether I die a martyr for His name or live to labour in His service, He may be glorified in my body.' 19. τοῦτο] 'this state of things,' these perplexities and annoyances. It is unconnected with the preceding ἐν τούτῳ, ver. 18. σωτηρίαν] 'salvation,' in the highest sense. These trials will develope the spiritual life in the Apostle, will be a pathway to the glories of heaven. His personal safety cannot be intended here, as some have thought; for the σωτηρία, of which he speaks, will be gained equally whether he lives or dies (ver. 20). τῆς ὑμῶν δεήσεως κ.τ.λ.] The two clauses are fitly connected by the same article; for the supply of the Spirit is the answer to their prayer. ἐπιχορηγίας] 'bountiful supply'; see the note on Gal. iii. 5. But must the following genitive τοῦ πνεύματος be considered subjective or objective? Is the Spirit the giver or the gift? Ought we not to say in answer to this question, that the language of the original suggests no limitation, that it will bear both meanings equally well, and that therefore any such restriction is arbitrary? 'The Spirit of Jesus' is both the giver and the gift. For the expression τὸ πνεῦμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ compare Rom. viii. 9, Gal. iv. 6, and Acts xvi. 7 (the correct reading). 20. ἀποκαραδοκίαν] 'earnest desire.' The substantive occurs once again in the New Testament, Rom. viii. 19. The verb is not uncommon in Polybius and later writers. The idea of eagerness conveyed by the simple word καραδοκείν is further intensified by the preposition, which implies abstraction, absorption, as in ἀποβλέπειν, ἀπεκδέχεσθαι, etc.: comp. Joseph. B. J. iii. 7. 26 τοῖς μὲν οὖν καθ' ἕτερα προσφέρουσι τὰς κλίμακας οὐ προσεῖχεν, ἀπεκαραδόκει δὲ τὴν ὁρμὴν τῶν βελῶν, i.e. his attention was drawn off and concentrated on the missiles; a passage quoted by C. F. A. Fritzsche, whose account of the word however (Fritzsch. Opusc. I. p. 150) is not altogether satisfactory. αἰσχυνθήσομαι κ.τ.λ.] αἰσχύνη and παρρησία are opposed, Prov. xiii. 5 ἀσεβῆς δὲ αἰσχύνεται καὶ οὐχ ἕξει παρρησίαν, 1 Joh. ii. 28 σχῶμεν παρρησίαν καὶ μὴ αἰσχυνθῶμεν ἀπ' αὐτοῦ. This right of free speech (παρρησία) is the badge, the privilege, of the servant of Christ: see esp. 2 Cor. iii. 12. καὶ νῦν] 'so now.' For καὶ νῦν (καὶ ἄρτι) corresponding to ὡς (καθὼς) comp. 1 Joh. ii. 18, Gal. i. 9. μεγαλυνθήσεται] After ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ the first person might naturally be expected: but with sensitive reverence the Apostle shrinks from any mention of his own agency, lest he should seem to glorify himself. It is not μεγαλυνθήσομαι, not even μεγαλυνῶ τὸν Χριστόν, but μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν τῷ σώματί μου. For the thought compare 2 Cor. iv. 10 πάντοτε τὴν νέκρωσιν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι περιφέροντες, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν φανερωθῇ, 1 Cor. vi. 20 δοξάσατε δὴ τὸν Θεὸν ἐν τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν. 21-26. 'Others may make choice between life and death. I gladly θανάτου. ²¹ἐμοὶ γὰρ τὸ ζῆν Χριστὸς καὶ τὸ ἀποθανεῖν κέρδος· ²²εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν ἐν σαρκὶ τοῦτό μοι καρπὸς ἔργου— accept either alternative. If I live, my life is one with Christ: if I die, my death is gain to me. Yet when I incline to prefer death, I hesitate: for may not my life—this present existence which men call life—may not my life be fruitful through my labours? Nay, I know not how to choose. I am hemmed in, as it were, a wall on this side and a wall on that. If I consulted my own longing, I should desire to dissolve this earthly tabernacle, and to go home to Christ; for this is very far better. If I consulted your interests, I should wish to live and labour still: for this your needs require. And a voice within assures me, that so it will be. I shall continue here and abide with you all; that I may promote your advance in the faith and your joy in believing: and that you on your part may have in me fresh cause for boasting in Christ, when you see me present among you once more. 21. ἐμοί, 'to me,' whatever it may be to others: 80 ἡμῶν, iii. 20. τὸ ζῆν Χριστός] 'life is Christ.' 'I live only to serve Him, only to commune with Him; I have no conception of life apart from Him.' 'Quicquid vivo,' is Bengel's paraphrase, 'Christum vivo': comp. Gal. ii. 20 ζῶ δὲ οὐκέτι ἐγώ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός, and Col. iii. 3, 4. τὸ ἀποθανεῖν κέρδος] 'death is gain, for then my union with Christ will be more completely realised.' The tense denotes not the act of dying but the consequence of dying, the state after death: comp. 2 Cor. vii. 3 εἰς τὸ συναποθανεῖν καὶ συνζῆν, 'to be with you in death and in life.' The proper opposition to ζῆν is not ἀποθνήσκειν, but ἀποθανεῖν or τεθνάναι, e.g. Plato Leg. p. 958 π. Gorg. p. 483 π. Phæd. 62 π. The difference is marked in Plato Phæd. 64 π οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἐπιτηδεύ- ουσιν ἢ ἀποθνήσκειν τε καὶ τεθνάναι. 22. The grammar of the passage reflects the conflict of feeling in the Apostle's mind. He is tossed to and fro between the desire to labour for Christ in life, and the desire to be united with Christ by death. The abrupt and disjointed sentences express this hesitation. εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν κ.τ.λ.] Of several interpretations that have been suggested, two only seem to deserve consideration: (1) 'But if my living in the flesh will be fruitful through a laborious career, then what to choose I know not.' In this case καὶ will introduce the apodosis. The only passage at all analogous in the New Testament Isaiah 2 Cor. ii. 2 εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ λυπῶ ὑμᾶς, καὶ τίς οὐφραίνων με; comp. Clem. Hom. ii. 44 εἰ δὲ τὸ πῖον ὄρος ἐπιθυμεῖ, καὶ τίνος τὰ πάντα; εἰ ψεύδεται, καὶ τίς ἀληθεύει; κ.τ.λ. But the parallel is not exact, for in these instances καὶ introduces a direct interrogative. Passages indeed are given in Hartung (I. pp. 130, 131) where καὶ ushers in the apodosis after εἰ, but these are all poetical. And even if this use of καὶ be admissible, the sentence still runs awkwardly. (2) 'But if (it be my lot) to live in the flesh, then my labour will be productive of fruit. And so what to choose I know not.' Thus the sentence εἰ δὲ τὸ ζῆν κ.τ.λ. is treated as elliptical, the predicate being suppressed. But, though ellipses are very frequent in St Paul (comp. e.g. Rom. iv. 9, v. 18, ix. 16, 1 Cor. iv. 6, xi. 24, 2 Cor. i. 6, Gal. ii. 9, v. 13, etc.), yet the present instance would be extremely harsh. Of the two explanations already considered the first seems preferable; but may not a third be hazarded? (3) 'But what if my living in the flesh will bear fruit, etc.? In fact what to choose I know not.' In this case εἰ implies an interrogation, καὶ τί αἱρήσομαι οὐ γνωρίζω· ²³συνέχομαι δὲ ἐκ τῶν δύο, τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἔχων εἰς τὸ ἀναλύσαι καὶ σὺν Χρισ- the apodosis being suppressed; as in Rom. ix. 22, Acts xxiii. 9 (where the received text adds μὴ θεομαχῶμεν). On this and similar uses of εἰ see Winer § lvii. p. 639, § lxiv. p. 750, A. Buttmann pp. 214, 215. I do not know whether this interpretation has ever been suggested; but it seems to be in keeping with the abruptness of the context, and to present less difficulty than those generally adopted. τὸ ζῆν ἐν σαρκί] St Paul had before spoken of the natural life as τὸ ζῆν simply; but the mention of the gain of death has meanwhile suggested the thought of the higher life. Thus the word ζῆν requires to be qualified by the addition of ἐν σαρκί. After all death is true life. The sublime guess of Euripides, τίς οἶδεν εἰ τὸ ζῆν μὲν ἐστι κατθανεῖν τὸ κατθανεῖν δὲ ζῆν, which was greeted with ignoble ridicule by the comic poets, has become an assured truth in Christ. καρπὸς ἔργου] Comp. Rom. i. 13 ἵνα τινὰ καρπὸν σχῶ καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν. For the metaphor see 1 Cor. iii. 6 sq. οὐ γνωρίζω] 'I do not perceive.' Γνωρίζειν has two distinct senses; (1) 'To understand, know'; (2) 'To declare, make known.' In classical Greek the former seems to be the more common, even at a late date, though the latter occurs not infrequently. On the other hand in biblical Greek the latter is the usual meaning (e.g. below, iv. 6), the exceptions being very few, as here and Job iv. 16 (Symm.), xxxiv. 25 (Lxx): comp. Tert. xii. Patr. Daniel 2 φίλον οὐ γνωρίζει. 23. συνέχομαι ἐκ τῶν δύο] 'I am hemmed in on both sides, I am prevented from inclining one way or the other.' The proposition seems to denote direction, as in ἐκ δεξιᾶς, ἐκ θαλάσσης, etc. The δύο are the two horns of the dilemma, stated in verses 21, 22. τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν κ.τ.λ.] 'my own desire tends towards.' Comp. Gal. vi. 4. τὸ ἀναλύσαι] 'to break up, depart, comp. ἀνάλυσις 2 Tim. iv. 6. The metaphor is drawn from breaking up an encampment, e.g. Polyb. v. 28. 8 αὖθις εἰς παραχειμασίαν ἀνέλυσε, 2 Macc. ix. 1 ἀναλελυκὼς ἀκόσμῳς. The camp-life of the Israelites in the wilderness, as commemorated by the annual feast of Tabernacles, was a ready and appropriate symbol of man's transitory life on earth: while the land of promise with its settled abodes, the land flowing with milk and honey, typified the eternal inheritance of the redeemed: Hebr. iv. 1 sq. See especially 2 Cor. v. 1 ἐὰν ἡ ἐπίγειος ἡμῶν οἰκία τοῦ σκήνους καταλυθῇ, οἰκοδομὴν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἔχομεν, οἰκίαν ἀχειροποίητον αἰώνιον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, and ver. 4. Compare also the metaphor in Plut. Mor. 76 D οὐ μονὰς ποιοῦσιν ἢ ἐποχὰς ὥσπερ ἐν ὁδῷ τῆς προκοπῆς ἀλλ' ἀναλύσεις. σὺν Χριστῷ εἶναι] The faithful immediately after death are similarly represented as in the presence and keeping of the Lord also in 2 Cor. v. 6, 8 ἐνδημοῦντες ἐν τῷ σώματι ἐκδημοῦμεν ἀπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου κ.τ.λ., Acts vii. 59; comp. Cicm. Rom. § 5 ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς δόξης of St Peter and εἰς τὸν ἅγιον τόπον ἐπορεύθη of St Paul, Polyc. Phil. § 9 εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον αὐτοῖς τόπον εἰσὶ παρὰ τῷ Κυρίῳ. On the other hand their state after death is elsewhere described as a sleep from which they will arise, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52, 1 Thess. iv. 14, 16. The one mode of representation must be qualified by the other. πολλῷ μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον] For the triple comparative see Isocr. Archid. § 83 πολὺ γὰρ κρεῖττον...τελευτῆσαι τὸν βίον μᾶλλον ἢ ζῆν κ.τ.λ. and other references in Wetstein: comp. Winer § xxxv. p. 254. The insertion of γὰρ is supported by most of the best MSS; and yet a reading which comes to the τῷ εἶναι· πολλῷ [γὰρ] μᾶλλον κρεῖσσον· ²⁴ τὸ δὲ ἐπιμένειν [ἐν] τῇ σαρκὶ ἀναγκαιότερον δι' ὑμᾶς. ²⁵ καὶ τοῦτο πεποιθὼς οἶδα, ὅτι μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν εἰς τὴν ὑμῶν προκοπὴν καὶ χαρὰν τῆς πίστεως, ²⁶ ἵνα τὸ καύχημα ὑμῶν περισσεύῃ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ διὰ τῆς ἐμῆς παρουσίας πάλιν πρὸς ὑμᾶς. relief of a disjointed syntax must be regarded with suspicion. 24. ἐπιμένειν τῇ σαρκὶ] not 'to abide in,' but 'to abide by the flesh,' to cling to this present life, to take it with all its inconveniences. This is the common construction of ἐπιμένειν in St Paul, Rom. vi. 1, xi. 22, 23, Col i. 23, 1 Tim. iv. 16. The insertion of ἐν weakens the force of the expression; besides that this preposition is not found with ἐπιμένειν elsewhere in St Paul, except in 1 Cor. xvi. 8 ἐπιμενῶ ἐν Ἐφίᾳ which is no parallel. ἀναγκαιότερον] The comparative corresponds to the foregoing κρεῖσσον. Either alternative is in a manner necessary, as either is advantageous. But the balance of necessity (of obligation) is on one side, the balance of advantage on the other. 25. τοῦτο πεποιθὼς οἶδα] 'of this I am confidently persuaded, that etc.'; comp. Rom. xiv. 14 οἶδα καὶ πέπεισμαι ...ὅτι κ.τ.λ., and Ephes. v. 5 τοῦτο γὰρ ἴστε γινώσκοντες ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος κ.τ.λ. The words are commonly taken, 'being persuaded of this (that my life will be advantageous to you), I know that etc.' οἶδα] not a prophetic inspiration, but a personal conviction: comp. ii. 24. The same word οἶδα is used Acts xx. 25, where he expresses his belief that he shall not see his Asiatic converts again. Viewed as infallible presentiments, the two are hardly reconcilable; for the one assumes, the other negatives, his release. The assurance here recorded was fulfilled (1 Tim. i. 3); while the presentiment there expressed was overruled by events (1 Tim. i. 3, 2 Tim. i. 15, 18, iv. 20). παραμενῶ] is relative, while μενῶ is absolute. It denotes continuance in a certain place or with certain persons or in certain relations. Very frequently, as here, it takes a dative of the person, e.g. Plat. Apol. p. 39 F, Phæd. 115 D οὐκέτι ὑμῖν παραμενῶ, etc. The reading of the received text συμπαραμενῶ may be dismissed, as insufficiently supported. μενῶ καὶ παραμενῶ may be translated 'bide and abide.' τῆς πίστεως] to be taken with both substantives. For χαρὰν τῆς πίστεως comp. Rom. xv. 13 πληρώσαι ὑμᾶς πάσης χαρᾶς καὶ εἰρήνης ἐν τῷ πιστεύειν. On joyfulness, as the key-note of this epistle, see the notes, i. 4, iv. 4. 26. ἵνα τὸ καύχημα κ.τ.λ.] 'that you may have more matter for boasting in me,' not 'that I may have more matter for boasting in you,' as it is sometimes taken. Either would accord with the Apostle's language elsewhere, 2 Cor. i. 14 ὅτι καύχημα ὑμῶν ἐσμὲν καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ (comp. v. 12); but the former is the simpler interpretation of the words here. The words κουχᾶσθαι, καύχησις, καύχημα, link this epistle with the preceding group, where they occur very abundantly (see the introduction, p. 42 sq.). In the later epistles only one instance is found, Ephes. ii. 9. On the difference between καύχημα, καύχησις, see the note Gal. vi. 4. ἐν] repeated. The first denotes the sphere in which their pride lives; the second the object on which it rests. Compare Col. ii. 7 περισσεύοντες ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν εὐχαριστίᾳ. παρουσίας πάλιν] For the position of πάλιν see the note on Gal. i. 13. The synonymes 'bishop' and 'presbyter.' IT is a fact now generally recognised by theologians of all shades of the two opinion, that in the language of the New Testament the same officer in words synonymes. the Church is called indifferently 'bishop' (ἐπίσκοπος) and 'elder' or 'presbyter' (πρεσβύτερος). The bearing of this fact on the origin and authority of the 'episcopate,' as the term was understood later and as it is understood in the present day, will be considered in a dissertation at the end of this volume. At present it will be sufficient to establish the fact itself; but before doing so, it may be useful to trace the previous history of the two words. Episcopus, 'bishop,' 'overscer,' was an official title among the Greeks. Meaning In Athenian language it was used especially to designate commissioners of 'bishop' appointed to regulate a new colony or acquisition, so that the Attic 'bishop' in heathen corresponded to the Spartan 'harmest'. Thus the impostor, who intrudes writers upon the colonists in Aristophanes (Av. 1022), says ἐπίσκοπος ἦκω δεῦρο τῷ κυάμῃ λαχών. These officers are mentioned also in an inscription, Boeckh no. 73. The title however is not confined to Attic usage; it is the designation for instance of the inspectors whose business it was to report to the Indian kings (Arrian Ind. xii. 5); of the commissioner appointed by Mithridates to settle affairs in Ephesus (Appian Mithr. 48); of magistrates who regulated the sale of provisions under the Romans (Charisius in the Dig. l. 4. 18); and of certain officers in Rhodes whose functions are unknown (Ross. Inscr. Græc. Ined. fasc. III. nos. 275, 276). In the LXX the word is common. In some places it signifies 'inspectors, and in the superintendents, taskmasters,' as 2 Kings xi. 19, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 12, 17, Is. LXX. lx. 17; in others it is a higher title. 'captains' or 'presidents,' Neh. xi. 9, ¹ Harpocration s. v. (ed. Dindorf. p. 129) quotes from Theophrastus, πολλῷ γὰρ κάλυψι κατὰ γὰρ τὴν τοῦ ὀνόματος θέσῃ, ὡς οἱ Λάκωνες ἁρμοστὰς φάσκοντες εἰς τὰς πόλεις πέμπειν, οὐκ ἐπισκόπους οὐδὲ φύλακας, ὡς Ἀθηναῖοι. See also Schol. on Arist. Av. l. 9, οἱ παρ' Ἀθηναίων εἰς τὰς ἐπηκόους πόλεις ἐπισκέψασθαι τὰ παρ' ἑκάστους πεμπόμενοι ἐπίσκοποι καὶ φύλακες ἐκαλοῦντο οὔς οἱ Λάκωνες ἁρμοστὰς ἔλεγεν. ² In these instances the ἐπίσκοποι seem to hold some office in connexion with a temple. In another inscription (Ross. Inscr. Græc. Ined. fasc. II. no. 198), found at Thera, the word again occurs; Διδόχθαι· ἀ[ποδε]ξαμένος τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τὸ μ[ὲν ἀρ]γύριον ἐγδανεῖσαι τὰς ἐπισκό[πος] Δίωνα καὶ Μελίππων, where among other dialectic forms the accusative plural in occurs. M. Wesch- er in an article in the Revue Archéologique, p. 246 (Avril 1866), supposes the ἐπίσκοποι here to be officers of a club or confraternity (ἔρανος or θίασος), in which he is followed by Renan Les Apôtres p. 353. If their opinion be correct, this inscription presents a closer analogy to the Christian use of the term, than the instances given in the text. The context of the inscription however is not decisive, though this interpretation seems fairly probable: see below p. 194. There can be no reasonable doubt I imagine about the reading ἐπισκόπος; though Ross himself suggested ἐπισσόφος, because he found the word in another Thereon inscription (Boeckh no. 2448). In this latter inscription ἐπισσόφος is probably a mason's blunder for ἐπισκόπος. ἐπισκοπή. 14, 22. Of Antiochus Epiphanes we are told that when he determined to overthrow the worship of the one true God, he 'appointed commissioners (ἐπισκόπους, bishops) over all the people,' to see that his orders were obeyed (1 Macc. i. 51: comp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 5. 4; in 2 Macc. v. 22 the word is ἐπιστάτας). The feminine ἐπισκοπή, which is not a classical word, occurs very frequently in the LXX, denoting sometimes the work, sometimes the office, of an ἐπίσκοπος. Hence it passed into the language of the New Testament and of the Christian Church. Thus beyond the fundamental idea of inspection, which lies at the root of the word 'bishop,' its usage suggests two subsidiary notions also; (1) Responsibility to a superior power; (2) The introduction of a new order of things. The term presbyter or elder The earlier history of the word presbyterus (elder, presbyter, or priest) is much more closely connected with its Christian sense. If the analogies of the 'bishop' are to be sought chiefly among heathen nations, the name and office of the 'presbyter' are essentially Jewish. Illustrations indeed might be found in almost all nations ancient or modern, in the γερουσία of Sparta for instance, in the 'senatus' of Rome, in the 'signoria' of Florence, or in the 'aldermen' of our own country and time, where the deliberative body originally took its name from the advanced age of its members. But among the chosen people we meet at every turn with presbyters or elders in Church and State from the earliest to the latest times. In the lifetime of the lawgiver, in the days of the judges, throughout the monarchy, during the captivity, after the return, and under the Roman domination, the 'elders' appear as an integral part of the governing body of the country. But it is rather in a special religious development of the office, than in these national and civil presbyteries, that we are to look for the prototype of the Christian minister. Over every Jewish synagogue, whether at home or abroad, a council of 'elders' presided¹. It was not unnatural therefore that, when the Christian synagogue took its place by the side of the Jewish, a similar organization should be adopted with such modifications as circumstances required; and thus the name familiar under the old dispensation was retained under the new. transferred from the Synagogue to the Church. Of the identity of the 'bishop' and 'presbyter' in the language of the apostolic age, the following evidence seems conclusive. Identity of the two in the apostolic writings (1) In the opening of this epistle St Paul salutes the 'bishops' and 'deacons².' Now it is incredible that he should recognise only the first ¹ See especially Vitringa de Synag. Vet. III. 1. c. 1, p. 613 sq. ² It may be worth while correcting a mistake which runs through the critical editions of the Greek Testament. Chrysostom is quoted as reading συνεπισκόπους in one word. His editors no doubt make him read so, but of this reading there is no trace in the context. After explaining that the terms deacon, presbyter, bishop, were originally convertible (οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τὸ παλαιὸν ἐκαλοῦντο ἐπίσκοποι καὶ διάκονοι Χριστοῦ καὶ οἱ ἐπίσκοποι πρεσβύτεροι), he illustrates this by the fact that even in his own day bishops often addressed a presbyter as a fellow-presbyter, a deacon as a fellow-deacon (ὅθεν καὶ νῦν πολλοὶ συμπρεσβυτέρῳ ἐπίσκοποι γράφουσι καὶ συνδιακόνῳ): but his language nowhere implies that he read συνεπισκόπους. The comment of Theodore of Mopsuestia again has been understood (see Tischendorf) as referring to and combating the reading συνεπισκόπους. This also is an error. After explaining the identity of and third order and pass over the second, though the second was absolutely essential to the existence of a church and formed the staple of its ministry. It seems therefore to follow of necessity that the 'bishops' are identical with the 'presbyters.' Whether or not the Philippian Church at this time possessed also a 'bishop' in the later sense of the term, is a question which must be reserved for the present. (2) In the Acts (xx. 17) St Paul is represented as summoning to Miletus the 'elders' or 'presbyters' of the Church of Ephesus. Yet in addressing them immediately after he appeals to them as 'bishops' or 'overseers' of the church (xx. 28). (3) Similarly St Peter, appealing to the 'presbyters' of the churches addressed by him, in the same breath urges them to 'fulfil the office of bishops' (ἐπισκοποῦντες) with disinterested zeal (1 Pet. v. 1, 2). (4) Again in the First Epistle to Timothy St Paul, after describing the qualifications for the office of a 'bishop' (iii. 1-7), goes on at once to say what is required of 'deacons' (iii. 8-13). He makes no mention of presbyters. The term 'presbyter' however is not unknown to him; for having occasion in a later passage to speak of Christian ministers he calls these officers no longer 'bishops,' but 'presbyters' (v. 17-19). (5) The same identification appears still more plainly from the Apostle's directions to Titus (i. 5-7); 'That thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders in every city, as I appointed thee; if any one be blameless, the husband of one wife, having believing children who are not charged with riotousness or unruly; for a bishop (τὸν ἐπίσκοπον)¹ must be blameless etc.²' (6) Nor is it only in the apostolic writings that this identity is found, and in Clement of Rome. bishops and presbyters Theodore adds, προσεκτέον ὅτι τὸ σὺν ἐπισκόποις λέγει, οὐχ ὡς τινες ἐνόμισαν ὥσπερ ἡμεῖς σὺν πρεσβυτέροις γράφειν εἰώθαμεν· οὐ γὰρ πρὸς τὸ ἑαυτοῦ πρόσωπον εἶπεν τὸ σὺν, ἵνα ᾖ σὺν ἐπισκόποις ἡμῶν· ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ πᾶσι τοῖς ἐν Φιλίπποις ἁγίοις, σὺν τοῖς αὐτῷ ἐπισκόποις τε καὶ διακόνοις: 'It must be observed that when he says with the bishops, it is not, as some have thought, a parallel to our practice of writing 'together with the elders' (i.e. of associating the elders with themselves in the superscription, as for instance Polycarp does in writing to the Philippians): 'for he does not use the word with in reference to himself, meaning with our bishops, but in reference to all the saints that are at Philippi, i.e. with the bishops and deacons that are there.' Here I have substituted σὺν πρεσβυτέροις for συμπρεσβυτέροις, as the context seems to require, and corrected the corrupt ᾖ ἴσημπον into ᾖ σὺν with the Latin. The Latin version of Theodore however (Raban. Maur. vi. p. 479, ed. Migne) mistakes and confuses his meaning. The interpretation which Theodore is combating appears in the Ambrosian Hilary; 'Cum episcopis et diaconibus: hoc est, cum Paulo et Timotheo, qui utique episcopi erant: simul significavit et diaconos qui ministrabant el. Ad plebem enim scribit: nam si episcopis scriberet et diaconibus, ad personas eorum scriberet; et loci ipsius episcopo scribeudum erat, non duobus vel tribus, sicut et ad Titum et Timotheum.' See below, p. 230. ¹ In τὸν ἐπίσκοπον the definite article denotes the type, as in 2 Cor. xii. 12 τὰ σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστολοῦ, Joh. x. 11 ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός: see the notes on Gal. iii. 20. ² The identity of the two titles in the New Testament is recognised by the Peshito Syriac Version, which commonly translates ἐπίσκοπος by kashisho, i.e. presbyter or elder: see Wichelhaus de Vers. Syr. Ant. p. 109. PHIL. St Clement of Rome wrote probably in the last decade of the first century and in his language the terms are still convertible. Speaking of the Apostles he says that 'preaching in every country and city (κατὰ χώρας καὶ κατὰ πόλεις) they appointed their first-fruits, having tested them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of them that should believe (μελλόντων πιστεύειν)' § 42. A little later, referring to the disorganised state of the Corinthian Church, he adds, 'Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife concerning the authority (ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος) of the bishopric'...' We shall incur no slight guilt if we eject from the bishopric those who have presented the offerings (δῶρα) unblameably and holily. Blessed are the presbyters who have gone before, whose departure was crowned with fruit and mature (οἵτινες ἔγκαρπον καὶ τελείαν ἔσχον τὴν ἀνάλυσιν)' § 44. Different usage in Ignatius and Polycarp. This is the last instance of identification. With the opening of a second century a new phraseology begins. In the epistles of Ignatius the terms are used in their more modern sense. In his letter to Polycarp (§ 6) he writes: 'Give heed to the bishop, that God also may give heed to you. I am devoted (ἀντίψυχον ἐγώ) to those who are obedient to the bishop, to presbyters, to deacons (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, πρεσβυτέροις, διακόνοις).' The bishop is always singled out by this writer, as the chief officer of the Church¹. So about the same time Polycarp, writing to the Philippians, gives directions to the deacons (§ 5) and the presbyters (§ 6). He also begins his letter, 'Polycarp and the presbyters that are with him.' With this form of address may be coupled the fact that the writer is distinctly called 'bishop of Smyrna' by Ignatius (Polyc. init.). The identity proved by Jerome. Towards the close of the second century the original application of the term 'bishop' seems to have passed not only out of use, but almost out of memory. So perhaps we may account for the explanation which Irenæus gives of the incident at Miletus (Acts xx. 17, 28). 'Having called together the bishops and presbyters who were from Ephesus and the other neighbouring cities².' But in the fourth century, when the fathers of the Church began to examine the apostolic records with a more critical eye, they at once detected the fact. No one states it more clearly than Jerome. 'Among the ancients,' he says, 'bishops and presbyters are the same, for the one is a term of dignity, the other of age³.' 'The Apostle plainly shows,' he writes in another place, 'that presbyters are the same as bishops... It is proved most clearly that bishops and presbyters are the same⁴.' Again in a third passage he says 'If any one thinks the opinion ¹ Besides the passages quoted in the text see Polyc. 5, Ephes. 2. All these passages are found in the Syriac. The shorter Greek terms with references to the bishop as chief officer of the Church. ² Iren. iii. 14. 2. His explanation of the incident has been charged with dishonesty, but I know of nothing to justify such a charge. It would appear a very natural solution of a difficulty, if the writer had only an indistinct knowledge of the altered value of the term. At all events the same account has been given by writers who lived in a more critical age; e.g. Potter, Church Government c. iii. p. 118. ³ Epist. lxix (i. p. 414 sq., ed. Vallarsi). ⁴ Epist. exlvi (i. p. 1081) 'Quum Apostolus perspicue doceat eodem esse presbyteros quos episcopos'...' manifestissime comprobatur eundem esse episcopum atque presbyterum.' that the bishops and presbyters are the same, to be not the view of the Scriptures but my own, let him study the words of the apostle to the Philippians, and in support of his view he alleges the scriptural proofs at great length. But, though more full than other writers, he is hardly and recognised by more explicit. Of his predecessors the Ambrosian Hilary had discerned earlier and the same truth. Of his contemporaries and successors, Chrysostom, Pelagius, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, all acknowledge it. Thus in every one of the extant commentaries on the epistles containing the crucial passages, whether Greek or Latin, before the close of the fifth century, this identity is affirmed. In the succeeding ages bishops and popes accept the verdict of St Jerome without question. Even late in the mediæval period, and at the era of the reformation, the justice of his criticism or the sanction of his name carries the general suffrages of theologians. The meaning of 'prætorium' in i. 13. The word 'prætorium' signifies properly (1) 'The general's tent,' 'the common head-quarters in a camp.' From this it gets other derived meanings: (2) 'The residence of a governor or prince,' e.g. Acts xxiii. 35 ἐν τῷ πραιτωρίᾳ τοῦ Ἡρώδου (A.V. 'judgment hall'), Mark xv. 16 ἀπήγαγον αὐτὸν ἔσω τῆς αὐλῆς ὁ ἴστιν πραιτώριον, Acta Thomas § 3 πραιτώρια Βασιλικά, Juv. Sat. x. 161 'sedet ad prætoria regis,' Tertull. ad Scap. § 3 'solus in prætorio suo etc.' (3) 'Any spacious villa or palace'; Juv. Sat. i. 75 'criminibus debent hortos prætoria mensas,' Sueton. Tiber. 39 'juxta Terracinam in prætorio cui spelunæ nomen erat incœnante eo' (comp. Octav. 72, Calig. 37), Epict. Dies. iii. 22. 47 οὐ πραιτωρίδιον ἀλλὰ γῆ μόνον κ.τ.λ. So much for the word generally. It remains to enquire, what sense it would probably bear, when used by a person writing from Rome and speaking of the cause which he advocated as becoming known 'in the whole of the prætorium.' Several answers have been given to this question. (1) 'The imperial residence on the Palatine.' So our English Version, (1) The following the Greek commentators. Thus Chrysostom, 'They still (τέως) called the palace by this name.' Similarly Theodore of Mopsuestia, ¹ Ad Tit. i. 5 (vii. p. 695). ² On Ephes. iv. 11. But he is hardly consistent with himself. On 1 Tim. iii. 8 he recognises the identity less distinctly; on Phil. i. 1 (see above, p. 97, note) he ignores it; while on Tit. i. 7 he passes over the subject without a word. ³ Chrysostom on Phil. i. 1 (on 1 Tim. iii. 8, Tit. i. 7, he is not so clear); Pelagius on Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 12, Tit. i. 7; Theodore of Mopsuestia on Phil. i. 1, Tit. i. 7, and especially on 1 Tim. iii. (where the matter is fully discussed); Theodoret on Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 1 sq., Tit. i. 7, following closely in the steps of Theodore. See also Ammonius on Acts xx. 28 in Cramer's Catena, p. 337. ⁴ Later authorities are given in Gieseler Kirchengesch. 1. pp. 105, 106. ⁵ In Raban. Maur. Op. vi. p. 482 & 7-2 Objection to this meaning. No instance of this sense. 'What we are in the habit of calling the palace, he calls the prætorium.' Theodoret giving the same meaning adds, 'It is probable that the palace was so called at that time¹.' This interpretation, which has the advantage of illustrating the reference to 'Cæsær's household' at the close of the epistle, is thus ably advocated by Dean Merivale²; "In the provinces the emperor was known, not as Princeps, but as Imperator. In Judæa, governed more immediately by him through the imperial procurators, he would be more exclusively regarded as a military chief. The soldier, to whom the Apostle was attached with a chain, would speak of him as his general. When Paul asked the centurion in charge of him, 'Where shall I be confined at Rome?', the answer would be, 'In the prætorium' or the quarters of the general. When led, as perhaps he was, before the emperor's tribunal, if he asked the attending guard, 'Where am I?', again they would reply, 'In the prætorium.' The emperor was protected in his palace by a body-guard, lodged in its courts and standing sentry at its gates; and accordingly they received the name of prætorians." It is hardly probable however that in the early ages of the empire the feelings of Roman citizens would be thus outraged by the adoption of a term which implied that they were under a military despotism. In the days of the republic the consuls were required to lay down their 'imperium' without the walls and to appear in the city as civilians. And under the early Cæsars the fiction of the republic was carefully guarded, though the reality had ceased to exist. If it be urged that the name was confined to the soldiers (as Dean Merivale seems to suggest), it is difficult to conceive why St Paul after several months' residence at least in Rome, during which he must have mixed with various classes of men, should have singled out this exceptional term, especially when writing to distant correspondents. But whatever may be said of the a priori probability, it is a fatal objection that not a single instance of this usage has been produced. The language of the Greek fathers quoted above shows that though they assumed the word must have had this meaning at an earlier date, it was certainly not so when they wrote. While 'prætorium' is a frequent designation of splendid villas, whether of the emperors or others, away from Rome, the imperial residence on the Palatine is not once so called³. Indeed the word seems to have suggested to a Roman the idea of a country seat. Thus when Tacitus and Suetonius are relating the same event, the one uses 'villa,' the other 'prætorium,' to describe the scene of the occurrence⁴. Hence Forcellini with right appreciation defines the word, 'ædes elegantiores ornatioresque in agris exstructæ et villa quæque ¹ His words are τὰ βασιλεία γὰρ πραιτώριον προσγόρευσει· εἰκός δὲ ὅτι καὶ οὕτως κατ' ἐκείνον ὠνομάξετο τὴν καιρὸν ἀρχὴν γὰρ εἶχεν ἡ ῥωμαϊκὴ δύναστεια. ² History of the Romans vi. p. 268. ³ In Phlegon de Longœu. § 4 ἐκ Σα- βίνων ἀπὸ πραιτωρίον παλλαντιανῶ, a palace of the emperor in the Sabine territory is meant. Παλλαντιανός here is explained 'imperial' 'Cæsarean' by Perizonius de Prætor. p. 252, as if connected with παλάτιον (comp. Dion Cass. lii. 16 quoted above in the text); but, like horti Pallantiani, the name is doubtless derived from its former owner Pallas; see Friedländer Sittengesch. Roms 1. p. 98. ⁴ Tac. Ann. iv. 59, Suet. Tiber. 39. minime rustica vel villae pars nobilior et cultior ubi domini, rusticari cum libet, morantur.' In Rome itself a 'prætorium' would not have been tolerated¹. (2) The 'prætorium' is not the imperial palace itself, but the prætorium barracks attached thereto. This interpretation is open to many of the objections urged against the former. Moreover it is equally destitute of authority. In a passage of Dion Cassius indeed (liii. 16) there seems to be mention of a 'prætorium' on the Palatine; καλείται δὲ τὰ βασιλεία παλάτιον...ὅτι ἓν τε τῷ παλατίῳ ὁ Καῖσαρ ᾤκει καὶ ἐκεῖ τὸ στρατήγιον εἶχε. Here στρατήγιον is doubtless a rendering of the Latin 'prætorium'; but the sense is hardly local. As this passage stands alone, the words would appear to mean simply that the emperor was surrounded by his body-guards and kept state as a military commander. This language, though it would probably have been avoided by a contemporary, was not in itself inappropriate when applied to Augustus, of whom Dion is speaking, before the prætorium camp was built, and when the barracks attached to the palace were still the head-quarters of the prætorium guards². At all events, if 'prætorium' ever had this sense, it can hardly have been meant by St Paul here; for the expression 'throughout the prætorium,' in connexion with the context, would be wholly out of place in reference to a space so limited. (2) The barracks on the Palatine. (3) The great camp of the prætorium soldiers is so designated. Tiberius concentrated the cohorts previously scattered up and down the city (Tac. Ann. iv. 2) and established them outside the Collino gate at the North East of the city in a permanent camp, whose ramparts can be traced at the present day, being embedded in the later walls of Aurelian. If 'prætorium' here has a local sense, no other place could be so fitly designated; for as this camp was without the walls, the term so applied would give no offence. But this meaning again lacks external support. It might indeed be argued that as the Greek equivalent to 'præfectus prætorio' is στρατοπεδάρχης, 'the commander of the camp,' the camp itself would be designated 'prætorium'; but, as a question of fact, no decisive instance of this sense is produced. The camp is sometimes called 'castra prætoria' (Plin. N. II. iii. 9), sometimes 'castra prætorianorum' (Tac. Hist. i. 3), once at least 'castra prætori' (i.e. prætorii, Orell. Inscr. 21); but never 'prætorium.' (3) The Prætorium camp. As all attempts to give a local sense to 'prætorium' thus fail for want of evidence, it remains to discover some other suitable meaning, which is not open to this objection. (4) Prætorium signifies not a place, but a body of men. It is used for instance of a council of war, the officers who met in the general's tent: e.g. Liv. xxvi. 15, xxx. 5. But more frequently it denotes the prætorium guards. ¹ On the other hand away from Rome the residence of the emperor's representative is frequently so called; e.g. at Cologne (Orell. 3197), at Munda (ib. 3303). ² See Perizonius p. 230. It must be remembered that Dion Cassius wrote about two centuries after the event. For this sense of στρατήγιον comp. Tac. Ann. iii. 33 'duorum egressus coli, duo esse prætoria,' where a complaint is made of the pomp maintained by the wives of provincial governors. regiments, the imperial guards. This in fact is the common use of the term. It is found in 'castra prætorii' already quoted and probably also in 'præfectus prætorio.' It occurs also in such phrases as 'veteranus ex prætorio' (Tac. Hist. ii. 11, Suet. Nero 9, Orell. Inscr. 123), 'missus ex prætorio' (Orell. no. 1644, note), 'lectus in prætorio' (Orell. no. 941; comp. nos. 3589, 6806, 6817). A guardman was said to serve 'in prætorio,' a soldier of the line 'in legione' (Orell. nos. 3547, 5286, 5291). If St Paul seeing a new face among his guards asked how he came to be there, the answer would be 'I have been promoted to the prætorium'; if he enquired after an old face which he missed, he might be told 'He has been discharged from the prætorium.' In this sense and this alone can it be safely affirmed that he would hear the word 'prætorium' used daily. The following passages will further illustrate this meaning: Plin. N. H. xxv. 2 'Nuper cujusdam militantis in prætorio mater vidit in quiete...in Lacetania res gerebatur, Hispaniæ proxima parte': Tac. Hist. i. 20 'Exauctorati per eos dies tribuni, e prætorio Antonius Taurus et Antonius Naso, ex urbanis cohortibus Æmilius Pacensis, e vigiliis Julius Fronto'; ib. iv. 46 'Militiam et stipendia orant...igitur in prætorium accepti': Joseph. Ant. xix. 3. 1 οἱ περὶ τὸ στρατηγικὸν καλούμενον ὅπερ ἐστὶ τῆς στρατιᾶς καθαρώτατον, i. e. 'the prætorium, which is the flower of the army': Dosith. Hadr. Sent. § 2 αἰτοῦντός τινος ἵνα στρατεύηται, Ἀνδριανὸς εἶπεν· Ποῦ θέλεις στρατεύεσθαι; ἐκεῖνον λέγοντος Εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον, Ἀδριανὸς ἐξήτασεν· Ποῖον μήκος ἔχεις; λέγοντος ἐκεῖνον Πέντε πόδας καὶ ἡμῖον, Ἀδριανὸς εἶπεν· Ἐν τοσοῦτῳ εἰς τὴν πολιτικὴν στρατεύου, καὶ ἐὰν καλὸς στρατιώτης ἔσῃ τρίτῳ ὀψωνίῳ δυνήσῃ εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον μεταβῆναι'; Mission Archèol. de Macédoine no. 130 (p. 325) Τι. Κλαύδιον οὐτρακὸν στρατευσάμενον ἐν πραιτωρίῳ, no. 131 (p. 326) Τι. Κλαύδιος Ῥούφος οὐτρακὸς ἐκ πραιτωρίου. This sense to be adopted. This sense is in all respects appropriate. It forms a fit introduction to the words καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν which follow. It is explained by St Paul's position as an imperial prisoner in charge of the prefect of the prætorians. And lastly it avoids any conflict with St Luke's statement that the Apostle dwelt in 'his own hired house': for it is silent about the locality. ¹ See also Plin. N. H. vii. 19, Orell. no. 3477. On the meaning of the word prætorium see especially 'Perizonium Hubero Disquisitio de Prætorio, etc. (Franeq. 1690),' a 12mo volume containing more than 900 pages. Huber maintained that by 'prætorium' in Phil. i. 13 must be understood the palace or the audience-chamber therein. Perizonius, whose refutation of his adversary is complete, explained it of the prætorian cohorts or the prætorian camp. If he had omitted this second alternative, his work would in my judgment have been entirely satisfactory: though I must confess to having once taken it to mean the camp; Journal of Class. and Sacr. Phil. no. x. p. 58. Almost all recent commentators on the Philippians occupy themselves in discussing the possible local senses of 'prætorium,' barely, if at all, alluding to the only meaning which is really well supported and meets all the requirements of the case. Of recent writers on St Paul two only, so far as I have noticed, Block (Eint. in das N. T. p. 433) and apparently Ewald (Sendschreiben etc. p. 441), take what seems to be the correct view, but even they do not explain their reasons. On this account I have entered into the question more fully than its absolute importance deserves. ² This difficulty indeed is very slight, if it be interpreted of the camp; for the camp was large and might perhaps have The following account, relating to a contemporary of St Paul, who also spent some time in Rome under military custody, is abridged from Josephus (Ant. xviii. 6. 5 sq.). As throwing light on the condition of a prisoner under such circumstances, it may fitly close this investigation. Herod Agrippa, then a young man and resident in Rome, contracted an intimate friendship with Caius. On one occasion, when the two were driving together, Agrippa was overheard praying that Tiberius would resign the empire to make way for his friend who was 'in all respects more worthy.' Some time after, the charioteer, having been dismissed by Agrippa and bearing a grudge against him, reported his words to Tiberius. So Agrippa was consigned to Macro, the prefect of the prætorians, to be put in chains. Hereupon Antonia, the sister-in-law of Tiberius, who had a kindly feeling for the Jewish prince as a friend of her grandson Caius, contained houses or rooms routed by prisoners: see above, p. 9 sq. But if the palace or the Palatine barracks were meant, St Luke's statement would not be so easily explained. Wieseler indeed (Chronol. p. 403, note 3), who pronounces in favour of the Palatine barracks, adduces the instances of Drusus and Agrippa in support of his view. But both cases break down on examination. (1) Drusus, it is true, was imprisoned in the palace; Tac. Ann. vi. 23, Sect. Tiber. 54. But this is no parallel to the case of St Paul. Drusus, as a member of the imperial family, would naturally be confined within the precincts of the imperial residence. Moreover, as Tiberius had designs on his nephew's life, secrecy was absolutely necessary for his plans. Nor indeed could one, who might at any moment become the focus of a revolution, be safely entrusted to the keeping of the camp away from the emperor's personal cognisance. (2) Wieseler misunderstands the incidents relating to Agrippa, whose imprisonment is wholly unconnected with the Palatine. When Tiberius ordered him to be put under arrest, he was at the emperor's Tusculan villa (§ 6). From thence he was conveyed to the camp, where we find him still confined at the accession of Caius, which led to his removal and release (§ 10). Wieseler's mistake is twofold. First; he explains τοῦ βασιλείου as referring to the palace at Rome; though Josephus lays the scene of the arrest at Tusculanum (Τιβέριος ἐκ τῶν Καπριῶν εἰς Τουσκουλατὸν παραγί-νεται). For the existence of such palaces at Tusculum see Strabo v. p. 239 δεχόμενοι βασιλείων κατασκευάς ἐκπρεπεστάται. Secondly; he boldly translates στρατόπεδον by 'prætorium,' understanding thereby the Palatine barracks; though these barracks were in no sense a camp and were never so called. Building upon these two false suppositions, he makes the Palatine the scene of both his arrest and his imprisonment. Caractacus also, like Agrippa, appears to have been imprisoned in the prætorian camp, Tac. Ann. xii. 36. And, if these royal captives were not retained on the Palatine, it is very improbable that an exception should be made in the case of a humble prisoner like St Paul, whose case would not appear to differ from many hundreds likewise awaiting the decision of Cæsar. It will appear from the account relating to Agrippa, given in the text, that this prince was confined in the camp during the reign of Tiberius; but that on the accession of Caius he was removed to a house of his own, though still under military custody. The notices in the Acts suggest that St Paul's captivity resembled this latter condition of Agrippa, and that he did not reside actually within the camp. A Roman tradition is perhaps preserved in the notice of the Roman Hilary (Ambrosiaster) in his prologue to the Ephesians; 'In custodia sub fidejussore intelligitur degisse manens extra castra in conductu suo.' In Acts xxviii. 16 some xss (Greek and Latin) read ἐξω τῆς παρεμβολῆς, 'extra castra.' Death of Tiberius. grieving at his misfortune, and yet not daring to intercede with the emperor, spoke to Macro on his behalf. Her entreaties prevailed. The prefect took care that the soldiers appointed to guard him should not be over severe, and that the centurion to whom he was bound should be a man of humane disposition. He was permitted to take a bath every day; free access was granted to his freedmen and his friends; and other indulgences were allowed him. Accordingly his friend Silas and his freedmen, Marsyas and Stocheus, were constant in their attendance: they brought him food that was palatable to him; they smuggled in clothes under pretence of selling them; they made his bed every night with the aid of the soldiers, who had received orders to this effect from Macro. In this way six months rolled by and Tiberius died. On hearing of the emperor's death, Marsyas ran in hot haste to Agrippa to tell him the good news. He found the prince on the threshold, going out to the baths, and making signs to him said in Hebrew, 'The lion's dead.' The centurion in command noticed the hurry of the messenger and the satisfaction with which his words were received. His curiosity was excited. At first an evasive answer was returned to his question; but as the man had been friendly disposed, Agrippa at length told him. The centurion shared his prisoner's joy, unfastened his chain, and served up dinner to him. But while they sat at table, and the wine was flowing freely, contrary tidings arrived. Tiberius was alive and would return to Rome in a few days. The centurion who had committed himself so grievously was furious at this announcement. He rudely pushed Agrippa off the couch, and threatened him with the loss of his head, as a penalty for his lying report. Agrippa was again put in chains, and the rigour of his confinement increased. So he passed the night in great discomfort. But the next day the report of the emperor's death was confirmed. And soon after a letter arrived from Caius to Piso the prefect of the city, directing the removal of Agrippa from the camp to the house where he had lived before he was imprisoned. Release of Agrippa. This relieved and reassured him. Though he was still guarded and watched, yet less restraint was put upon his movements (φυλακή μὲν καὶ τήρησις ἦν, μετὰ μέντοι ἄνεσθαι τῆς εἰς τὴν δίαιταν). When the new emperor arrived in Rome, his first impulse was to release Agrippa at once: but Antonia represented to him that this indecent haste would be regarded as an outrage on his predecessor's memory. So after waiting a few days to save appearances, he sent for Agrippa, placed the royal diadem on his head, gave him the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias, and removing his iron fetter (ἀλύσει) invested him with a golden chain of the same weight. 27 Μόνον ἀξίως τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ Χριστοῦ πολιτεύεσθε, ἵνα εἴτε ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν ὑμᾶς εἴτε ἀπὼν ἀκούω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν ὅτι στήκετε ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι, μιᾷ ψυχῇ 27. ἀπὼν ἀκούσω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν. 27—30. 'But under all circumstances do your duty as good citizens of a heavenly kingdom; act worthily of the Gospel of Christ. So that whether I come among you and see with my own eyes, or stay away and obtain tidings from others, I may learn that you maintain your ground bravely and resolutely, acting by one inspiration; that with united aims and interests you are fighting all in the ranks of the Faith on the side of the Gospel; and that no assault of your antagonists makes you waver: for this will be a sure omen to them of utter defeat, to you of life and safety: an omen, I say, sent by God Himself; for it is His grace, His privilege bestowed upon you, that for Christ—yea, that ye should not only believe on Him, but also should suffer for Him. For ye have entered the same lists, ye are engaged in the same struggle, in which you saw me contending then at Philippi, in which you hear of my contending now in Rome.' 27. Μόνον] 'Only,' i.e. 'whatever may happen, whether I visit you again or visit you not': see Gal. ii. 10, v. 13, vi. 12, 2 Thess. ii. 7. πολιτεύεσθε] 'perform your duties as citizens.' The metaphor of the heavenly citizenship occurs again, iii. 20 ἡμῶν τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει, and Ephes. ii. 19 συνπολίται τῶν ἁγίων. See the note on iii. 20. It was natural that, dwelling in the metropolis of the empire, St Paul should use this illustration. The metaphor moreover would speak forcibly to his correspondents; for Philippi was a Roman colony, and the Apostle had himself obtained satisfaction, while in this place, by declaring himself a Roman citizen: Acts xvi. 12, 37, 38. Though the word πολιτεύεσθαι is used very loosely at a later date, at this time it seems always to refer to public duties devolving on a man as a member of a body: so Acts xxiii. 1 πάσῃ συνειδήσει ἀγαθῇ πεπολίτευμα τῷ Θεῷ κ.τ.λ., where St Paul had been accused of violating the laws and customs of the people and so subverting the theocratic constitution; Joseph. Vit. § 2 ἠρξάμην πολιτεύεσθαι τῇ Φαρισαίων αἱρέσει κατακολουθῶν, for the Pharisees were a political as well as a religious party. The opposite to πολιτεύεσθαι is ἰδιωτεύειν, e.g. Eschin. Timarch. p. 27. The phrase ἀξίως πολιτεύεσθαι is adopted in Clem. Rom. § 21. Polycarp also, writing to these same Philippians (§ 5), combines it very happily with another expression in St Paul (2 Tim. ii. 12), ἐὰν πολιτευσώμεθα ἀξίως αὐτοῦ, καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν αὐτῷ, 'If we perform our duties under Him as simple citizens, He will promote us to a share of His sovereignty.' ἵνα εἴτε ἐλθὼν κ.τ.λ.] The sentence is somewhat irregular. It would have run more smoothly ἵνα, εἴτε ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν, εἴτε ἀπὼν καὶ ἀκούων, μάθω τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν. For εἴτε, εἴτε, with participles, comp. e.g. 2 Cor. v. 9 εἴτε ἐνδημοῦντες εἴτε ἐκδημοῦντες. On this plan the sentence is begun: but in the second clause the symmetry is lost and the participle (ἀκούω) exchanged for a finite verb (ἀκούω), so that in place of a general word applying to both participial clauses (e.g. μάθω) is substituted a special one (ἀκούω) referring to the second clause only. στήκετε] 'stand firm,' 'hold your ground.' For the metaphor see Ephes. vi. 13 ἵνα δυνηθῆτε ἀντιστήναι ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ πονηρᾷ, καὶ ἅπαντα κατεργασάμενοι στήναι στήτε οὖν, περιζωσά- συναθλοῦντες τῇ πίστει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ²⁸καὶ μὴ πτυρόμενοι ἐν μηδενὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀντικειμένων· ἥτις ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς ἔνδειξις ἀπωλείας, ὑμῶν δὲ σωτηρίας, καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ Θεοῦ· ²⁹ὅτι ὑμῖν ἐχαρίσθη τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, οὐ μενοι κ.τ.λ. In the form στήκω the idea of firmness or uprightness is prominent: see the note on Gal. v. 1. In a later passage the Apostle compares the Christian life to the Greek stadium (iii. 14). Here the metaphor seems to be drawn rather from the combats of the Roman amphitheatre. Like criminals or captives, the believers are condemned to fight for their lives: against them are arrayed the ranks of worldliness and sin: only unflinching courage and steady combination can win the victory against such odds: comp. 1 Cor. iv. 9 ὁ Θεὸς ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἰσχάτους ἀπέδειξεν ὡς ἐπιθανατίους, ὅτι θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ κ.τ.λ. ἐνὶ πνεύματι] differs from μὴ ψυχῇ. The spirit, the principle of the higher life, is distinguished from the soul, the seat of the affections, passions, etc. For this distinction of πνεῦμα and ψυχὴ see the notes on 1 Thess. v. 23. For ἐν πνεῦμα comp. Ephes. iv. 4, Clem. Rom. 46, Hermas Sim. ix. 13. συναθλοῦντες τῇ πίστει] 'striving in concert with the faith.' Comp. Mart. Ign. § 3 παρεκάλει συναθλεῖν τῇ αὐτοῦ προθέσει, Ignat. Polyc. § 6 συγκοπιάτε ἀλλήλους, συναθλεῖτε. Thus ἡ πίστις is here objective, 'the faith,' 'the teaching of the Gospel'; see the notes on Gal. iii. 23. For this idea of association with the faith, thus personified and regarded as a moral agent, compare 1 Cor. xiii. 6 συγχαίρει δὲ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, 2 Tim. i. 8 συγκακοπάθησον τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, 3 Joh. 8 συνεργοὶ γινώμεθα τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. The other construction, which detaches τῇ πίστει from the preposition in συναθλοῦντες and translates it 'for the faith,' seems harsh and improbable. 28. μὴ πτυρόμενοι] 'not blenching,' 'not startled': comp. Clem. Hom. ii. 39 πτύραντες ἀμαθεῖς ὄχλους, M. Anton. viii. 45, Polyc. in Euseb. H. E. v. 24. The metaphor is from a timid horse (πτοεῖν); comp. Plut. Mor. p. 800 ο μήτε ὄψει μήτε φωνῇ πτυρόμενος ὥσπερ θηρίον ὑποπτον, Vit. Fab. 3 ἐντρόμου τοῦ ἵππου γενομένου καὶ πτυρέντος. Though apparently not an Attic word, it seems to have been used in other dialects from the earliest times, e.g. Hippocr. de Morb. Mul. 1. p. 600 ἡ δεδίσεται καὶ πτύρηται. ἥτις] 'seeing that it,' i.e. 'your fearlessness when menaced with persecution'; by attraction with ἔνδειξις: comp. Ephes. iii. 13 αἰτοῦμαι μὴ ἐγκακεῖν ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσίν μου ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἥτις ἐστὶν δόξα ὑμῶν, and see Winer § xxiv. p. 209. St Paul uses very similar language in writing to the other great church of Macedonia, 2 Thess. i. 47. In this sentence the received text presents two variations: (1) For ἐστὶν αὐτοῖς it reads αὐτοῖς μὲν ἐστιν: (2) For ὑμῶν it has ὑμῖν. These are obviously corrections for the sake of balancing the clauses and bringing out the contrast. τοῦτο ἀπὸ Θεοῦ] referring to ἔνδειξις. It is a direct indication from God. The Christian gladiator does not anxiously await the signal of life or death from the fickle crowd (Juv. Sat. iii. 36 'Munera nunc edunt et verso pollice vulgi quem libet occidunt populariter'). The great ἀγωνοθέτης Himself has given him a sure token of deliverance. 29. ἐχαρίσθη] 'God has granted you the high privilege of suffering for Christ; this is the surest sign, that He looks upon you with favour.' See the note on i. 7. τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ] i.e. πάσχειν. The δοξίαν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ ἀλλήλους ἠγούμενοι ὑπερέχοντας ἑαυτῶν, ⁴μὴ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι σκοποῦντες, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων ἕκαστοι. 4. 5. μὴ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστος σκοποῦντες ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων. Ἕκαστοι τοῦτο φρονεῖτε κ.τ.λ. impediments to an universal, diffusive, unconditional charity are the exaltation of party and the exaltation of self. Both these are condemned here; the first in κατ' ἐριθείαν, the second in κατὰ κενοδοξίαν. The μηδὲ κατὰ κενοδοξίαν of the older MS distinguishes and emphasizes the two false motives more strongly than the ᾖ κενοδοξίαν of the received text. κενοδοξίαν] 'vain-glory, personal vanity.' See the note on Gal. v. 26. τῇ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ] 'your loveliness of mind.' Though a common word in the New Testament, ταπεινοφροσύνη seems not to occur earlier. Even the adjective ταπεινόφρων and the verb ταπεινοφρονεῖν, though occurring once each in the LXX (Prov. xxix. 23, Ps. cxxx. 2), appear not to be found in classical Greek before the Christian era. In heathen writers indeed ταπεινός has almost always a bad meaning, 'grovelling,' 'abject.' In Aristotle (i) for instance (Eth. Endem. iii. 3) ταπεινός is associated with ἀνδραποδώδης; in Plato (Legg. iv. p. 774 c) with ἀνελεύθερος; in Arrian (Epict. i. 3) with ἀγεννής. To this however some few exceptions are found, especially in Plato and the Platonists; see Neander Church Hist. i. p. 26 (Eng. Tr.). On the other hand, St Paul once uses ταπεινοφροσύνη in disparagement. Col. ii. 18. It was one great result of the life of Christ (on which St Paul dwells here) to raise 'humility' to its proper level; and, if not fresh coined for this purpose, the word ταπεινοφροσύνη now first became current through the influence of Christian ethics. On its moral and religious significance see Neander Planting i. p. 483 (Eng. Tr.). ἀλλήλους κ.τ.λ.] i.e. 'each thinking the other better.' See esp. Rom. xii. 10 τῇ τιμῇ ἀλλήλους προηγούμενοι. 4. 5. These verses exhibit several various readings. The received text has σκοπεῖτε for σκοποῦντες, and φρονείσθω for φρονεῖτε, also inserting γὰρ after τοῦτο. All these variations may be at once dismissed, as they have not sufficient support and are evident alterations to relieve the grammar of the sentence. But others still remain, where it is more difficult to decide. In ver. 4, at the first occurrence of the word, there is about equal authority for ἕκαστος and ἕκαστοι; at its second occurrence, the weight of evidence is very decidedly in favour of ἕκαστοι as against ἕκαστος. On the grammar it should be remarked; (1) That the plural of ἕκαστος, though common elsewhere, does not occur again either in the New Testament (for in Rev. vi. 11 it is certainly a false reading) or, as would appear, in the LXX. (2) That we should expect either τὰ ἑαυτῶν ἕκαστοι or τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἕκαστος; but this consideration is not very weighty, for irregularities sometimes occur; and as tὰ ἑαυτῶν precedes ἕκαστος, the latter might be looked upon as an afterthought inserted parenthetically. (3) That St Paul can hardly have written ἕκαστος in the first clause and ἕκαστοι in the second, intending the clauses as correlative; and therefore if we retain ἕκαστος in the first case, it will be necessary to detach the following ἕκαστοι, and join it on with the next sentence. This view seems to have been taken by some older expositors and translators; and I have given it as an alternative reading. Whether the probabilities (independently of the evidence) are in favour of ἕκαστος or ἕκα- ⁵Τοῦτο φρονεῖτε ἐν ὑμῖν, ὁ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ᵃὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγήσατο τὸ στοι in the first case, it is difficult to say. The plural ἕκαστοι would mean 'each and all.' σκοποῦντες] 'regarding as your aim (σκοπός).' For this sense of σκοπεῖν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ, 'to consult one's own interests,' comp. Eur. El. 1114, Thuc. vi. 12, and other passages quoted by Wetstein. For other instances of participles used where imperatives might have been expected, see Rom. xii. 9, Heb. xiii. 5. ἀλλὰ καὶ] 'but also,' i.e. let them look beyond their own interests to those of others. ἕκαστοι] for the repetition of the word compare 1 Cor. vii. 17. 5—11. 'Reflect in your own minds the mind of Christ Jesus. Be humble, as He also was humble. Though existing before the worlds in the Eternal Godhead, yet He did not cling with avidity to the prerogatives of His divine majesty, did not ambitiously display His equality with God; but divested Himself of the glories of heaven, and took upon Him the nature of a servant, assuming the likeness of men. Nor was this all. Having thus appeared among men in the fashion of a man, He humbled Himself yet more, and carried out His obedience even to dying. Nor did He die by a common death: He was crucified, as the lowest malefactor is crucified. But as was His humility, so also was His exaltation. God raised Him to a preeminent height, and gave Him a title and a dignity far above all dignities and titles else. For to the name and majesty of Jesus all created things in heaven and earth and hell shall pay homage on bended knee; and every tongue with praise and thanksgiving shall declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, and in and for Him shall glorify God the Father.' 5. ἐν ὑμῖν] 'in yourselves,' i.e. 'in your hearts,' as Matt. iii. 9 μὴ δόξητε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, ix. 3 εἶπαν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς (explained by ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν which follows), ix. 21 etc. For ὑμῖν, where the New Testament writers generally have ἑαυτοῖς and classical authors ὑμῖν αὐτοῖς, compare Matt. vi. 19 μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς; and see A. Buttmann, p. 97. These slight difficulties, together with the irregularity of construction mentioned in the next note, have doubtless led to the substitution of φρονεῖσθα for φρονεῖτε in the received text. ὁ καὶ κ.τ.λ.] sc. ἐφρονεῖτο. The regular construction would have been ὁ καὶ Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἐφρόνει ἐν ἑαυτῷ. 6. ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ] 'in the form of God.' On the meaning of μορφῇ and its distinction from σχῆμα see the detached note at the end of this chapter. Though μορφῇ is not the same as φύσις or οὐσία, yet the possession of the μορφῇ involves participation in the οὐσία also: for μορφῇ implies not the external accidents but the essential attributes. Similar to this, though not so decisive, are the expressions used elsewhere of the divinity of the Son, εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ 2 Cor. iv. 4, Col. i. 15, and χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ Heb. i. 3. Similar also is the term which St John has adopted to express this truth, ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ. ὑπάρχων] The word denotes 'prior existence,' but not necessarily 'eternal existence.' The latter idea however follows in the present instance from the conception of the divinity of Christ which the context supposes. The phrase ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων is thus an exact counterpart to ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν κ.τ.λ., John i. 1. The idea corresponding to ὑπάρχων is expressed in other terms elsewhere; Col. i. 15, 17 πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως, αὐτός ἐστιν πρὸ πάντων, Heb. i. 8, 10, John viii. 58, III εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, Ἰάλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου xvii. 24, and Apoc. i. 17, iii. 14. οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο] 'yet did not regard it as a prize, a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards.' The more usual form of the word is ἁρπαγμα, which properly signifies simply 'a piece of plunder,' but especially with such verbs as ἡγεῖσθαι, ποιεῖσθαι, νομίζεεν, etc., is employed like ἔρμαιον, εὕρημα, to denote 'a highly-prized possession, an unexpected gain': as Plut. Mor. p. 330 D οὐδὲ ὥσπερ ἁρπαγμα καὶ λάφυρον εὐτυχίας ἀνελπίστου σπαράξαι καὶ ἀνωσύρασθαι διανοηθεῖς, Heliod. vii. 20 οὐχ ἁρπαγμα οὐδὲ ἔρμαιον ἡγεῖται τὸ πρᾶγμα, ib. viii. 7 ἁρπαγμα τὸ ῥηθὲν ἐποιήσατο ἡ Ἀρσάκη, Titus Bostr. c. Manich. i. 2 ἁρπαγμα ψευδῶς τὸ ἀναγκαῖον τῆς φύσεως ἡγεῖται, Euseb. H. E. viii. 12 τὸν θάνατον ἁρπαγμα θέμενοι, Vit. Const. ii. 31 οἷον ἁρπαγμά τι τὴν ἐπάνοδον ποιησάμενοι. It appears then from these instances that ἁρπαγμα ἡγεῖσθαι frequently signifies nothing more than 'to clutch greedily,' 'prize highly,' 'to set store by;' the idea of plunder or robbery having passed out of sight. The form ἁρπαγμὸς however presents greater difficulty; for neither analogy nor usage is decisive as to its meaning: (1) The termination -μὸς indeed denotes primarily the process, so that ἁρπαγμὸς would be 'an act of plundering.' But as a matter of fact substances in -μὸς are frequently used to describe a concrete thing, e.g. θεσμὸς, χρησμὸς, φραγμὸς, etc. (see Buttmann, Ausf. Sprachl. § 119. 23 (II. p. 399); with which compare the English 'seizure, capture,' and the like): so that the form is no impediment to the sense adopted above. (2) And again the particular word ἁρπαγμὸς occurs so rarely that usage cannot be considered decisive. In Plut. Mor. p. 12 A τὸν ἐκ Κρήτης καλούμενον ἁρπαγμόν, the only instance of its occurrence in any classical writer (for though it appears as a various reading for ἁρπαγὴ in Pausan. i. 20. 2, the authority is too slight to deserve consideration), it seems certainly to denote the act. On the other hand in Euseb. Comm. in Luc. vi. (Mai, Nov. Patr. Bibl. IV. p. 165) ὁ Πέτρος δὲ ἁρπαγμὸν τὸν διὰ σταυροῦ θάνατον ἐποιεῖτο διὰ τὰς σωτηρίους ἐλπίδας (a reference which I owe to a friend), in Cyril. Alex. de Ador. I. p. 25 (ed. Aubert.) οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν τὴν παραίτησιν ὡς ἐξ ἀδρανοῦς καὶ ὑδαρεστέρας ἐποιεῖτο φρενός (speaking of Lot's importunity when the angels declined his offer of hospitality), and in a late anonymous writer in the Catena Possini on Mark x. 42 τῷ δείξαι ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἁρπαγμὸς ἡ τιμή, τῶν ἐθνῶν γὰρ τὸ τοιοῦτον, it is equivalent to ἁρπαγμα. Under these circumstances we may, in choosing between the two senses of ἁρπαγμὸς, fairly assign to it here the one which best suits the context. The meaning adopted above satisfies this condition: 'Though He pre-existed in the form of God, yet He did not look upon equality with God as a prize which must not slip from His grasp, but He emptied Himself, divested Himself, taking upon Him the form of a slave.' The idea is the same as in 2 Cor. viii. 9 δι' ἱμὸς ἑπτώχευσεν πλούσιος ὤν. The other rendering (adopted by the A.V.), 'thought it not robbery to be equal with God,' disconnects this clause from its context. The objections to this latter interpretation will be considered more at length in the detached note at the end of the chapter. τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ] 'to be on an equality with God.' For this use of ἴσα as a predicate, comp. Job xi. 12 βροτὸς δὲ γεννητὸς γυναικὸς ἴσα ὄνῳ ἐρημίτη. δι' ὅμοια in Thucyd. i. 25 δυνάμει ὄντες... ὅμοια τοῖς Ἑλλήνων πλουσιωτάτοις: see Jelf, Gramm. § 382. The examples of the mere adverbial λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος, 8 καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτόν, γενόμενος use of ἴσα accumulated by commentators do not throw much light on the meaning here. Between the two expressions ἴσος εἶναι and ἴσα εἶναι no other distinction can be drawn, except that the former refers rather to the person, the latter to the attributes. In the present instance ἴσα Θεῷ expresses better the Catholic doctrine of the Person of Christ, than ἴσος Θεῷ; for the latter would seem to divide the Godhead. It is not the statement either of the Lord Himself or of the evangelist, but the complaint of the Jews, that He 'made Himself ἴσον τῷ Θεῷ (John v. 18).' In the letter of the synod of Ancyra, directed against the Sabellianism of Marcellus, attention is called to the absence of the article with Θεὸς hero and above (ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ); καθὼν οὕτε μορφῇ οὔτ' ἐν μορφῇ; ἐστι τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ, οὔτε ἴσα ἐστὶ τῷ Θεῷ ἀλλὰ Θεῷ, οὔτε οὐθεντικῶς ὡς ὁ πατήρ (Epiphan. Hær. lxxiii. 9, p. 855 Petar.). The object of this comment, whether right or wrong, is apparently to distinguish between Θεὸς God absolutely and ὁ Θεὸς God the Father; but the editors generally after Petau substitute ἀλλὰ Θεός, ἀλλὰ Θεός, for ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ Θεῷ, thus disregarding the MS and confusing the sense. 7. ἀλλὰ ἑαυτόν] 'So far from this: He divested Himself,' not of His divine nature, for this was impossible, but 'of the glories, the prerogatives, of Deity. This He did by taking upon Him the form of a servant.' The emphatic position of ἑαυτὸν points to the humiliation of our Lord as voluntary, self-imposed. ἐκίνωσεν] 'emptied, stripped Himself' of the insignia of majesty. μορφὴν δούλον λαβών] 'by taking the form of a slave.' The action of λαβών is coincident in time with the action of ἐκίνωσεν, as e.g. Ephes. i. 9: comp. Plat. Men. p. 92 σ' εὐεργίτησον φράσας, and see Hermann on Viger no. 224, Bernhardy Griech. Synt. p. 383. By 'form' is meant not the external semblance only (σχῆμα of the following verse), but the characteristic attributes, as in ver. 6. For ἄνθρωπος the stronger word δούλος is substituted: He, who is Master (κύριος) of all, became the slave of all. Comp. Matt. xx. 27, 28, Mark x. 44, 45. This text was made the starting-point of certain mystic speculations by the early sect of the Sethians; Hippol. Hær. v. 19, x. 11. ἐν ὁμοιώματι] Unlike μορφή, this word does not imply the reality of our Lord's humanity: see Trench N. T. Syn. § xv. 'Forma (μορφή) dicit quiddam absolutum; similitudo (ὁμοίωμα) dicit relationem ad alia ejusdem conditionis; habitus (σχῆμα) refertur ad aspectum et sensum,' is Bengel's distinction. Thus ὁμοίωμα stands midway between μορφή and σχῆμα. The plural ἀνθρώπων is used; for Christ, as the second Adam, represents not the individual man, but the human race; Rom. v. 15, 1 Cor. xv. 45-47. γενόμενος] like λαβών is opposed to the foregoing ὑπάρχων (ver. 6), and marks the assumption of the new upon the old. 8. 'Nor was this His lowest degradation. He not only became a man, but He was treated as the meanest of men. He died the death of a criminal slave.' σχήματι κ.τ.λ.] The former verse dwells on the contrast between what He was from the beginning and what He became afterwards: hence λαβών (not ἔχων), ὁμοίωμα (not μορφή), γενόμενος (not ὧν), all words expressive of change. In the present the opposition is between what He is in Himself, and what He appeared in the eyes of men: ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου, θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ· 9 διὸ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα hence σχήματι (for ὁμαιώματι or μορφή), εὑρεθείς (for γενόμενος or ὑπάρχων), ὡς ἄνθρωπος (for ἄνθρωπος), all expressions implying external semblance. 'He hath no form nor comeliness: there is no beauty that we should desire him: he was despised and we esteemed him not' (Is. liii. 2, 3). For σχήματι εὑρεθείς κ.τ.λ. compare Test. xii Patr. Zab. 9 ὄψεσθε Θεὸν ἐν σχήματι ἀνθρώπου, Benj. 10 ἐπὶ γῆς φανέντα ἐν μορφῇ ἀνθρώπου [ταπεινώσεως]. ὑπήκοος] 8c. τῷ Θεῷ: comp. ver. 9, διὸ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς κ.τ.λ. On the ὑπακοή of Christ comp. Rom. v. 19, Hebr. v. 8. θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ] 'I said death, but it was no common death. It was a death which involved not intense suffering only but intense shame also: a death reserved for malefactors and slaves: a death on which the Mosaic law has uttered a curse (Deut. xxi. 23), and which even Gentiles consider the most foul and cruel of all punishments (Cic. Verr. v. 64); which has been ever after to the Jews a stumblingblock and to the Greeks foolishness.' Compare Heb. xii. 2 ὑπέμεινεν σταυρὸν αἰσχύνης καταφρονήσας, and see Galatians p. 152 sq. The contrast of his own position must have deepened St Paul's sense of his Master's humiliation. As a Roman citizen he could under no circumstances suffer such degradation; and accordingly, if we may accept the tradition, while St Peter died on the cross, he himself was executed by the sword: see Tertull. Scorp. 15, and comp. Ep. Gall. in Euseb. H. R. v. 1, § 12. 9. διό] In consequence of this voluntary humiliation, in fulfilment of the divine law which He Himself enunciated, ὁ ταπεινῶν ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται (Luke xiv. 11, xviii. 14). διὸ καὶ] is a frequent collocation of particles in the New Testament with various shades of meaning. Here the καὶ implies reciprocation. ὑπερύψωσεν] The word is found several times in the LXX, but apparently does not occur in classical writers. ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ] 'game to Him, the Son of Man.' Ὑπερύψωσεν and ἐχαρίσατο are used in reference to the subordinate position voluntarily assumed by the Son of God. τὸ ὄνομα] 'the name, i.e. the title and dignity,' comp. Ephes. i. 21 ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ κυριότητος καὶ παντὸς ὀνόματος ὀνομαζομένου, Heb. i. 4 ὡς διαφοροῦτερον παρ' αὐτοὺς κεκληρον ὄνομα. If St Paul were referring to any one term, Κύριος would best explain the reference; for it occurs in the context ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, ver. 11. But here, as in the passages quoted, we should probably look to a very common Hebrew sense of 'name,' not meaning a definite appellation but denoting office, rank, dignity. In this case the use of the 'Name of God' in the Old Testament to denote the Divine Presence or the Divine Majesty, more especially as the object of adoration and praise, will suggest the true meaning: since the context dwells on the honour and worship henceforth offered to Him on whom 'the name' has been conferred. 'To praise the name, to bless the name, to fear the name, of God' are frequent expressions in the Old Testament. See especially Gesenius Thesaur. p. 1432, s. v. DC, where he defines 'the name of God,' 'Deus quatenus ab hominibus invocatur, celebratur.' Philo in a remarkable passage (among other titles assigned to our Lord in the Apostolic writings) gives 'the Name of God' as a designation of the 'Word': καὶ ἂν μηδὲν μέντοι τυγχάγῃ τις ἀξιόχρεως ὡν υἱὸς Θεοῦ προσαγορεύεσθαι, σπουδάζετω κοσμεῖσθαι κατὰ τὸν πρωτόγονον αὐτοῦ PHIL. τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα, ¹οἶνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν Γόνη κάμψη ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθολόγον, τὸν ἄγγελον πρεσβύτατον, ὡς ἀρχάγγελον πολυώνυμον ὑπάρχοντα καὶ γὰρ ἀρχὴ καὶ ὄνομα Θεοῦ καὶ λόγος καὶ ὁ κατ' εἰκόνα ἄνθρωπος καὶ ὁρῶν Ἰσραὴλ προσαγορεύεται (de Conf. Ling. § 28, p. 427 M). St Paul's idea here seems to be the same; for the parallel remains unaffected by the fact that the Word was not revealed to Philo as an incarnate Person. Somewhat different in expression, though similar in meaning, is St John's language, Rev. xix. 13. The reading τὸ ὄνομα (for which the received text has ὄνομα without the article) is unquestionably correct, both as having the support of the oldest MSS, and as giving a much fuller meaning. For other instances where τὸ ὄνομα is used absolutely, comp. Acts v. 41 κατηξιώθησαν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἀτιμασθῆναι, Ignat. Eph. 3 δίδεμαι ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι, Philad. 10 δοξάσαι τὸ ὄνομα. In all these cases transcribers or translators have stumbled at the expression and interpolated words to explain it. The same motive will account for the omission of the article here. 10. This passage is modelled on Isaiah xlv. 23 ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ ἐξομολογήσεται πᾶσα γλῶσσα τῷ Θεῷ (80 Alex., but Vat. has καὶ ὁμείται π. γλ. τὸν Θεόν, and Sin. καὶ ὀμείται π. γλ. τὸν Κύριον), the text being modified to suit St Paul's application to the Son. In Rom. xiv. 10, 11, on the other hand, the same text is directly quoted: πάντες γὰρ παραστησόμεθα τῷ βήματι τοῦ Θεοῦ (v. l. τοῦ Χριστοῦ) γέγραπται γάρ, Ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει Κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει κ.τ.λ.; the introductory words however, Ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει Κύριος, being substituted for κατ' ἐμαυτοῦ ὀμνῶν of the prophet. In the passage in the Romans then, if the reading τοῦ Χριστοῦ were adopted, Κύριος would refer naturally to our Lord, and thus it would serve to illustrate the application of the text here; but the balance of authority is decidedly in favour of τοῦ Θεοῦ, which is doubtless correct; the other reading having been introduced from 2 Cor. v. 10, where the words τὸ βῆμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ occur. Yet even without the countenance which would thus have been obtained from Rom. xiv. 11, it seems clear from the context that 'the name of Jesus' is not only the medium but the object of adoration. The motive of the passage (as shown by the last verse) is to declare the honour paid to Jesus; and that the individual expressions suggest this interpretation will appear from the following note. ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι] 'in the name,' i.e. the majesty, the manifestation to man, as an object of worship and praise. It is not 'the name Jesus,' but 'the name of Jesus.' The name here must be the same with the name in the preceding verse. And the personal name Jesus cannot there be meant; for the bestowal of the name is represented as following upon the humiliation and death of the Son of Man. If such had been the meaning, the words should have run, not 'He bestowed on Him the name etc,' but 'He exalted the name borne by Him'; for, though eminently significant in His case and thus prophetic of His glorious office (Matt. i. 21), it was the personal name of many others besides. That the bending of the knee is an act of reverence to Jesus, and not only to God through Him, will appear from the following considerations; (1) The parallel clause describes an act of reverence paid directly to the Son as its object, the ultimate aim however being the glory of the Father, πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς κ.τ.λ. (2) The construction ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψη in this sense is supported by many analogous instances where direct adoration is meant: e.g. Ps. lxiii. νίων, "καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα εξομολογῆσται ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ πατρὸς. "Ὥστε, ἀγαπητοί μου, καθὼς πάντοτε ὑπηκούσατε, 5 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἀρῶ τὰς χεῖράς μου, Ps. xlv. 10 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἐξομολογησόμεθα, Ps. cv. 3 ἐπαινέσθε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί τῷ ἁγίῳ αὐτοῦ, 1 Kings viii. 44 προσεύξονται ἐν ὀνόματί Κυρίου, besides the very frequent expression ἐπικαλεῖσθαι ἐν ὀνόματί Κυρίου (or Θεοῦ) 1 Kings xviii. 24, 25, 26, 2 Kings v. 11, Ps. xx. 8, exvi. 17, 2 Chron. xxviii. 15. τῶν ἐπουρανίων κ.τ.λ.] 'all creation, all things whatsoever and wheresoever they be.' The whole universe, whether animate or inanimate, bends the knee in homage and raises its voice in praise: see especially Rev. v. 13 καὶ πᾶν κτίσμα δ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ ὑποκάτω τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης [ἀ] ἔστιν καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτοῖς πάντα, καὶ ἤκουσα λέγοντας τῷ καθήμενῳ κ.τ.λ.; and comp. Ephes. i. 20-22. So in like manner St Paul represents 'all creation' as awaiting the redemption of Christ, Rom. viii. 22. Compare Ignat. Trall. 9 βλεπώντων τῶν ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ ὑποχθονίων, Polyc. Phil. 2 ᾧ ὑπετάγη τὰ πάντα ἐπουράνια καὶ ἐπίγεια. It would seem therefore that the adjectives here are neuter; and any limitation to intelligent beings, while it detracts from the universality of the homage, is not required by the expressions. The personification of universal nature offering its praise and homage to its Creator in the 148th Psalm will serve to illustrate St Paul's meaning here. If this view be correct, all endeavours to explain the three words of different classes of intelligent beings; as Christians, Jews, heathens; angels, men, devils; the angels, the living, the dead; souls of the blessed, men on earth, souls in purgatory, etc., are out of place. 11. ἐξομολογήσεται] 'proclaim with thanksgiving.' In itself ἐξομολογεῖσθαι is simply 'to declare or confess openly or plainly.' But as its secondary sense 'to offer praise or thanksgiving' has almost entirely supplanted its primary meaning in the LXX, where it is of frequent occurrence, and as moreover it has this secondary sense in the very passage of Isaiah which St Paul adapts, the idea of praise or thanksgiving ought probably not to be excluded here. Compare the construction ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι πάτερ ὅτι, Matt. xi. 25, Luke x. 21. The authorities are divided between ἐξομολογήσεται and ἐξομολογήσεται. In a doubtful case I have given the preference to the latter, as transcribers would be tempted to substitute the conjunctive to conform to κάμψη. The future is justified by such passages as Rev. xxii. 14 ἵνα ἔσται...καὶ εἰσέλθωσιν; see Winer § xli. p. 360 sq. Κύριος Ἰησοῦς] See Acts ii. 36 καὶ Κύριον αὐτὸν καὶ Χριστὸν ὁ Θεὸς ἐποίησεν, τοῦτον τὸν Ἰησοῦν ὃν ὑμεῖς ἐσταιρώσατε, Rom. x. 9 ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς ἐν τῷ στόματί σου Κύριον Ἰησοῦν, i.e. 'confess Jesus to be Lord,' where the other reading ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς is a paraphrase; comp. 1 Cor. xii. 3. 12. 13. 'Therefore, my beloved, having the example of Christ's humility to guide you, the example of Christ's exaltation to encourage you, as ye have always been obedient hitherto, so continue. Do not look to my presence to stimulate you. Labour earnestly not only at times when I am with you, but now when I am far away. With a nervous and trembling anxiety work out your salvation for yourselves, For yourselves, did I say? Nay, ye are not alone. It is God working in you from first to last: God that inspires the earliest impulse, and God that directs the final achievement: for such is His good pleasure.' ὑπηκούσατε 'were obedient,' i.e. to God, not to St Paul himself. Ὑπακοή 8-2 [11. 13 μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου μόνον, ἀλλὰ νῦν πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ μου, μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου τὴν ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν κατεργάζεσθε· ¹³Θεὸς γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ τὸ θέλειν καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν ὑπὲρ τῆς is most frequently so used in the New Testament of submission to the Gospel, e.g. Rom. i. 5, xv. 18, xvi. 19, 26, 2 Cor. vii. 15, x. 5, 6. It here refers back to the example of Christ, who Himself 'showed obedience' (ὑπήκοος γενόμενος ver. 8). μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ κ.τ.λ.] 'do not, as though my presence prompted you, work out in my presence only etc.' The sentence is a fusion of two ideas, μὴ ὡς ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου κατεργάζεσθε, and μὴ ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ μου μόνον κατεργάζεσθε, 'do not be energetic because I am present,' and 'do not be energetic only when I am present.' The pleonastic ὡς lays stress on the sentiment or motive of the agent: compare Rom. ix. 32, 2 Cor. ii. 17, Philem. 14. φόβου καὶ τρόμου] i.e. a nervous and trembling anxiety to do right. Such at least seems to be the meaning of the phrase in St Paul, 2 Cor. vii. 15, Ephes. vi. 5: comp. 1 Cor. ii. 3. The words occur together frequently in the LXX, where however they have a sterner import: Gen. ix. 2, Exod. xv. 16, Deut. ii. 25, xi. 25, Ps. liv. 5, Is. xix. 16. ἑαυτῶν] The word is emphatic in reference both to what goes before and to what follows. 'Do not depend on me, but on yourselves,' 'When you depend on yourselves, you depend on God.' κατεργάζεσθε] 'work out,' as e.g. Xen. Mem. iv. 2.7 πλειόνων περὶ ταῦτα πραγματευομένων ἐλάττους οἱ κατεργαζόμενοι γίγνονται. It is a common word in St Paul. 13. γάρ] This verse supplies at once the stimulus to and the corrective of the precept in the preceding: 'Work, for God works with you': and 'The good is not your own doing, but God's.' ἐνεργῶν] 'works mightily, works effectively.' The preposition of the compound is unconnected with the ἐν οἱ ἐν ὑμῖν ('in your hearts'). See the notes on Gal. ii. 8. καὶ τὸ θέλειν κ.τ.λ.] 'not less the will, the first impulse, than the work, the actual performance.' 'Nos ergo volunus, sed Deus in nobis operatur et velle; nos ergo operamur, sed Deus in nobis operatur et operari,' Augustin. de Don. Perser. 33 (x. p. 838, ed. 1.cn.). It was not sufficient to say Θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν, lest he should seem to limit the part of God to the actual working: this activity of God comprises τὸ θέλειν as well as τὸ ἐνεργεῖν. The θέλειν and the ἐνεργεῖν correspond respectively to the 'gratia præveniens' and the 'gratia cooperans' of a later theology. ὑπὲρ τῆς κ.τ.λ.] 'in fulfilment of His benevolent purpose'; for God 'will have all men to be saved' (1 Tim. ii. 4). The words should therefore be connected with Θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν, not with καὶ τὸ θέλειν κ.τ.λ.; for this latter connexion would introduce an idea alien to the context. On εὐδοκία see the note i. 15. 14-16. 'Be ye not like Israel of old. Never give way to discontent and murmuring, to questioning and unbelief. So live that you call forth no censure from others, that you keep your own consciences single and pure. Show yourselves blameless children of God amidst a crooked and perverse generation. For you are set in this world as luminaries in the firmament. Hold out to others the word of life. That so, when Christ shall come to judge all our works, I may be able to boast of your faith, and to show εὐδοκίας. ¹⁴πάντα ποιεῖτε χωρὶς γογγυσμῶν καὶ διαλογισμῶν, ¹⁵ἵνα γένησθε ἄμεμπτοι καὶ ἀκέραιοι, τέκνα Θεοῦ ἄμωσα μέσον Γενεᾶς ἐκολιᾶς καὶ Διεστραμμένη, ἐν οἷς φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες ἐν κόσμῳ, ¹⁶λόγον that my race has not been run in vain, that my struggles have indeed been crowned with success.' 14. γογγυσμῶν] 'murmurings.' The word is constantly used in the LXX of Israel in the wilderness: compare 1 Cor. x. 10 μηδὲ γογγύζετε καθάπερ τινὲς αὐτῶν ἐγόγγυσαν. The same reference to the Israelites, which is directly expressed in the passage just quoted, seems to have been present to the Apostle's mind here; for in the next verse he quotes from the song of Moses. For γογγυσμὸς the Athenians used τονθορυσμὸς: the former however occurs in the oldest Ionic writers (see Lobeck Phryn. p. 358). This is one of many instances of the exceptional character of the Attic dialect: see above on πτυρόμενοι i. 28 and Galatians vi. 6, and p. 92 sq. διαλογισμῶν] This word in the New Testament means sometimes 'inward questionings,' sometimes 'disputes, discussion'; for there is no sufficient ground for denying it this second meaning: see 1 Tim. ii. 8. Here it seems to have the former sense. As γογγυσμὸς is the moral, so διαλογισμὸς is the intellectual rebellion against God. 15. γένησθε] 'may approve yourselves': better supported than the other reading ἦτε. ἀκέραιοι] 'pure, sincere,' literally 'unmixed,' 'unadulterated' (from κεράννυμι); for the word is used of pure wine (Athen. ii. 45 ε), of unalloyed metal (Plut. Mor. 1154 π), and the like. Comp. Philo Leg. ad Cai. § 42, p. 594 μ τὴν χάριν διδούς ἔδωκεν οὐκ ἀκέραιον ἀλλ' ἀναμίξας αὐτῇ δίος ἀργαλεώτερον. The stress laid in the New Testament on simplicity of character appears in this as in many other words: ἀπλοῦς, εἰλικρινῆς, δίψυχος etc. Of the two words here used, the former (ἄμεμπτοι) relates to the judgment of others, while the latter (ἀκέραιοι) describes the intrinsic character. τέκνα Θεοῦ κ.τ.λ.] A direct contrast to the Israelites in the desert, who in the song of Moses are described as οὐκ αὐτῇ τέκνα (i.e. no children of God) μωμητά, γενεὰ σκολιὰ καὶ διεστραμμένη (Deut. xxxii. 5, LXX): comp. Lukeix. 41. ἄμωμα] Both forms ἄμωμος and ἀμώμητος are equally common. Here the weight of evidence is in favour of the former, though there is some authority for the latter: in 2 Pet. iii. 14 on the other hand, ἀμώμητοι has much stronger support than ἄμωμοι. μέσον] For this adverbial use see Steph. Thes. (ed. Hase and Dindorf), s. v. p. 824. The received text substitutes ἐν μέσῳ. διεστραμμένης] 'distorted,' a stronger word than σκολιάς: comp. Arrian Epict. iii. 6. 8 οἱ μὴ παντάπασι διεστραμμένοι τῶν ἀνθρώπων (comp. i. 29. 3). It corresponds to a strong, reduplicated form in the Hebrew מִתְלַחֵל. φαίνεσθε] 'ye appear,' not 'ye shine' (φαίνετε) as the A. V. The same error is made in Matt. xxiv. 27, Rev. xviii. 23. On the other hand in Matt. ii. 7 τοῦ φαινομένου ἀστέρος, it is correctly rendered 'appeared.' φαίνεσθε here should be taken as an indicative, not an imperative. ὡς φωστῆρες] 'as luminaries.' The word is used almost exclusively of the heavenly bodies (except when it is metaphorical (as e.g. Gen. i. 14, 16 (where it is a rendering of חָאוּר)), Reclus. xliii. 7, Orac. Sibyll. ii. 186, 200, iii. 88, etc. Comp. Dan. xii. 3 (LXX) φαινόσιν ὡς φωστῆρες τοῦ οὐρα- ζωῆς ἐπέχοντες, εἰς καύχημα ἐμοὶ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα. Ἦλλὰ εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ νοῦ, Wisd. xiii. 2 φωστῆρας οὐρανοῦ πρυτάνεις κόσμου. The word occurs only once again in the N. T., Rev. xxi. 11, where also it should be translated 'luminary.' ἐν κόσμῳ] To be taken not with φωστῆρες alone (as the passage of Wisdom just quoted might suggest), but with φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες. For in the former case κόσμῳ must signify the material world as distinguished from the moral world. But this is hardly possible in the language of the New Testament: for though κόσμος sometimes refers to external nature, yet as it much more frequently has a moral significance, it cannot well, unless so defined by the context, signify the former to the exclusion of the latter. It is therefore used here in the same sense as in John iii. 19 τὸ φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον καὶ ἠγάπησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον τὸ σκότος κ.τ.λ.: comp. i. 9, 10, ix. 5, xii. 46, etc. 16. ἐπέχοντες] The foregoing clause ἐν οἷς φαίνεσθε ὡς φωστῆρες ἐν κόσμῳ should probably be taken as parenthetical, so that ἐπέχοντες is attached to ἵνα γένησθε κ.τ.λ. For this sense of ἐπέχειν 'to hold out' see Hom. II. ix. 489, xxii. 494, Ar. Nub. 1382, etc. (οἶνον, κοπύλην), Pausan. i. 33. 7, Plut. Mor. 265 A, 263 F (μαστόν, θηλήν, γάλα). If therefore we are to look for any metaphor in ἐπέχοντες, it would most naturally be that of offering food or wine. At all events it seems wholly unconnected with the preceding image in φωστῆρες. εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, 'against the day of Christ,' as i. 10; comp. i. 6. 'The day of Christ' is a phrase peculiar to this epistle. More commonly it is 'the day of the Lord.' For this reference to the great judgment in connexion with his ministerial labours compare 1 Cor. iii. 12, 13, iv. 3—5, and esp. 2 Cor. i. 14. εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον' as Gal. ii. 2. This passage is quoted Polyc. Phil. § 9 οὗτοι πάντες οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον: compare 2 Tim. iv. 7. ἐκοπίασα] Probably a continuation of the same metaphor, referring to the training for the athletic games: compare 1 Cor. ix. 24—27. At least κοπιάν is elsewhere associated with τρέχειν in the same way: Anthol. III. p. 166 πίνε καὶ εὐφραίνου· τί γὰρ αὔριον, ἡ τί τὸ μέλλον, οὐδεὶς γινώσκει· μὴ τρέχε, μὴ κοπία, Ignat. Polyc. 6 συγκοπιάτε ἀλλήλους, συναθλείτε, συντρέχετε. 17, 18. 'I spoke of my severe laboars for the Gospel. I am ready even to die in the same cause. If I am required to pour out my life-blood as a libation over the sacrificial offering of your faith, I rejoice myself and I congratulate you all therein. Yea in like manner I ask you also to rejoice and to congratulate me.' Thus the particles ἀλλὰ εἰ καὶ will refer to the preceding ἔδραμον, ἐκοπίασα. Most recent commentators explain the connexion in a very harsh and artificial way. Assuming that St Paul had before mentioned his anticipation of living till the advent of Christ εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ (ver. 16), they suppose that he now suggests the alternative of his dying before. But in fact no such anticipation was expressed: for his work would be equally tested at 'the day of Christ,' whether he were alive or dead when that day came. The faint expectation, which in i. 6, 10 (where the same phrase occurs) is suggested by the context, finds no expression here. On εἰ καὶ as distinguished from καὶ εἰ see the note on Gal. i. 8. σπένδομαι] As his death actually approaches, he says ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπέν- τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, χαίρω καὶ συγχαίρω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν· ¹⁸ τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ καὶ ὑμεῖς χαίρετε καὶ συγχαίρετέ μοι. δομαι 2 Tim. iv. 6. Comp. Ignat. Rom. 2 πλέον μοι μὴ παράσχησθε τοῦ σπονδισδήναι Θεῷ, ὡς ἔτι θυσιαστήριον ἑτοιμόν ἐστιν, uttered under similar circumstances. It is a striking coincidence, that St Paul's great heathen contemporary Seneca, whose name tradition has linked with his own, is reported to have used a similar metaphor when on the point of death: Tac. Ann. xv. 64 'respergens proximos servorum, addita voce libare se liquorem illum Jovi liberatori': compare the account of Thrasea, Ann. xvi. 35. The present tense σπένδομαι places the hypothesis vividly before the eyes: but it does not, as generally explained, refer to present dangers, as though the process were actually begun: comp. e.g. Matt. xii. 26, xviii. 8, 9, etc. ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ] The general import of the metaphor is clear; but it has been questioned whether the reference is to heathen libations or to Jewish drink-offerings. The preposition (ἐπὶ) seems hardly conclusive. Even if it be true that the drink-offerings of the Jews were always poured around and not upon the altar (Joseph. Ant. iii. 9. 4 σπένδοσι περὶ τὸν βωμὸν τὸν οἶνον; see Ewald Alterth. p. 37 sq. 2te ausg.), yet the LXX certainly uses the preposition 'upon' to describe them: Levit. v. 11 οὐκ ἐπιχεεῖ ἐπ' αὐτὸ ἔλαιον, Num. xxviii. 24 ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀλοκαυτώματος τοῦ διὰ παντὸς ποιήσεις τὴν σπονδὴν αὐτοῦ. Nor need ἐπὶ with the dative necessarily be translated 'upon,' but may mean 'accompanying.' On the other hand, as St Paul is writing to converted heathens, a reference to heathen sacrifice is more appropriate (comp. 2 Cor. ii. 14); while owing to the greater prominence of the libation in heathen rites the metaphor would be more expressive. For the appropriateness of the preposition in this case see Hom. Il. xi. 775 σπένδων αἴθοπα οἶνον ἐπ' αἴθομίνοις ἱεροῖσιν, Arrian Alex. vi. 19 σπείσας ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ τὴν φιάλην κ.τ.λ., and the common word ἐπισπένδειν. Tho 'sacrifice' (θυσία) here is the victim, not the act. λειτουργία] This word has passed through the following meanings: (1) A civil service, a state-burden, especially in the technical language of Athenian law: (2) A function or office of any kind, as of the bodily organs, e.g. the mouth, Arist. Part. An. ii. 3: (3) Sacerdotal ministration especially, whether among the Jews (as Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21, and commonly in the LXX), or among heathen nations (as Diod. Sic. i. 21, where it is used of the Kgyptian priesthood): (4) The eucharistic services; and thence more generally (5) Set forms of divine worship. As the word is applied most frequently in the Bible to sacerdotal functions, it should probably be taken here as supplementing the idea of θυσία. Thus St Paul's language expresses the fundamental idea of the Christian Church, in which an universal priesthood has supplanted the exclusive ministrations of a select tribe or class: see 1 Pet. ii. 5 ἱεράτευμα ἅγιον ἀνενέγκαι πνευματικὸς θυσίας. The Philippians are the priests; their faith (or their good works springing from their faith) is the sacrifice: St Paul's life-blood the accompanying libation. Commentators have much confused the image by representing St Paul himself as the sacrificer. συγχαίρω] 'I congratulate,' not 'I rejoice with.' As joy is enjoined on the Philippians in the second clause, it must not be assumed on their part in the first. For this sense of συγχαίρειν 'to congratulate,' where reciprocation on the part of the person appealed to is not so much presupposed as invited, see e.g. Plut. Mor. 231 B συγχαίρω τῇ πόλει τριακοσίους κρείττονάς μουπολίτας ἐχούσῃ, Polyb. xxix. 7. 4, ¹⁹ Ἐλπίζω δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Τιμόθεόν ταχέως πέμψαι ὑμῖν, ἵνα κἀγὼ εὐψυχῶ γνοὺς τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν. ²⁰ οὐδένα γὰρ ἔχω ἰσόψυχον, ὅστις γνησίως τὰ περὶ ὑμῶν μεριμνήσει· ²¹ οἱ πάντες γὰρ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ζητοῦσιν, οὐ τὰ Barnab. 1 μᾶλλον συγχαίρω ἑμαυτῷ, etc. 18. τὸ δὴ αὐτό] in the same way, i.e. τὴν αὐτὴν χορὰν χαίρετε; as Matt. xxvii. 44 τὸ δ' αὐτὸ καὶ οἱ λῃσταί...ὠνειδιζον αὐτόν. The accusative defines the character rather than the object of the action, so that ταὐτὰ χαίρειν (Demosth. de Cor. p. 323) is 'to have the same joys.' For the poetical use of χαίρειν and similar words with an accusative of the object see Valcknaer on Eur. Hipp. 1335. καὶ ὑμεῖς χαίρετε] We are reminded of the messenger who brought the tidings of the battle of Marathon, expiring on the first threshold with these words on his lips, χαίρετε καὶ χαίρομεν, Plut. Mor. p. 347 c. See the note on iv. 4. 19—24. 'But though absent myself, I hope in the Lord to send Timotheus shortly to you. This I purpose not for your sakes only but for my own also; that hearing how you fare, I may take heart. I have chosen him, for I have no other messenger at hand who can compare with him, none other who will show the same lively and instinctive interest in your welfare. For all pursue their own selfish aims, reckless of the will of Christ. But the credentials of Timotheus are before you: you know how he has been tested by long experience, how as a son with a father he has laboured with me in the service of the Gospel. Him therefore I hope to send without delay, when I see what turn my affairs will take. At the same time I trust in the Lord, that I shall visit you before long in person.' 19. Ἐλπίζω δὲ] This is connected in thought with ver. 12. 'I urged the duty of self-reliance during my absence. Yet I do not intend to leave you without guidance. I purpose sending Timotheus directly, and I hope to visit you myself before long.' Recent commentators seem to agree in taking ἐλπίζω δὲ as opposite to the fear expressed in the foregoing εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι; but the possibility of his own death and the intention of sending Timotheus do not stand in any sort of opposition. ἐν Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ] So above i. 14 and below ii. 24. The same idea is expressed still more explicitly i. 8 ἐν σπλάγχναις Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. The Christian is a part of Christ, a member of His body. His every thought and word and deed proceeds from Christ, as the centre of volition. Thus he loves in the Lord, he hopes in the Lord, he boasts in the Lord, he labours in the Lord, etc. He has one guiding principle in acting and in forbearing to act, μόνον ἐν Κυρίῳ (1 Cor. vii. 39). κἀγὼ εὐψυχῶ] 'I also may take courage.' Comp. ver. 27 οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐμέ. The guidance of the Philippians was one object of Timothy's mission; St Paul's comfort was another. While εὐψυχοί, εὐψυχία, are not uncommon, the verb εὐψυχεῖν seems not to occur in classical writers, though the imperative εὐψύχει appears frequently on epitaphs: see Jacobs Anthol. xii. p. 304. In Pollux iii. 28 εὐψυχεῖν is given as a synonymo for θαρσεῖν. Comp. Hermas Vis. i. 2. 20. οὐδένα γάρ] This condemnation must be limited to the persons available for such a mission. See the introduction, p. 36. ἰσόψυχον] 'like-minded,' not with St Paul himself, as it is generally taken, but with Timotheus. Otherwise the words would have been οὐδένα γάρ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. ²²τὴν δὲ δοκιμὴν αὐτοῦ γινώσκετε, ὅτι ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον σὺν ἐμοὶ ἐδούλευσεν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον. ²³τοῦτον μὲν οὖν ἐλπίζω πέμψαι, ὡς ἂν ἀφίᾶω τὰ περὶ 21. οὐ τὰ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ. ἄλλον or οὐδένα γὰρ πλὴν τούτου. The word ἰσόψυχος is extremely rare. It occurs in Æsch. Agam. 1470 (1446) where it has much the same sense as here. In Ps. liv. 14 ἄνθρωπε ἰσόψυχε it is a rendering of כִּי־כֹּה 'as my price,' i. e. 'quem mihi æquiparabam, quem diligebam ut me ipsum' (Gescu.), being thus equivalent to ἀντίψυχε. ὅστις, 'such that he.' See Gal. iv. 24 (note), 26, v. 19. γνησίως] i. e. as a birth-right, as an instinct derived from his spiritual parcentage: see esp. [Demosth.] c. Neær. p. 1353 τοὺς φύσετε πολίτας καὶ γνησίως μετέχοντας τῆς πόλεως, Epitaph. p. 1390 τοὺς μὲν...πολίτας προσαγορευομένους ὁμοίους εἶναι τοῖς εἰσποιήτοις τῶν παίδων, τούτους δὲ γνησίους γόψῃ τῆς πατρίδος πολίτας εἶναι. Timotheus was neither a supposititious (νόθος) nor an adopted (εἰσποιητος) son, but, as St Paul calls him elsewhere, γνήσιος τέκνον ἐν πίστει (1 Tim. i. 2, comp. Tit. i. 4); comp. Hippol. Har. vi. 20 Ἰσίδωρος ὁ Βασιλείδου παῖς γνήσιος 'his father's own son.' He recognised this filial relationship (ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον ver. 22); he inherited all the interests and affections of his spiritual father. This, I suppose, is Chrysostom's meaning, when he explains it touτέστι πατρικῶς (compare πατρικῇ φιλία, ἔχθρα etc.). Comp. Heb. xii. 8 ἄρα νόθοι καὶ οὐχ υἱοί ἐστι. 21. οἱ πάντες] 'one and all,' 'all without exception.' For the force of the article with πάντες, πάντα, see Bernhardy vi. p. 320, Jelf § 454. 22. δοκιμὴν] 'approved character,' as in 2 Cor. ii. 9, ix. 13, and probably Rom. v. 4. See Fritzsche Rom. I. p. 259. γινώσκετε] 'ye recogniss,' 'ye remember and acknowledge.' Timotheus was personally well known to the Philippians; see the note i. 1. ὡς πατρὶ τέκνον] This is often explained by understanding σὺν with πατρὶ from the following clause σὺν ἐμοί; see Jelf § 650. Instances of such omissions however occur chiefly though not always in poetry, and are found mostly in clauses connected by conjunctions (ἡ, καὶ, etc.). The preposition is omitted here, because the exact form of the sentence was not yet decided in the writer's mind when the first words were written; see Winer § I. p. 525, § Ixiii. p. 722. For this testimony to Timotheus compare 1 Cor. iv. 17 ὃς ἐστὶν μου τέκνεν ἀγαπητὸν καὶ πιστὸν ἐν Κυρίῳ, xvi. 10 τὸ γὰρ ἔργον Κυρίου ἐργάζεται ὡς κἀγώ. 23. τούτον μὲν οὖν] 'him then,' the clause being answered by πέποιθα δὲ ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς ἐλεύσομαι (ver. 24), while ἐξαυτῆς is matched by ταχέως. ὡς ἂν...ἐξαυτῆς] 'at once when.' For ὡς ἂν temporal comp. Rom. xv. 24, 1 Cor. xi. 34. ἀφίᾶω] So ἀφορῶντες Heb. xii. 2. If any weight is to be attached to the agreement of the older MSS, the aspirated form (ἀφίᾶω for ἀπίᾶω) must be read here. In Acts ii. 7 (οὐχ or οὐχὶ ἰδοὺ) and in Acts iv. 29 (ἔφιδε) they are divided. In the three principal MSS of the LXX, so far as I have noticed, the following instances of aspirates in compounds of εἶδον occur: Gen. xvi. 13, ἐφίᾶων A; Gen. xxxi. 49, ἐφίᾶοι A; Ps. xxx. 8, ἐφίεσθαι A; Ps. xci. 12, ἐφίεσθαι A; Ps. cxi. 8, ἐφίδη N; Jer. xxxi. 19, ἐφίδε N; Jonah iv. 5, ἀφίεσθαι N; 1 Mac. iii. 59, ἐφίδειν N A; 2 Macc. i. 27, ἐφίεσθαι (for ἐπιδε imper.) A; 2 Macc. viii. 2, ἐφίδειν (ἐφίδι) A; Deut. xxvi. 15, καθίδε B; Judith vi. 19, καθεῖδε (for κατίδε) A. It must be remembered that in the Vatican MS ἐμέ, ἐξαντῆς· ²⁴πέποιθα δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς ταχέως ἐλεύσομαι [πρὸς ὑμᾶς]. ²⁵ἀναγκαῖον δὲ ἡγησάμην Ἐπαφρόδιτον τὸν ἀδελφὸν καὶ συνεργὸν καὶ συνατρατιώτην μου, ὑμῶν δὲ ἀπόστολον καὶ λειτουργὸν τῆς almost all the book of Genesis is lost and that the Sinaitic contains less than half of the Old Testament. The collations of other MSS in Holmes' and Parsons' LXX supply many additional examples both in these and other passages. Similarly ἐλπίς is sometimes preceded by an aspirate (ἀφελπίζοντες Luke vi. 35, ἐφ' ἐλπίδι, Rom. viii. 20, 1 Cor. ix. 10, ἀφελπικῶς Hermas Vis. iii. 12); when naturalised in Coptic it is always so written, and we frequently find Helpis is a proper name in Latin. In both cases the anomaly is supported by inscriptions: ΕΦΕΙΔΕ Boeckh no. 3333; ΗΕΛΗΙΔΑ no. 170; the latter being as old as the 5th century B.C. The aspirates are doubtless to be explained as remnants of the digamma, which both these words possessed: see Curtius Griech. Etym. pp. 217, 238 (2nd ed.). It is less easy to account for οὐχ ὄψεσθε Luke xvii. 22, οὐχ ἄλιγος Acts xii. 18 (in which passages however the aspirate is not well supported), though there are some indications that ὄπτωμαι had a digamma. On οὐχ Ἰουδαικῶς, Gal. ii. 14, see the note there. 24. With St Paul's language here compare 1 Cor. iv. 17, 19, ἔπεμψα ὑμῖν Τιμόθεον ὃς ἐστὶν μου τέκνον κ.τ.λ. ἐλεύσομαι δὲ ταχέως πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐὰν ὁ Κύριος θελήσῃ. ταχέως] If the view taken in the introduction (p. 31 sq.) of the date of this epistle be correct, St Paul's release was delayed longer than he at this time expected. We have a choice between supposing him disappointed in the anticipation expressed here or in the anticipation implied in the injunction to Philemon (ver. 22). 25--30. 'Meanwhile, though I purpose sending Timotheus shortly, though I trust myself to visit you before very long, I have thought it necessary to despatch Epaphroditus to you at once; Epaphroditus, whom you commissioned as your delegate to minister to my needs, in whom I have found a brother and a fellow-labourer and a comrade in arms. I have sent him, because he longed earnestly to see you and was very anxious and troubled that you had heard of his illness. Nor was the report unfounded. He was indeed so ill that we despaired of his life. But God spared him in His mercy; mercy not to him only but to myself also, that I might not be weighed down by a fresh burden of sorrow. For this reason I have been the more eager to send him, that your cheerfulness may be restored by seeing him in health, and that my sorrow may be lightened by sympathy with your joy. Receive him therefore in the Lord with all gladness, and hold such men in honour; for in his devotion to the work, he was brought to death's door, hazarding his life, that he might make up by his zeal and diligence the lack of your personal services to supplement your charitable gift.' 25. ἀναγκαῖον κ.τ.λ.] The same expression occurs 2 Cor. ix. 5. ἡγησάμην is here the epistolary aorist, like ἔπεμψα (ver. 28); for Epaphroditus seems to have been the bearer of the letter. See the introduction p. 37 and the note on Gal. vi. 11. 'Ἐπαφρόδιτον] On Epaphroditus see the introduction p. 61 sq. He is not mentioned except in this epistle. The name (corresponding in meaning to the Latin 'venustus') was extremely common in the Roman period. It was assumed by the dictator Sylla himself in χρείας μου, πέμψαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ²⁶ἐπειδὴ ἐπιποθῶν ἦν πάντας ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἀδημονῶν, διότι ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἠσθένησεν. ²⁷καὶ γὰρ ἠσθένησεν παραπλήσιον θανάτῳ· ἀλλὰ writing to the Greeks (Λεύκιος Κορνήλιος Σύλλας Ἐπαφρόδιτος, Plut. Syll. 34; comp. Appian. Civ. i. 97). It was borne by a freedman of Augustus (Dion Cass. li. 11, 13); by a favourite of Nero, likewise a freedman (Tac. Ann. xv. 55 etc.); by a grammarian of Chæroneia residing at Rome during this last emperor's reign (Suidas s. v.); by a patron of literature (possibly the same with one of those already mentioned) who encouraged Josephus (Antiq. proem. 2, Vit. 76). The name occurs very frequently in inscriptions both Greek and Latin, whether at full length Epaphroditus, or in its contracted form Epaphras. ἀδελφὸν κ.τ.λ.] The three words are arranged in an ascending scale; common sympathy, common work, common danger and toil and suffering. Συνστρατιώτης occurs again Philem. 2. The metaphor is naturally very common: see esp. 2 Cor. x. 3, 4, 1 Tim. i. 18, 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4. ὑμῶν δι] This prominent position is given to ὑμῶν, both to contrast it with the immediately preceding μου, and to bind together the words following; for ἀπόστολον καὶ λειτουργὸν τῆς χρείας μου form one idea, 'a messenger sent to minister to my need.' Epaphroditus was the bearer of the contributions from Philippi (iv. 18), which just below are designated λειτουργία (ver. 30): comp. Rom. xv. 27 ἐν τοῖς σαρκικοῖς λειτουργήσαι αὐτοῖς. For this sense of ἀπόστολος, 'a delegate or messenger of a church,' see 2 Cor. viii. 23 ἀπόστολοι ἐκκλησιῶν. The interpretation which makes Epaphroditus an apostle or bishop of Philippi will be considered in the Dissertation on the Christian Ministry. τῆς χρείας μου] as iv. 16; comp. Acts xx. 34, Rom. xii. 13. 26. ἐπιποθῶν] 'eagerly longing after': see the note on i. 8. Here the expression is still further intensified by the substitution of ἐπιποθῶν ἦν for ἐπιπόθει. While the external evidence for and against ἰδεῖν is very evenly balanced, the language seems to gain in force by the omission. It may have been added because ἐπιποθεῖν ἰδεῖν was a well-remembered expression in St Paul; Rom. i. 11, 1 Thess. iii. 6, 2 Tim. i. 4. ἀδημονῶν] 'distressed.' The word is used in connexion with ἀπορεῖν, ἰλιγγιᾶν (Plato Themt. p. 175 D), with ξενοπαθεῖν (Plut. Mor. 601 C), and the like. It describes the confused, restless, half-distracted state, which is produced by physical derangement, or by mental distress, as grief, shame, disappointment, etc. For its sense here comp. Dion. Hal. A. R. i. 56 ἀδημονοῦντι τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ παρεικότι τὸ σῶμα ὑπὸ λύπης. The derivation of ἀδημονεῖν suggested by Buttmann (Lexil. p. 29), from ἀδημος 'away from home' and so 'beside oneself' (in which however he seems not to have been aware that he was anticipated by Photius Lex. p. 9: see Steph. Thes. s. v.), is almost universally accepted. But to say nothing else, the form of the word is a serious obstacle; and Lobeck, Pathol. pp. 160, 238, is probably right in returning to the older derivation ἀδήμων, ἀδήσαι. In this case the primary idea of the word will be loathing and discontent. The word occurs in Symmachus, Ps. cxv. 2 (ἐν τῇ ἐκστάσει Lxx), Ps. lx. 2 (ἀκηδιάσαι Lxx), Eccl. vii. 16 (ἐκπλαγῆς Lxx); and in Aquila, Job xviii. 20 (ἐστέναξαν Lxx). 27. καὶ γὰρ] 'for indeed.' The καὶ implies that the previous ἠσθένησεν understates the case. ὁ Θεὸς ἠλέησεν αὐτόν, οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐμέ, ἵνα μὴ λύπην ἐπὶ λύπην σχῶ. ²⁸ σπουδαιοτέρως οὖν ἔπεμψα αὐτόν, ἵνα ἰδόντες αὐτὸν πάλιν χαρῆτε, κἀγὼ ἀλυπότερος ὦ. ²⁹ προσδέχεσθε οὖν αὐτὸν ἐν Κυρίῳ μετὰ πάσης χαρᾶς, καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους ἐντίμους ἔχετε, ³⁰ ὅτι ἐπὶ λύπην] So all the best copies, while the received text reads ἐπὶ λύπη. In such cases the dative is more common in classical authors, but the accusative is supported by several passages in the LXX, e.g. Ezech. vii. 26 ἀγγελία ἐπὶ ἀγγελίαν, Ps. lxviii. 28 ἀνομίαν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν, Is. xxviii. 10 (where both constructions are combined) θλίψιν ἐπὶ θλίψιν, ἐλπίδα ἐπ' ἐλπίδι. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 2, and see A. Buttmann p. 291. 28. σπουδαιοτέρως] 'with increased eagerness' on account of this circumstance: see for the comparative Winer § xxxv. p. 304, and compare the note on περισσοτέρως i. 14. ἔπεμψα] i.e. with the letter, as in Ephes. vi. 22, Col. iv. 8, Philom. 11, and perhaps also 2 Cor. ix. 3. On this aorist see above, ver. 25. πάλιν χαρῆτε] 'may recover your cheerfulness,' which had been marred by the news of Epaphroditus' illness: for the order suggests the connexion of πάλιν with χαρῆτε rather than with ἰδόντες. ἀλυπότερος ὦ] 'my sorrow may be lessened.' The expression is purposely substituted for πάλιν χαρῶ, for a prior sorrow will still remain unremoved; comp. ver. 27 λύπην ἐπὶ λύπην. 29. προσδέχεσθε κ.τ.λ.] Comp. Rom. xvi. 2. 30. τὸ ἔργον] Comp. Acts xv. 38 Παῦλος δὲ ἠξίου τὸν ἀποστάντα ἀπ' αὐτῶν ἀπὸ Παμφυλίας καὶ μὴ συνελθόντα αὐτοῖς εἰς τὸ ἔργον, μὴ συνπαραλαμβάνειν τοῦτον, where we seem to have St Paul's very words. So too Ignat. Ephes. 14 οὐ γὰρ ἐπαγγελίας τὸ ἔργον, Rom. 3 οὐ πεισμονῆς τὸ ἔργον ἀλλὰ μεγέθους ἐστὶν ὁ χριστιανισμός. Thus τὸ ἔργον is used absolutely, like ἡ ὁδός, τὸ θέλημα, τὸ ὄνομα (see on ver. 9), etc. Though one only of the oldest was has τὸ ἔργον alone, this must be the correct reading. The others add Κυρίου, Χριστοῦ, τοῦ Κυρίου, τοῦ Χριστοῦ, or τοῦ Θεοῦ, of which the two first are highly supported; but the authorities, being very evenly divided, neutralise each other. All alike are insertions to explain τὸ ἔργον. παραβολευσάμενος] 'having gambled with his life.' From παραβάλλεσθαι, to throw down a stake, to make a venture (e.g. Polyb. ii. 94. 4 οὐδαμῶς κρίνων ἐκκυβεύειν οὐδὲ παραβάλλεσθαι τοῖς ὅλοις) comes παράβολος, 'gambling, rash, reckless,' whence παραβολεύεσθαι 'to play the gambler,' formed on the analogy of ἀσωτεύεσθαι, διαλεκτικεύεσθαι, περπερεύεσθαι, πονηρεύεσθαι, 'to play the spendthrift, quibbler, braggart, scoundrel, etc.': see Lobeck Phryn. p. 67. With the use here compare the ecclesiastical sense of parabolani, brotherhoods who at the risk of their lives nursed the sick and buried the dead. For the expression compare Diod. Sic. iii. 35 ἔκριναν παραβολέσθαι ταῖς ψυχαῖς, Hom. II. ix. 322 αἰεὶ ἐμὴν ψυχὴν παραβαλλόμενος. While παραβάλλεσθαι takes either an accusative or a dative of the thing staked, παραβολεύεσθαι from its nature can have only the latter. The original meaning of the English word 'hazard' is the same, 'a game of chance': see for the derivation Diez Etymol. Worterb. der Rom. Spr. p. 33 s. v. azzardo, E. Müller Etym. Worterb. der Eng. Spr. s. v. No one who has felt the nervous vigour of St Paul's style will hesitate between παρα- διὰ τὸ ἔργον μέχρι θανάτου ἤγγισεν παραβολευσάμενος τῇ ψυχῇ, ἵνα ἀναπληρώσῃ τὸ ὑμῶν ὑστέρημα τῆς πρὸς με λειτουργίας. III. 'Τὸ λοιπόν, ἀδελφοί μου, χαίρετε ἐν Κυρίῳ' Βολευσάμενος and παραβουλευσάμενος. The latter, which would mean 'having consulted amiss,' stands in the received text: but the evidence is strongly in favour of the former. Both words alike are very rare. ἀναπληρώσῃ κ.τ.λ.] as in 1 Cor. xvi. 17 χαίρω ἐπὶ τῇ παρουσίᾳ Στεφινᾶ κ.τ.λ. ὅτι τὸ ὑμέτερον ὑστέρημα αὐτοὶ ἀνεπλήρωσαν: comp. Clem. Rom. § 38 δι' οὗ ἀναπληρωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὸ ὑστέρημα. So also ἀνταναπληροῦν in Col. i. 24 and προσαναπληροῦν in 2 Cor. xi. 9. τὸ ὑμῶν ὑστέρημα κ.τ.λ.] i.e. 'what your services towards me lacked to be complete,' in other words 'your personal ministrations,' as in 1 Cor. xvi. 17 just quoted. It seems plain from this expression that Epaphroditus illness was the consequence not of persecution but of over-exertion. III. 1. 'And now, my brethren, I must wish you farewell. Rejoice in the Lord. Forgive me, if I speak once more on an old topic. It is not irksome to me to speak, and it is safe for you to hear.' τὸ λοιπόν] 'for the rest,' i.e. 'finally, in conclusion.' With λοιπόν or τὸ λοιπόν St Paul frequently ushers in the concluding portion of his letters containing the practical exhortations; 1 Thess. iv. 1, 2 Thess. iii. 1, 2 Cor. xiii. 11, Ephes. vi. 10 (where however τοῦ λοιποῦ should probably be read). Sometimes this concluding portion is prolonged, as in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, where it extends over two chapters. In the present instance the letter is interrupted, a fresh subject is introduced, the conclusion is for a time forgotten, and St Paul resumes his farewell injunctions later at iv. 8 τὸ λοιπόν, ἀδελφοί κ.τ.λ. See the introduction, p. 69 sq. In other passages λοιπόν and τὸ λοιπόν occur in reference to the approaching end of all things; as 1 Cor. vii. 29 ὁ καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος ἐστίν, τὸ λοιπόν ἵνα κ.τ.λ., Ign. Ephes. 11, Smyrn. 9. χαιρετε] 'farewell.' At the same time the word conveys an injunction to rejoice; see ii. 18, iv. 4, and the note on the latter passage. τὰ αὐτά] 'the same things.' But to what does St Paul refer? To his own personal intercourse with the Philippians? To messages delivered by his delegates? To previous letters not now extant? To some topic contained in this present epistle? The expression itself τὰ αὐτὰ γράφειν seems to limit the range of choice to written communications. The theory of an earlier letter or letter s, which seems to be supported by an expression of Polycarp (§ 3 ἀπὼν ὑμῖν ἔγραψεν ἐπιστολᾶς), will be considered in the detached note. At present it is sufficient to say that if the epistle itself supplies the requisite allusion, it is much more naturally sought here than elsewhere. On what subject then does this epistle dwell repeatedly? Two answers will suggest themselves. (1) The duty of rejoicing. This topic is very prominent in the epistle: see the note on i. 4. It has occurred more than once already. It has the advantage also of appearing in the immediate context, χαίρετε ἐν Κυρίῳ. Nevertheless it seems inadequate to explain St Paul's language here. Such an injunction has no very direct bearing on the safety of the Philippians; its repetition could hardly be suspected of being irksome to the Apostle. The words seem obviously to refer to some actual or threatened evil, against which a reiterated warn- τὰ αὐτὰ γράφειν ὑμῖν ἐμοὶ μὲν οὐκ ὀκνηρόν, ὑμῖν δὲ ἀσφαλές. ing was necessary. (2) Such an evil existed in the dissensions among the Philippians. This topic either directly or indirectly has occupied a very considerable portion of the letter hitherto; and it appears again more than once before the close: see the introduction p. 67 sq. It is the Apostle's practice to conclude with a warning against the prevailing danger of his correspondents. The Corinthians are again reminded that 'the Lord cometh' (1 Cor. xvi. 22); the Galatians are told once more that 'circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing' (Gal. vi. 15); the Thessalonians receive a parting injunction against the spirit of restlessness and disorder spreading among them (1 Thess. v. 14, 2 Thess. iii. 14). The Apostle therefore would naturally lay stress on this point here, intending, as he appears to have done, to bring his letter to a speedy close. See the note on iii. 2. ὀκνηρόν, 'irksome, tedious.' The word generally signifies 'dilatory, sluggish,' as in the LXX frequently; but here it is active, 'causing ὄκτος,' as in Soph. Œd. T. 834 ἡμῖν μέν, ἄναξ, ταῦτ' ὀκνηρά. The synonymes μορφή and σχῆμα¹. The word σχῆμα corresponds exactly in derivation, though but partially in meaning, to the old English 'haviour.' In its first sense it denotes the figure, shape, fashion, of a thing. Thence it gathers several derived meanings. It gets to signify, like the corresponding Latin 'habitus,' sometimes the dress or costume (as Aristoph. Eq. 1331 τεττιγοφόρας ἀρχαίῳ σχήματι λαμπρός), sometimes the attitude or demeanour (as Eur. Ion 238 τρόπων τεκμήριον τὸ σχῆμ' ἔχεις τόδε). It is used also for a 'figure of speech,' as the dress in which the sense clothes itself or the posture which the language assumes. It signifies moreover pomp, display, outward circumstance (as Soph. Ant. 1169 τύραννον σχῆμ' ἔχων), and frequently semblance, pretence, as opposed to reality, truth (as Plat. Epin. p. 989 σοῦ σχήμασι τεχνάζοντας ἀλλὰ δληθεία τιμῶντας ἀρετήν, Plut. Vit. Galb. 15 ἀρνήσεως σχῆμα τὴν ἀναβολὴν εἶναι φάσκοντες, Eur. Fragm. Æol. 18 οὐδὲν ἄλλο πλὴν ὄχλος καὶ σχῆμα). Altogether it suggests the idea of something changeable, fleeting, unsubstantial. Μορφή, like σχῆμα, originally refers to the organs of sense². If σχῆμα may be rendered by 'figure,' 'fashion,' μορφή corresponds to 'form.' It comprises all those sensible qualities, which striking the eye lead to the conviction that we see such and such a thing. The conviction indeed may be false, for the form may be a phantom; but to the senses at all events the representation of the object conceived is complete. The word has not and cannot have any of those secondary senses which attach to σχῆμα, as gesture or dress or parade or pretext. In many cases indeed the words are used convertibly, because the sense is sufficiently lax to include either. But the difference between the two is tested by the fact that the μορφή of a definite thing as such, for instance of a lion or a tree, is one only, while its σχῆμα may change every minute. Thus we often find μορφῆς σχῆμα, as in Latin 'figura formae'³, but rarely, if ever, σχήματος μορφή (Eur. Iph. Taur. 292 οὐ ταῦτά μορφῆς σχήματα, Ion 992 ποῖόν τι μορφῆς σχῆμα;). The σχῆμα is often an accident of the μορφή. ¹ The following note is founded on some remarks which appeared several years ago (in the Journal of Class. and Sacr. Philol. no. VII. p. 113 sq., 121), enlarged and modified. The distinction of μορφή and σχῆμα has since been drawn out by Archbishop Trench (N. T. Syn. § lxx) in his pointed and instructive manner. ² I have purposely avoided the question of its derivation, feeling that I have no right to an opinion on the subject. Benfey, Wurzel-lez. II. p. 309, connects it with the Sanscrit 'varpas,' 'form.' ³ As e. g. Lucr. iv. 69 'formai servare figuram.' Compare the account of 'forma' and 'figura' given by Döderlein, Lat. Syn. III. p. 25 sq. (referred to by Trench, l. c. p. 93). His distinction corresponds to that which is here given of μορφή and σχῆμα. 'The form (Gestalt),' he says, 'so far as it has definite outlines is figura; so far as it is the visible impression and the stamp of the inner being and corresponds thereto, it is forma.' Its philosophical meaning. Plato. Aristotle. From the primary popular sense of μορφή we pass to its secondary philosophical meaning. And here the older philosophers do not render much assistance. In Parmenides indeed (μορφὰς γὰρ κατίθεντο δύο, ver. 112 Karsten) the word signifies 'natures,' 'essences,' for he is speaking of two elemental principles of the universe. But without the light thrown upon its use here by the phraseology of later thinkers, no inference could safely be drawn from this solitary instance. In Plato we first meet with a clear example of its philosophical sense. In the Phædo (p. 103 E, 104 A) Socrates, eliciting the doctrine of ideas by question and answer after his wont, concludes that 'not only is the same name always claimed for the eἶδος¹ itself, but also for something else which is not the εἶδος and yet has its μορφή always whenever it exists.' And in illustration of his meaning he adduces the example of the odd and the number three, the latter being always called odd and being inseparable from oddness, though not the odd itself. Thus in Plato's language the μορφή is the impress of the idea on the individual, or in other words the specific character. It need not therefore denote any material sensible quality, as in the instance quoted it does not. In Plato however the philosophical sense of μορφή is very rare. On the other hand Aristotle uses it commonly. But its relation to εἶδος has undergone a change, corresponding to the difference in his metaphysical views. As he discards Plato's doctrine of ideas wholly, as he recognises no eternal selfexistent archetype distinct from the specific character exhibited in the individuals, it follows as a matter of course that with him εἶδος and μορφή are identical. There are, according to his teaching, two elements or principles or causes of things; the matter, the substratum supporting the qualities, and the form, the aggregate of the qualities². The form he calls indifferently εἶδος or μορφή³. He moreover designates it by various synonyms. It is sometimes 'the abstract conception realised' (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι⁴), sometimes 'the essence corresponding to the definition' (ἡ οὐσία ἢ κατὰ τὸν λόγον), ¹ Here the εἶδος is plainly the ἰδέα. Plato seems to have used both words alike to denote the eternal archetype, as for instance in the passages in Trendelenburg, Platon. de ideis doctr. p. 33 sqq. Where however especial accuracy was aimed at, ἰδέα would naturally be preferred to εἶδος: see Thompson's note on Archer Butler's Lectures II. p. 128. ² A large number of passages is collected by Waitz, Organon II. p. 401 sq. See also Heyder Aristot. u. Hegel. Dialektik p. 182 sq., and especially Ritter and Preller Hist. Phil. p. 324 sq. (ed. 2). In other places Aristotle speaks of four causes, the efficient, the material, the formal, and the final. The final and the efficient causes however may be conceived as involved in the formal: see esp. G. Schneider, De Causa Finali Aristotelea (Berol. 1865), p. 15 sq. ³ See Waitz Organon II. p. 405. There are exceptional cases where either word is used in its popular rather than its philosophical sense, referring directly to the organs of vision: but Biese, die Philosophie des Aristoteles I. p. 439, is not justified in his general distinction that μορφή is 'die äusserliche sichtbare Form der Dinge,' and εἶδος 'das die Dinge von innen heraus Gestaltende.' This distinction may suit one passage, but it is contradicted by twenty others. The same remark applies to the attempts made by the old commentators on Aristotle to distinguish μορφή and εἶδος. ⁴ On this term see Trendelenburg, Rhein. Mus. II. p. 457 sq., esp. pp. 469, 481 (1828); comp. his note on de Anima I. 1, 2, p. 192 sq. sometimes 'the definition of the essence' (ὁ λόγος τῆς οὐσίας), sometimes 'the definition alone, sometimes 'the essence' alone. He calls it also 'the actuality' (ἐνέργεια) or 'the perfection' (ἐντελέχεια)¹, matter being designated 'the potentiality' (δύναμις). 'So rich in wealth and titles,' said a later writer of a rival school half in irony, 'is the εἶδος with Aristotle².' The significance of his μορφή or εἶδος will appear also from the fact that he elsewhere identifies it with the final cause (τέλος or οὗ ἕνεκα)³, because the end or purpose is implicitly contained in the qualities. It is still more evident from the intimate connexion which he conceives to exist between the form and the nature. 'The term nature,' he says, 'is used to signify three things; sometimes it is equivalent to the matter, sometimes to the form, sometimes to both combined. Of the nature according to matter and the nature according to form, the latter is the more influential (κυριωτέρα)⁴,' i.e. it has a more important function in making the thing what it is. It will appear moreover from this account, that the term μορφή, though originally derived from the organs of sense like εἶδος, and referring to external conformation, has in the language of Aristotle a much wider application, being not only applied to physical qualities generally, but also extended to immaterial objects. Thus he says in one passage that skin, vein, membrane, and all such things, belong to the same μορφή⁵; in another, that courage and justice and prudence have the same μορφή in a state as in an individual⁶; in a third, that science and health may be called the μορφή and εἶδος of the scientific and the healthy respectively⁷; while in a fourth, criticising the saying of Democritus that 'anybody could see what was the form (μορφή) of a man,' meaning that he might be known by his shape and colour, he replies that 'a corpse has the form (μορφή) of the human shape (σχήματος) and yet nevertheless is not a man⁸.' The form of a man therefore in Aristotle's conception was something more than his sensible appearance. This sense of μορφή, as the specific character, was naturally transmitted from these great original thinkers to the philosophers of later ages. It is philosophers found for instance in Plutarch⁹. It appears very definitely in the Neopla- ¹ On the form regarded as the ἐνέργεια and the ἐντελέχεια see Trendelenburg de Anima ii. 1, p. 295 sq. ² A Platonist in Stobæus Ecl. i. c. 13 οὕτως αὐτῷ πλούσιόν τε καὶ πολυώνυμόν ἐστι τὸ εἶδος. ³ See Schneider de Caus. Fin. Aristot. p. 10 sq. and the passages quoted p. 12. ⁴ Phys. Ausc. ii. 1, p. 192 A (Bekker), de Part. An. i. 1, p. 640 B. See below, note 8. ⁵ de Anim. Gen. ii. 3, p. 737 B. ⁶ Polit. vii. 1, p. 1323 B. ⁷ de Anima ii. 2, p. 414 A. ⁸ de Part. An. i. 1, p. 640 B, ἡ γὰρ κατὰ τὴν μορφὴν φύσις κυριωτέρα τῆς ὑλικῆς φύσεως. εἰ μὲν οὖν τῷ σχήματι καὶ τῷ χρώματι ἕκαστόν ἐστι τῶν τε ῥῷων καὶ τῶν μορίων, ὀρθῶς ἂν Δημόκριτος λέγοι· φαίνεται γὰρ οὕτως ὑπολαβεῖν. φησὶ γοῦν παντὶ δῆλον εἶναι οἷόν τι τὴν μορφὴν ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὡς ὄντος αὐτοῦ τῷ τε σχήματι καὶ τῷ χρώματι γνωρίμου. καίτοι καὶ ὁ τεθνεὼς ἔχει τὴν αὐτὴν τοῦ σχήματος μορφήν, ἀλλ' ὅμως οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος (i. c. the corpse has the μορφή of the human σχήμα, but it has not the μορφή of a man). ⁹ Mor. p. 1013 O αὐτὸς τε γὰρ ὁ κόσμος οὗτος καὶ τῶν μερῶν ἕκαστον αὐτοῦ συνέστηκεν ἐκ τε σωματικῆς οὐσίας καὶ νοητῆς, ὡν ἡ μὲν ὕλην καὶ ὑποκείμενον, ἡ δὲ μορφὴν καὶ εἶδος τῷ γενομένῳ παρέσχε κ.τ.λ. Comp. p. 1022 z. For these references and the passage in the PHIL. tonists¹. And what is more to our purpose, it is recognised by Philo, the chief representative of Alexandrian Judaism². Popular language. Nor can it have been wholly without influence on the language of every-day life. Terms, like ideas, gradually permeate society till they reach its lower strata. Words stamped in the mint of the philosopher pass into general currency, losing their sharpness of outline meanwhile, but in the main retaining their impress and value. The exclusive technicalities of the scholastic logic are the common property of shopmen and artisans in our own day. New Testament usage Do we then find in the New Testament any distinction between μορφή and σχῆμα, corresponding to that which appears to have held roughly in the common language of the Greeks and to have been still further developed in the technical systems of philosophers? of σχῆμα A review of the passages where σχῆμα and its derivatives are used will not, I think, leave any doubt on the mind that this word retains the notion of 'instability, changeableness,' quite as strongly as in classical Greek. Thus 'the fashion of this world,' which 'passeth away,' is τὸ σχῆμα τοῦ κόσμου τούτου (1 Cor. vii. 31). 'To fall in with the fashion of this world' is συναχηματίζεσθαι τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ (Rom. xii. 2). 'To follow the capricious guidance of the passions' is συναχηματίζεσθαι ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις (1 Pet. i. 14). The fictitious illusory transformation whereby evil assumes the mask of good—the false apostles appearing as the true, the prince of darkness as an angel of light, the ministers of Satan as ministers of righteousness—is described by the thrice repeated word μετασχηματίζεσθαι (2 Cor. xi. 13, 14, 15). The significance of σχῆμα will be felt at once, if in any of these passages we attempt to substitute μορφή in its stead³. and μορφή. On the other hand the great and entire change of the inner life, otherwise described as being born again, being created anew, is spoken of as a conversion of μορφή always, of σχῆμα never. Thus 'He fore-ordained them conformable (συμμόρφους) to the image of His Son' (Rom. viii. 29); 'Being made conformable (συμμορφιζόμενος) to His death' (Phil. iii. 10); 'We are transformed (μεταμορφούμεθα) into the same image' (2 Cor. iii. 18); 'To be transformed by the renewal of the mind' (Rom. xii. 2); 'Until Christ be formed (μορφωθῇ) in you' (Gal. iv. 19). In these passages again, if any one doubts whether μορφή has any special force, let him substitute σχῆμα and try the effect. In some cases indeed, where the organs of sense are concerned and where the appeal lies to popular usage, either word might be used. Yet I think it will be felt at once that in the account of the transfiguration μεταnext note I am indebted to Wyttenbach's note on Plato, Phæd. p. 103 E. ¹ See e.g. Plotin. Ennead. i. 6, p. 52 A, especially the expression οὐκ ἀνασχομένης τῆς ὕλης τὸ πάντη κατὰ τὸ εἶδος μορφοῦσθαι. ² de Vict. Off. § 13, p. 261 M, τὸ τεθλασμένον ἀφήρηται τὴν ποιότητα καὶ τὸ εἶδος καὶ οὐδὲν ἑτερὸν ἐστιν ἢ κυρίως εἰπεῖν ἄμορφος ὕλη, and lower down, ταῖς ἀσωμάτοις δυνάμεσιν, ὧν ἔτυμον ὄνομα αἱ ἰδέαι, κατεχρήσατο πρὸς τὸ γένος ἕκαστον τὴν ἁρμόττουσαν λαβεῖν μορφήν. For other references see Dähne Jüdisch-Alex. Religionsphilosophie 1. p. 185. ³ In 1 Cor. iv. 6 ταῦτα μετεσχημάτισα εἰς ἑμαυτὸν κ.τ.λ. the word refers to a rhetorical σχῆμα, and here μετεμόρφωσα would of course be out of place. σχηματίζεσθαι would have been out of place and that μεταμορφοῦσθαι alone is adequate to express the completeness and significance of the change (Matt. xvii. 2, Mark ix. 2). Even in the later addition to St Mark's Gospel where our Lord is described as appearing to the two disciples ἐν ἑτέρᾳ μορφῇ, though μορφὴ here has no peculiar force, yet σχῆμα would perhaps be avoided instinctively, as it might imply an illusion or an imposture. It will be observed also that in two passages where St Paul speaks of an appearance which is superficial and unreal, though not using σχῆμα, he still avoids μορφὴ as inappropriate and adopts μόρφωσις instead (Rom. ii. 20 τὴν μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας, 2 Tim. iii. 5 μόρφωσιν εὐσεβείας). Here the termination denotes the aiming after or affecting the μορφή. And the distinction, which has thus appeared from the review of each Concur- word separately, will be seen still more clearly from those passages where they rence of occur together. In Rom. xii. 2 μὴ συνσχηματίζεσθαι τῷ αἰὼν τούτῳ the two ἀλλὰ μεταμορφοῦσθαι τῇ ἀνακοινώσει τοῦ νοῦς. the form of the sentence calls attention to the contrast, and the appropriateness of each word in its own connexion is obvious: 'Not to follow the fleeting fashion of this world, but to undergo a complete change, assume a new form, in the renewal of the mind.' On the other hand in Phil. iii. 21 μετασχηματίσει τὸ σῶμα τῆς τα- πεινώσεως ἡμῶν σύμμορφον τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ, the difference is not obvious at first sight. The meaning however seems to be, 'will change the fashion of the body of our humiliation and fix it in the form of the body of His glory.' Here I think it will be clear that a compound of σχῆμα could not be substituted for σύμμορφον without serious detriment to the sense: while on the other hand μεταμορφώσει might possibly have stood for μετασχηματίσει¹. I now come to the passage in the Epistle to the Philippians out of Phil. ii. 6, which this investigation has arisen. But before attempting to discover 7- what is implied by μορφὴ Θεοῦ, it will be necessary to clear the way by dis- posing of a preliminary question. Does the expression ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων refer to the pre-incarnate or the incarnate Christ? Those who The pre- adopt the latter view for the most part explain the words of the super- incarnate natural or divine power and grace manifested by our Lord during His Christ is earthly ministry. Thus in ancient times the Ambrosian Hilary, 'Deus meant, apparet, dum mortuos excitat, surdis reddit auditum, leprosos mundat, et alia': thus in a later age Erasmus, 'Ipsis factis se Deum esse declara- ret etc.'; and Luther, 'Dass göttliche Gestalt nichts anderes sei denn sich erzeigen mit Worten und Werken gegen andere als ein Herr und Gott².' Against this view De Wette, though himself referring the ex- pression to Christ incarnate, urges with justice that the point of time marked by ὑπάρχων is evidently prior to our Lord's actual ministry, ¹ Of the two words μετασχηματίζειν would refer to the transient condition from which, μεταμορφοῦν to the perma- nent state to which, the change takes place. Archbishop Trench however sup- poses that μετασχηματίζειν is here pre- ferred to μεταμορφοῦν as expressing 'transition but no absolute solution of continuity,' the spiritual body being developed from the natural, as the butterfly from the caterpillar; N. T. Syn. 2nd ser. p. 91. ² Postill. ad. Epist. Domin. Palm. (xii. p. 630 ed. Hall.), quoted by De Wette. 9-2 the period of this ministry itself being a period of humiliation. He therefore explains it as describing the glory dwelling potentially in Christ, at the moment when He commenced His ministry. The meaning of St Paul, he thinks, is best illustrated by the account of the temptation (Matt. iv. 8), where our Lord rejects Satan's offer of 'all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.' At that moment and in that act of renunciation it might be said of Him that ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσιν. But this is quite as unsatisfactory as the explanation which he rejects. The point of time is clearly prior not only to our Lord's open ministry, but also to His becoming man. Even if the words μορφὴν δούλου λαβών did not directly refer to the incarnation, as they appear to do, nothing else can be understood by ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος. We cannot suppose St Paul to have meant, that our Lord was not in the likeness of men before His baptism and ministry, and became so then for the first time. On the contrary all accounts alike agree in representing this (so far as regards His earthly life) as the turning-point when He began to 'manifest forth His glory' (John ii. 11).' It was an exaggeration indeed when certain early heretics represented His baptism as the moment of His first assumption of Deity: but only by a direct reversal of the accounts in the Gospel could it be regarded in any sense as the commencement of His humanity. The whole context in St Paul clearly implies that the being born as man was the first step in His humiliation, as the death on the Cross was the last. In other words, it requires that ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων be referred to a point of time prior to the incarnation. Thus μορφή refers to the divine attributes. This being so, what meaning must we attach to 'the form of God' in which our Lord pre-existed? In the Clementine Homilies St Peter is represented as insisting upon the anthropomorphic passages in the Scriptures and maintaining therefrom that God has a sensible form (μορφή). To the objection of his opponent that if God has a form (μορφή), He must have a figure, a shape (σχῆμα) also, the Apostle is made to reply by accepting the inference: 'God has a σχῆμα; He has eyes and hands and feet like a man; nevertheless He has no need to use them'. Not such was St Paul's conception of God. Not in this sense could he speak of the μορφή, not in any sense could he speak of the σχῆμα, of Him who is 'King of kings and Lord of lords, who only hath immortality, who dwelleth in light unapproachable, whom no man hath seen or can see' (1 Tim. vi. 15, 16).' It remains then that μορφή must apply to the attributes of the Godhead. In other words, it is used in a sense substantially the same which it bears in Greek philosophy². It suggests the same idea which is otherwise expressed in ¹ Clem. Hom. xvii. 3, 7, 8. ² A passage in Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 9) fairly illustrates the distinction of μορφή and σχῆμα in St Paul. He says that Christians do not believe the idols formed by men's hands to have the form (μορφήν) of God; they have only the names and the shapes (σχήματα) of demons; the form of God is not of this kind (οὐ τοιαύτην ἔχειν τὴν μορφήν); His glory and form are ineffable (ἀρρητον δόξαν καὶ μορφὴν ἔχων). He thus appears to contrast the visible σχήματα of demons with the insensible immaterial μορφή of God. A corresponding distinction also seems to hold in the Pistis St John by ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ, in Christian writers of succeeding ages by νίος Θεοῦ ὦν Θεός, and in the Nicene Creed by Θεὸς ἐκ Θεοῦ. In accepting this conclusion we need not assume that St Paul consciously derived his use of the term from any philosophical nomenclature. There was sufficient definiteness even in its popular usage to suggest this meaning when it was transferred from the objects of sense to the conceptions of the mind. Yet if St John adopted λόγος, if St Paul himself adopted εἰκών, πρωτοτοκος, and the like, from the language of existing theological schools, it seems very far from improbable that the closely analogous expression μορφὴ Θεοῦ should have been derived from a similar source. The speculations of Alexandrian and Gnostic Judaism formed a ready channel, by which the philosophical terms of ancient Greece were brought within reach of the Apostles of Christ. Thus in the passage under consideration the μορφὴ is contrasted with the σχήμα, as that which is intrinsic and essential with that which is accidental and outward. And the three clauses imply respectively the true divine nature of our Lord (μορφὴ Θεοῦ), the true human nature (μορφὴ δοῦλου), and the externals of the human nature (σχήματι ὡς ἄνθρωπος)¹. Different interpretations of οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο. It will appear from the notes, that two principal interpretations of οὐχ ἀρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο have been proposed, depending on the different senses assigned to ἁρπαγμός. In the one the prominent idea is the assertion, in the other the surrender, of privileges. The one lays stress on the majesty, the other on the humility, of our Lord. These two interpretations may conveniently be considered side by side and discussed at greater length. 1. If ἁρπαγμός 'plundering' is taken to mean 'robbery,' 'usurpation,' then the expression asserts that the equality with God was the natural possession, the inherent right, of our Lord. This interpretation suits the Sophia, where both words occur several times, pp. 38, 184, 226, 246, 253, 272, 273, 274, 277; the former especially in the phrase ἀλήθεια μορφῆς opposed to similitude or copy (παράδειγμα, see p. 253), the latter in connexion with τύποι and παραδείγματα (see esp. 272 sq.). ¹ In the controversies of the fourth and fifth centuries great stress was laid by Catholic writers on the force of μορφή here. See for instance Hilary of Poitiers de Trin. viii. 45 (II. p. 245), Psalm cxxxviii. (I. p. 569), Ambrose Epist. 46 (II. p. 986), Greg. Nyss. c. Eunom. iv. p. 566 (ἡ δὲ μορφὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ ταὐτὸν τῇ οὐσίᾳ πάντων ἐστιν), and the commentators Victorinus, Ambrosiaster, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, on this passage. St Chrysostom especially discusses the matter at some length. It is not surprising that they should have taken this view, but they could hardly have insisted with such confidence on the identity of μορφή and οὐσία, unless they had at least a reasonable case on their side. I trust the investigation in the text will show that their view was not groundless, though their language might be at times overstrained. The context lost sight of. words themselves well enough, when isolated from their context, and so far is free from objection. But it takes no account of the clauses which immediately precede and follow. (1) It neglects the foregoing words. For the Apostle is there enforcing the duty of humility, and when he adds 'Have the mind which was in Jesus Christ,' we expect this appeal to our great Example to be followed immediately by a reference, not to the right which He claimed, but to the dignity which He renounced. The dislocation of thought caused by this interpretation is apparent; 'Be ye humble and like-minded with Christ, who partaking of the divine nature claimed equality with God.' The mention of our Lord's condescension is thus postponed too late in the sentence. (2) And again this interpretation wholly disregards the connexion with the words following. For in the expression οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο κ.τ.λ. ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκίνωσεν, the particles οὐχ and ἀλλὰ obviously correspond, 'not the one but the other'; so that ἐκίνωσεν ἑαυτὸν must contain the idea which directly contrasts with ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο. On the other hand the interpretation in question renders ἀλλὰ as equivalent to ἀλλ' ὅμως. Besides being unnatural in itself after οὐχ, this rendering fails entirely to explain the emphatic position of ἁρπαγμόν. Influence of the Latin fathers. This sense, which is adopted in our own English Version and has been extensively received in modern times, may probably be traced to the influence of the Latin fathers, who interpreted the rendering of the Latin Version without reference to the original. The Latin phrase 'rapinam arbitrari' did not convey the secondary meaning which was at once suggested by ἁρπαγμὸν (ἁρπαγμα) ἡγείσθαι; nor perhaps would the Latin particles 'non...sed' bring out the idea of contrast so strongly as οὐχ...ἀλλὰ. At all events it should be noticed, that while this interpretation is most common (though not universal) among Latin writers, it is unsupported by a single Greek father, unless possibly at a very late date. Such is the interpretation of TERTULLIAN de Resurr. Carn. 6, adv. Prax. 7, adv. Marc. v. 20; of the AMBROSIAN HILARY here; of ST AMBROSE de Fid. ii. 8 (IL p. 483 ed. Bened.) 'Quod enim quis non habet, rapere conatur; ergo non quasi rapinam habebat æqualitatem cum Patre etc.'; of PRIMASIUS here; and above all of ST AUGUSTINE who again and again quotes and explains the passage in his Sermons, 92 (v. p. 500 ed. Bened.), 118 (p. 587), 183 (p. 875), 186 (p. 885), 213 (p. 937), 244 (p. 1019), 264 (p. 1075), 292 (p. 1170), 304 (p. 1235); comp. in Psalm. xc (IV. p. 972). The distinctness with which this interpretation was enunciated by the greatest teacher of the Western Church would necessarily secure for it a wide reception. (2) ἁρπαγμός 'a prize.' 2. If on the other hand ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγείσθαι is considered equivalent to the common phrase ἁρπαγμα ἡγείσθαι, so that ἁρπαγμός will signify 'a prize,' 'a treasure,' then the logical connexion with the context before and after is strictly preserved: 'Be humble as Christ was humble: He, though existing before the worlds in the form of God, did not treat His equality with God as a prize, a treasure to be greedily clutched and ostentatiously displayed: on the contrary He resigned the glories of heaven.' The only objection to this rendering, the form ἁρπαγμός in place of ἁρπαγμα, has been considered in the notes. This is the common and indeed almost universal interpretation of the Greek fathers, who would have the most lively sense of the requirements of the language. So it is evidently taken in the earliest passage where it is quoted, in the Epistle of the CHURCHES OF GAUL (Euseb. II. E. v. 2), where praising the humility of the martyrs they say ἐπὶ τοσεύτου ζηλωταὶ καὶ μιμηταὶ Χριστοῦ ἐγένοντο, ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, evidently thinking this clause to contain in itself a statement of His condescension. So ORIGEN clearly takes it; in Joann. VI. § 37 (IV. p. 156 D) μέχρι θανάτου καταβαίνειν ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγούμενον τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, καὶ κενοῦν ἑαυτὸν κ.τ.λ.; in Matth. Comm. Ser. (III. p. 916 C) 'Vere Jesus non rapinam arbitratus est esse se æqualem Deo, et non semel sed frequenter pro omnibus seipsum humiliavit'; in Rom. v. § 2 (IV. p. 553 A) 'Nec rapinam ducit esse se æqualem Deo, hoc est, non sibi magni aliquid deputat quod ipse quidem æqualis Deo et unum cum patre sit'; ib. x. § 7 (IV. p. 672 C) 'Christus non sibi placens nec rapinam arbitrans esse se æqualem Deo semetipsum exinanivit.' So too METHODIUS; Methodius. Fragm. p. 105 (Jahn) αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, τιμῶν αὐτὸ [τὸ μαρτύριον] ἐμαρτύρησεν, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγησάμενος τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, ἵνα καὶ τούτῳ τὸν ἄνθρωπον τῷ χαρίσματι εἰς ὃν κατέβη στέψῃ. So again EUSEDIUS Eusebius. unmistakeably; Eccl. Proph. iii. 4 ἐγενήθη πένης, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγούμενος τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ ἀλλ' ἑαυτὸν ταπεινῶν κ.τ.λ.; Eccles. Theol. i. 13 (p. 57) προϋπάρχων, θεότητι πωρικῆς δόξης τετιμημένος· οὐ μὴν ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγούμενος τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ ἑαυτὸν δ' οὖν κενώσας κ.τ.λ.; comp. ib. i. 20 (p. 94). So also THEODORE OF MOFSUESTIA (Raban. Maur. Op. VI. p. 488 B ed. Migne) Theodore. 'Non magnam reputavit illam quæ ad Deum est æqualitatem et elatus in sua permansit dignitate, sed magis pro aliorum utilitate præelegit humiliora etc.'; and after him THEODORET, interpreting the passage, τὴν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἰσότητα ἔχων οὐ μίγα τοῦτο ὑπέλαβε. So moreover the PSEUDO-ATHANASIUS Hom. de Sem. (Athan. Op. II. p. 49 ed. Bened.) χρισθεὶς δὲ ὁ Δαυειδ εἰς βασιλεία οὐχ ἅμα ἥρπασε τὴν βασιλείαν ἀλλ' ἠνείχετο πολλοῖς χρόνοις δουλεύων τῷ Σαούλ' καὶ ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν γεννηθεὶς βασιλεὺς πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων...ἠνείχετο, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ κ.τ.λ. So in like manner ISIDORE OF PELUSIUM Epist. iv. 22 εἰ ἔρμαιον ἠγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσον οὐκ ἂν ἑαυτὸν ἐταπείνωσεν...δοῦλος μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἐλευθερωθεὶς καὶ υἱοθεσίᾳ τιμηθεὶς ἄτε ἁρπαγμα ἢ εὕρημα τὴν ἀξίαν ἠγησάμενος οὐδ' ἂν ὑποσταίῃ οἰκενικὸν ἔργον ἀνύσαι' ὁ δὲ γνήσιος υἱὸς κ.τ.λ.; and CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA c. Jul. vi (VI. p. 195 ed. Aubert.) ὁ μὲν γὰρ τῶν ὅλων σωτὴρ καὶ Κύριος, καίτοι μετὸν αὐτῷ τὸ ἐν μορφῇ καὶ ἰσότητι τῇ κατὰ πᾶν ὁτιοῦν ὁρᾶσθαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα καὶ τοῖς τῆς θεότητος ἐναβρύνεσθαι θάκοις, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἠγήσατο κ.τ.λ. (where the καίτοι is decisive). In addition to this positive testimony it should be noticed, that throughout the important controversies of the fourth and fifth centuries it does not seem once to have occurred to any Greek father to put forward the other explanation of the passage, though so eminently favourable to the orthodox belief¹. ¹ It is not clear what interpretation was adopted by Didymus of Alexandria de Trin. i. 26 (p. 73). Τί τῆς ἰσότητος ταύτης εὑρίσκεται ἄνισον; οὐχ ἥρπασε γάρ, φησίν, οὐκ ἔλαβε τὸ ἴσον εἶναι τῇ φύσει τῷ Θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ· καὶ δὴ ὁ μὴ ὑπ' ἄλλου κενωθεὶς ἑαυτὸν δὲ κενώσας αὐθέντην δεσπότην ὁμοῦ καὶ Also by Hilary and Jerome. The two senses compared. A middle course taken by Chrysostom. Objection to his explanation. Nor is the interpretation thus generally adopted by Greek writers confined to them alone. Some of the most acute and learned of the Latin fathers explain it in the same way. Thus perhaps HILARY OF POITIERS de Trin. viii. 45 (II. p. 246 ed. Bened.) 'Non sibi rapiens esse se æqualem Deo, ad susceptionem se formas servilis per obedientiam exinanivit...non tamen æqualem se Deo per rapinam existimans quamvis in forma Dei et æqualis Deo per Deum Deus signatus exstaret¹'; and more clearly JEROME ad Hedib. Q. 9 (Epist. 120, I. p. 837) 'Pro quibus non rapinam arbitratus est se esse æqualem Deo sed semetipsum exinanivit'; see also his notes on Gal. iv. 12, v. 14³. In comparing these two interpretations, it will be seen that while the former makes οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο a continuation and expansion of the idea already contained in ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, 'He existed in the form of God and so did not think it usurpation to be equal with God'; the latter treats the words as involving a contrast to this idea, 'He existed in the form of God but nevertheless did not eagerly assert His equality with God.' In short the two interpretations of the clause, as I have said before, are directly opposed, inasmuch as the one expresses our Lord's assertion, the other His cession, of the rights pertaining to His divine majesty. And between these two explanations—the one which interprets ἁρπαγμὸν by ἀδικίαν, and the other which interprets it by ἔρμαιον—our choice must be made. A middle interpretation however was maintained by St Chrysostom, and has been adopted with more or less distinctness by others, especially in recent times. It agrees very nearly with the first in the sense assigned to ἁρπαγμός, and yet approaches to the second in the general drift of the clause. 'Being in the form of God, He did not consider that He was plundering, when He claimed equality with God. He did not therefore look upon His divine prerogatives as a booty of which He feared to be deprived and which therefore it was necessary to guard jealously. He reigned not as a tyrant but as a lawful sovereign. He could therefore divest himself of the outward splendours of His rank without fear².' As an indirect doctrinal inference from the passage, this account is admissible; but as a direct explanation of its bearing, it is faulty because it understands too much, requiring links to be supplied which the connexion does not suggest and which interrupt the sequence of thought. ἀξίων ἑαυτὸν ἀπέδειξεν: comp. ib. iii. 17 (p. 377). The expression οὐχ ἥρπασε however seems to point to an intermediate interpretation like the one adopted by Chrysostom, as given in the text. Nothing can be inferred from the language of St Basil adv. Eunom. iv. (I. p. 294 F. 295 A), or from Liturg. S. Bas. p. 158 (Neale). ¹ Yet in another passage c. Const. Imper. § 19 (II. p. 577) he says, 'Non rapit quod erat Christus,' which points to the other sense of ἁρπαγμός. Perhaps he, like Chrysostom, adopted a middle interpretation combining features of both. ² This is probably the view also of Victorinus in his commentary on the passage, 'Ergo nunc Paulus, Non, inquit, Christus rapinam credidit, id est, hoc sibi vindicavit, tantum habere voluit ut forma Dei esset, sed etiam se ipsum exinanivit etc.'; but his language is not distinct. See again his treatise c. Aríum i. 9, Galland Bibl. Vet. Patr. VIII. p. 155. ³ Op. XI. p. 245. I have abridged his explanation. All similar attempts to mediate between the two opposing explanations fail in the same way and tend only to confuse the interpretation of the passage. Of the two explanations then, between which our choice lies, the context, as I have shown, seems imperatively to require the second; and if authority count for anything, the list of names, by which it is maintained, sufficiently refutes the charge of being 'liable to grave suspicion on theological grounds.' We should do wisely however to consider its doctrinal bearing, without reference to authority. Now while the other explanation directly asserts our Lord's divinity, this confessedly does not. Yet on the other hand the theological difference is only apparent. For, though we miss the direct assertion in this particular clause, the doctrine still remains. It is involved in the preceding words, for the 'pre-existence in the form of God,' as will appear I think from the last note, means substantially this. It is indirectly implied moreover in this very clause taken in connexion with the context. For how could it be a sign of humility in our Lord not to assert His equality with God, if He were not divine? How could such a claim be considered otherwise than arrogant and blasphemous, if He were only a man? If St Chrysostom's interpretation must be rejected as faulty and confused, his argument at least is valid; 'No one wishing to exhort to humility says, Be humble and think less of yourself than of your compeers (Ἕλαττον φρόνει τῶν ὁμοτίμων), for such and such a person being a slave did not set himself up against his master; therefore imitate him. Nay, one might reply, here is a question not of humility, but of infatuation (ἀπονοίας)'; 'It is no humility for the inferior not to set himself up against his superior'; 'If being a man, He washed the feet of men, He did not empty, did not humble Himself; if being a man, He did not grasp at equality with God, He deserves no praise¹.' One who refuses to claim some enviable privilege may be influenced by either of two motives, by a feeling of humility or by a sense of justice, according as he has or has not a right to this privilege. Those who hold humanitarian views of the Person of Christ necessarily take the latter view of the motive in this instance. The equality with God, they argue, was not asserted, because it would have been an act of usurpation to do so. To this view it may fairly be objected, that it overlooks the true significance of ἁρπαγμὸν (ἁρπαγμα) ἡγεῖσθαι, which as a recognised phrase is equivalent to ἔρμαιον ἡγεῖσθαι and therefore refers to the desirableness of the possession or acquisition. But its fatal condemnation is this, that it treats the clause as isolated and takes no account of the context. The act expressed by οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο is brought forward as an example of humility, and can only be regarded as such, if the expression τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ refers to rights which it was an act of condescension to waive². Theological bearing of the interpretation adopted. It does not favour humanitarian views. ¹ Op. xi. pp. 136, 237, 247. ² One other interpretation put forward by recent commentators deserves attention. Meyer (followed by Dean Alford), desirous of giving ἁρπαγμὸν the active sense which its termination suggests, translates the words, 'Did not look upon His being on an equality with God, as a means of self-enrichment.' In answer to the mechanical objection urged against this sense, that a state (τὸ εἶναι) cannot be regarded as an action (ἁρπαγμὸν), he justly appeals to 1 Tim. vi. 5 νομιζόντων πορισμὸν εἶναι Lost Epistles to the Philippians? Supposed reference to such in the Epistle itself and in Polycarp. Probabilities considered. It has been maintained by some, that a passage in the Epistle to the Philippians implies a more or less sustained correspondence between St Paul and his converts, so that the extant letter is only a single link in a long chain. 'To write the same things,' says St Paul, 'to me is not irksome, while for you it is safe.' The reference, it is urged, cannot be explained from the epistle itself, since it does not supply any topic which satisfies the two conditions, of occurring in the immediate context, and of being repeated elsewhere in the course of the letter. Moreover the inference thus suggested is thought to be confirmed by an allusion in the Epistle of Polycarp. Writing to these same Philippians, he says (§ 3); 'Neither I nor another like me can attain to the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul; who coming among you taught the word of truth accurately and surely before the men of that day; who also when absent wrote letters (ἐπιστολάς) to you, into which if ye search ye can be builded up unto the faith given to you.' Against this view no objection can be taken from the probabilities of the case. On the contrary it is only reasonable to suppose, that during the ten or eleven years which elapsed between the epoch of their conversion and the date of this epistle, the Apostle, ever overflowing with love and ever prompt to seize the passing opportunity, would have written not once or twice only to converts with whom his relations were so close and affectionate. And—to consider the broader question—if we extend our range of view beyond the Philippians to the many churches of his founding, if we take into account not these ten years only but the whole period of his missionary life, we can hardly resist the conclusion that in the epistles of our Canon we have only a part—perhaps not a very large part—of the whole correspondence of the Apostle either with churches or with individuals. But, if there be any reluctance to allow that the letter of an inspired Apostle could have been permitted to perish, a moment's thought will dissipate the scruple. Any theory of inspiration, which would be consistent with historical fact, must find a place for this supposition. It is true of Him who 'spake as never man spake,' that if all His words had been preserved, 'the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.' Yet His recorded sayings may be read through in a very few hours. And τὴν εὐσέβειαν, which presents an exact parallel in this respect. This interpretation suits the context very fairly, but it seems to me to be somewhat strained; and the fact that ἄρπαγμα ἡγεῖσθαι (ποιεῖσθαι) is a common phrase meaning 'to prize highly, to welcome eagerly,' and that ἄρπαγμόν ἡγεῖσθαι (ποιεῖσθαι), wherever else it occurs, has also this sense, would appear to be decisive. Meyer indeed attempts to force his own meaning on ἄρπαγμόν in the passage of Cyril, de Ador. i. p. 25, quoted above (in the notes, p. 111); but when this writer, speaking of Lot's renewal of the offer of hospitality when declined by the angels, describes this importunity by οὐχ ἄρπαγμόν τὴν παραίτησιν ἐποιεῖτο, it is difficult to conceive that the phrase can mean anything else but 'did not eagerly close with, did not gladly welcome their refusal.' on the ground of inspiration we cannot assuredly claim for the letters of the Apostle an immunity from the ravages of time, which was denied to the words of the Saviour Himself. The 'litera scripta' indeed has a firmer hold on life. But the difficulty of multiplying copies, the strife of parties within the Church, and the perils assailing the brotherhood from without, are sufficient to explain the loss of any documents in the earlier ages. And from the nature of the case the letters of the Apostles could not have been so highly prized by their contemporaries, as by later generations. History confirms the suggestion which reason makes, that the writings of the first teachers of the Gospel grew in importance, as the echo of their voice died away. A letter from a dear friend is a poor substitute for the free interchange of conversation. But when he is taken from us, we know not how to value his correspondence highly enough¹. At all events indications are not wanting of other letters besides those which have been preserved for the instruction of the Church. The two short Epistles to the Thessalonians stand alone in a period which extends over at least twenty years before and after². Yet in one of these the Apostle calls attention to his mode of signature, as a guarantee of genuineness, which occurred 'in every epistle' written by him³. Such an expression would be conclusive, even if unsupported by other allusions, which suggest at least the suspicion that several letters may have passed between St Paul and his Thessalonian converts⁴. Again, his written communications with the Corinthians seem to have extended beyond the two extant epistles. In a passage in the First Epistle, according to the most probable interpretation, he directly alludes to a previous letter addressed to them⁵: and the acknowledgment of the Corinthians, which he elsewhere mentions, that his 'letters are weighty and powerful,' together with his own reply 'Such as we are by letters when absent etc.'⁶ cannot be ex- ¹ Prof. Jowett, Epistles of St Paul 1. p. 195 (2nd ed.), has an instructive essay on the probability of many epistles having been lost. With some of his special criticisms however I venture to disagree. He supposes for instance that 1 Cor. v. 9 refers to the First Epistle to the Corinthians itself, and that Col. iv. 16 does not refer to the Epistle to the Ephesians. ² Fourteen years at least, probably seventeen (see notes Gal. ii. 1), elapsed between St Paul's conversion and the third visit to Jerusalem (A.D. 51). The Epistles to the Corinthians, which probably follow next in order after the Epistles to the Thessalonians, were not written till A.D. 57, 58. Thus the whole period will be 20 or 23 years, according to the reckoning adopted. ³ 1 Thess. iii. 17. ⁴ 1 Thess. ii. 2, 15. ⁵ 1 Cor. v. 9 ἔγραψα ὑμῖν ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ μὴ συναναυγνῶσαι πόρνοι. The real difficulty in referring this allusion to the First Epistle itself lies not in ἔγραψα, which might be explained as an epistolary acriot, but in ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ 'in my letter,' which is thus rendered meaningless: see Journal of Class. and Sacr. Phil. ii. p. 196 (note). Two independent reasons have probably conspired to promote the unnatural explanation by which it is referred to the First Epistle. (1) On theological grounds commentators have been unwilling to admit that an epistle of St Paul could have perished: while (2) they have been misled critically by the context, ver. 11 νῦν δὲ ἔγραψα κ.τ.λ., taking νῦν in its primary temporal sense, whereas it appears to mean, 'under these circumstances,' 'the world being what it is.' ⁶ 2 Cor. A. 10, 11. [Laodicea.] plained quite satisfactorily (though the explanation might pass) by the single extant epistle written before this date. On the other hand the 'letter from Laodicea,' which the Apostle directs the Colossians to procure and read¹, must not be classed among these lost letters, as there is very good reason for supposing that he there refers to the circular letter to the Asiatic Churches, sent to Laodicea as one of the great centres and thence communicated to the neighbouring town of Colossæ, but circulated in the Church at large through the metropolis of Asia and therefore generally known as the Epistle to the Ephesians. Whether to these lost letters to Thessalonica and to Corinth we are required to add one or more addressed to the Philippians, I propose now to consider. The general question has only been introduced to prepare the way for this investigation. Explanations of Phil. iii. 1 examined. 1. The passage in the Epistle to the Philippians itself has been variously explained. Some have interpreted it 'to repeat in writing the same injunctions which I gave you myself by word of mouth,' or 'which I charged you by my messengers.' But such amplifications receive no encouragement from the words themselves, which mean simply 'to write the same things again and again.' To written communications therefore our attention must be confined. Even with this limitation, three solutions are offered. Either (1) The extant epistle itself consists of two separate letters welded together; or (2) A lost letter must be assumed in which the same subject was introduced; or (3) The often repeated topic must be discovered in the extant letter. The first of these solutions has been already considered and set aside²; nor indeed does it contribute anything towards the interpretation of this passage (though it would explain the plural in Polycarp), for no new topic is introduced by the disintegration of the existing letter. The second might very fairly be accepted in default of a better: but there is nothing in the words which suggests a reference to any incident external to the letter itself, and it is therefore simpler not to look elsewhere for the allusion. The third view then seems preferable, if any topic can be found which satisfies the conditions. And in the notes on the passage I have attempted to show that such a topic is not wanting. Allusion in Polycarp considered. 2. But the reference in the Epistle of Polycarp still remains to be explained. What account must be given of the 'letters,' which St Paul wrote to the Philippians? Does Polycarp, as some have thought, include the Thessalonian Epistles, which as being addressed to a neighbouring Church would be known and read at Philippi also? This is possible; but a simpler solution offers itself. Notwithstanding the plural ἐπιστολαί, the reference may be satisfied by the one extant Epistle to the Philippians. Of this usage of the plural ἐπιστολαί, applying to a single letter³, there can be no doubt. This will appear plainly from Thucyd. viii. 51 ὄσον οὐ παρούσαν ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἀλκιβιάδου περὶ τούτων ἐπιστολήν, compared with αἱ δὲ παρὰ τοῦ Ἀλκιβιάδου ἐπιστολαὶ οὐ πολὺ ὕστερον ἦκον; from Joseph. Ant. xii. 4. 10 ἐπιστολαί used of a single letter. ¹ Col. iv. 16. I hope to consider the question of the 'epistle from Laodicea' in the introduction to the Epistle to the Ephesians: see also Colossians p. 274 sq. ² See the introduction, page 69 note. ³ Thom. Mag. p. 354 καὶ ἐπιστολὴ καὶ ἐπιστολαὶ πληθυντικῶς· ῥητορικόν. ὁ Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλεὺς Ἄρειος πρεσβείων τε ἔπεμπε καὶ ἐπιστολάς ὡν τὸ ἀντίγραφόν ἐστι τοιοῦτον, compared with ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐπιστολὴ ἡ πεμφθεῖσα παρὰ τοῦ Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλέως τοῦτον περιείχε τὸν τρόπον¹: and from Alciphron Epist. ii. 4 ὡς διεπέμψω μου τοῦ βασιλέως τὰς ἐπιστολάς, εὐθὺς ἀνέγνων, compared with σοβοῦσα ταῖς χερσὶν ἑμαντῆς τὴν ἐπιστολὴν σὺν αὐτῇ τῇ βασιλικῇ σφραγίδι; the singular in each case standing in the immediate neighbourhood of the plural and referring to the same writing. I have placed these instances side by side, because the context in all three cases determines the sense, and because being taken from writers of different epochs they show that the usage was not confined to any one period. The following references also, which might be multiplied many times, serve to illustrate its occurrence in classical writers at different stages of the language: Eur. Iph. Taur. 589, 767, Iph. Aul. 111, 314, Thucyd. i. 132, iv. 50, Polyb. v. 43. 5, Lucian. Avar. 47 (II. p. 450), Julian. Epist. 73 (comp. Epist. 44)². Nor is this usage confined to classical Greek. In Esth. iii. 14 ἐπιστολαί is a translation of a singular substantive (כֹּהֵב); while in 1 Macc. v. 14, x. 3, 7, xi. 29, xii. 5 etc., it plainly refers to a single document. And in ecclesiastical writers of a later date examples are found. Eusebius (H. E. vi. 1) for instance, like the authors first quoted, uses ἐπιστολὴ and ἐπιστολαὶ in the same context when speaking of one and the same letter³. If therefore we find that in another place Polycarp, referring again to the Epistle to the Philippians, uses the singular (ἐπιστολή)⁴, this circumstance will present no difficulty; for we have seen similar variations of usage in the passages of Thucydides and Alciphron, of Josephus and Eusebius, where the anomaly is rendered more striking by the fact that in these authors the singular and plural occur in close proximity. But a later passage of this same father has been quoted to show that he carefully distinguishes between the singular and the plural of this word. 'The letters (ἐπιστολάς) of Ignatius,' he writes, 'which were sent to us by him, and such others as we had by us, we have sent to you, as ye commanded; all which (αἴτινες) are appended to this letter (ἐπιστολή); from which ye may derive great advantage' (§ 13). The plural here has been explained as referring to the two letters, the one to the Smyrnæans, the other to Polycarp, contained in the short Greek recension. This explanation, it will be seen, supposes either the genuineness of the short Greek recension of the Ignatian letters or the spuriousness of this portion of Polycarp's epistle. Into these questions it would be beside the purpose to enter here. I would only say that here again the ἐπιστολαὶ may very well be used of a single letter, and that on this supposition there is a certain propriety in the ¹ Comp. also Antiq. xiii. 4. 8. ² I owe a few of these references to Rettig Quæst. Phil. p. 38. ³ Comp. also H. E. vi. 43, quoted by Cotelier on Polyo. Phil. 3. The plural 'epistolæ' in Latin is used in the same way; Justin xi. 8, 12, Plin. N. II. xxxiii. 12, quoted by Fabric. Bibl. Græc. iv. p. 804 (ed. Harles). ⁴ Polyo. Phil. 11 'qui estis in principio epistolæ ejus,' where some word like 'laudati' should perhaps be supplied. Others however suppose the original Greek to have been οἱ ὄντες ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐπιστολαὶ αὐτοῦ, comparing for ἐν ἀρχῇ. Phil. iv. 15, and for ἐπιστολαὶ αὐτοῦ 2 Cor. iii. 2, 3. He does not refer to a lost letter. change from the plural to the singular, when the writer has occasion to speak of himself. For the plural ἐπιστολαί, which signifies properly 'directions, injunctions,' whenever it occurs in prose of a single epistle, seems to denote a missive of importance, such as a king's mandate or a bishop's pastoral; and its employment by Polycarp to designate his own letter would have jarred strangely with his pervading tone of humility, though it would fitly describe the communications of the blessed Apostle Paul (§ 3) or the holy martyr Ignatius (§ 13)¹. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/jblightfoot/ ²Βλέπετε τοὺς κύνας, βλέπετε τοὺς κακοὺς ἐρ- III. 2—6. 'Be on your guard. Shun these shameless dogs, these workers of mischief, these mutilators of the flesh. I call it mutilation, for we are the true circumcision, we offer the genuine service; we—you and I—Gentile and Jew alike—who serve by the Spirit of God, who place our boast in Christ Jesus and put no trust in the flesh. And yet, whatever be the value of this confidence in the flesh, I assert it as well. If any other man claims to put trust in the flesh, my claim is greater. I was circumcised on the eighth day, a child of believing parents. I am descended of an old Israelite stock. I belong to the loyal and renowned tribe of Benjamin. I am of a lineage which has never conformed to foreign usages, but has preserved throughout the language and the customs of the fathers. Thus much for my inherited privileges; and now for my personal career. Do they speak of law? I belong to the Pharisees, the strictest of all sects. Of zeal? I persecuted the Church. This surely is enough! Of righteousness? In such righteousness as consists in obedience to law, I have never been found a defaulter.' 2. A probable account of the abrupt introduction of this new topic is given in the introduction p. 69. As the Apostle is on the point of referring once more to the divisions in the Philippian Church before concluding, he is interrupted. Whether the interruption was momentary, or whether some hours or even days elapsed before the letter was resumed, it is vain to conjecture. But it has diverted, or at least modified, the current of his thoughts. He speaks no longer of the social dissensions actually prevalent among the Philippians; but he warns them against a much more serious though hitherto distant peril—the infection of Judaism. It seems probable therefore that he had meanwhile been apprised of some fresh outbreak or reminded of some old antagonism on the part of his Judaizing opponents in Rome; see p. 17. The thrice repeated 'mark ye,' together with the recurrence of the definite article in the three clauses—the dogs, the evil workers, the concision—shows that St Paul is alluding to a well known and well-marked party in or out of the Church. Βλέπετε] 'look to, be on your guard against, mark and watch.' Comp. Mark iv. 24 βλέπετε τί ἀκούετε, 2 Joh. 8 βλέπετε ἑαυτούς: so frequently βλέπετε ἀπό (e.g. Mark viii. 15) and βλέπετε μή (e.g. Luke xxi. 8). τοὺς κύνας] St Paul retorts upon the Judaizers the term of reproach, by which they stigmatized the Gentiles as impure. In the Mosaic law the word is used to denounce the foul moral profligacies of heathen worship (Deut. xxiii. 19 οὐ προσοίσεις μίσθωμα πόρνης οὐδὲ ἄλλαγμα κυνός). Among the Jews of the Christian era it was a common designation of the Gentiles, involving chiefly the idea of ceremonial impurity; see esp. Clem. Hom. ii. 19 εἶπεν Οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἰάσθαι τὰ ἔθνη ἑακότα κυσὶν διὰ τὸ διαφόροις χρῆσθαι τροφαῖς καὶ πράξεσιν, ἀποδεδομένης τῆς κατὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τραπέζης τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ' ἡ δὲ τοῦτο ἀκούσασα, καὶ τῆς αὐτῆς τραπέζης ὡς κύων ψιχίων ἀποπιπτόντων συμμεταλαμβάνειν [δεομένη], μεταθεμένη ὅπερ ἦν, τῷ ὁμοίως διατάσθαι τοῖς τῆς βασιλείας υἱοῖς τῆς εἰς τὴν θυγατέρα, ὡς ἠξίωσεν, ἔτυχεν ἰάσεως. The writer thus interprets from a Judaizing point of view the incident in Matt. xv. 22 sq., where our Lord uses the Jewish phraseology of the day to test the faith of the Canaanite woman. See the rabbinical quotations in Schöttgen I. p. 1145. St John applies the term to those whose moral impurity excludes them from the new Jerusalem, the spiritual Israel, Apoc. xxii. 15. As a term of reproach the γάτας, βλέπετε τὴν κατατομήν. ἡμεῖς γὰρ ἔσμεν ἡ περιτομή, οἱ πνεύματι Θεοῦ λατρεύοντες καὶ καυχώμενοι word on the lips of a Jew signified chiefly 'impurity'; of a Greek, 'impudence.' The herds of dogs which prowl about eastern cities, without a home and without an owner, feeding on the refuse and filth of the streets, quarrelling among themselves, and attacking the passer-by, explain both applications of the image. To the Jew more especially the comparison of the heathen to a dog would commend itself, as describing his indiscriminate use of meats whether clean or not. Thus St Paul's language here is strikingly significant: 'They speak of themselves as God's children; they boast of eating at God's table; they reproach us as dogs, as foul and unclean, as outcasts from the covenant, because forsooth we eat meat bought at the shambles, because we do not observe the washing of cups and platters. I reverse the image. We are the children, for we banquet on the spiritual feast which God has spread before us: they are the dogs, for they greedily devour the garbage of carnal ordinances, the very refuse of God's table.' See the note on σκύβαλα ver. 8. κακούς ἐργάτας] So again he says of the Judaizing teachers 2 Cor. xi. 13 οἱ τοιοῦτοι ψευδαπόστολοι, ἐργάται δόλιοι. The proselytizing zeal of the party has been already noticed by St Paul, i. 15, 16. There he contemplates it as exerted upon heathendom, and with very mixed feelings he constrains himself to rejoice: here on the other hand he apprehends its assaults on a more liberal Christianity, and an unqualified condemnation is pronounced upon it. The Pharisaic party (Acts xv. 5) which 'compassed sea and land to make one proselyte' (Matt. xxiii. 15) had carried its old leaven into the Christian Church. There was the same zealous activity in the pursuit of its aims (ἐργάτας), and there were the same pernicious consequences in the attainment (κακούς). τὴν κατατομήν] 'the concision, the mutilation.' The corresponding verb κατατέμνειν is used in the LXX only of mutilations and incisions forbidden by the Mosaic law; Levit. xxi. 5 ἐπὶ τὰς σάρκας αὐτῶν οὐ κατατεμοῦσιν ἐντομίδας, 1 Kings xviii. 28 κατατέμνοντο κατὰ τὸν ἐθισμὸν αὐτῶν, Is. xv. 2, Hos. xvii. 14. Hence the appropriateness here: 'This circumcision, which they vaunt, is in Christ only as the gashings and mutilations of the idolatrous heathen': comp. Gal. v. 12 ὄφελον καὶ ἀποκόψονται, with the note. Thus it carries out the idea of κύνας. For the paronomasia of κατατομή, περιτομή, compare 2 Thess. iii. 11 μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους, Rom. xii. 3 μὴ ὑπερφρονεῖν παρ' ὁ δεῖ φρονεῖν ἀλλὰ φρονεῖν εἰς τὸ σωφρονεῖν: see Winer § lxviii. p. 793 sq. See the monograph by J. F. Böttcher de Paron. etc. Paulo freq. (Lips. 1823); and for instances in the Old Testament Glass. Phil. Sacr. v. ii. 2, p. 926. But, though especially frequent in the Bible, they are naturally common everywhere. The saying of Diogenes, that the school of Euclides was not σχολή but χολή and the discourse of Plato not διατριβή but κατατριβή (Diog. Laert. vi. 24), may be matched in English by the ambassador's complaint that he had been sent not to Spain but to Pain, or Leicester's report of the English troops in the Netherlands that the Queen's 'poor subjects were no better than abjects,' or Coleridge's description of French philosophy as 'psilosophy,' or again in Latin by the taunt of pope against antipopo that he was not 'consecratus' but 'execratus,' or the common proverb 'compendia dispendia.' See also Farrar's Chapters on Language p. 265 sq. 3. ἡμεῖς κ.τ.λ.] 'We are the true ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἐν σαρκὶ πεποιθότες. Ἀκάπερ ἐγὼ ἔχων πεποίθησιν καὶ ἐν σαρκί· εἴ τις δοκεῖ ἄλλος circumcision; we, who have put off the impurity of the heart and have put on Christ, whether belonging to the outward circumcision, as I, or to the outward uncircumcision, as you.' ἡ περιτομή] The contrast of the material and the spiritual circumcision occurs more than once elsewhere in St Paul: Rom. ii. 25 29, Col. ii. 11, comp. Ephes. ii. 11 οἱ λεγόμενοι ἀκροβυστία ὑπὸ τῆς λεγομένης περιτομῆς ἐν σαρκὶ χειροποιήτου. In this respect, as in so many others, St Stephen's speech contains an anticipation of St Paul: Acts vii. 51 ἀπερίτμητοι καρδίοις καὶ τοῖς ὠσίν. The use made of the image of circumcision, as a metaphor for purity, in the Old Testament had prepared the way for the Apostle's application: e.g. the circumcision of the heart, Levit. xxvi. 41, Deut. x. 16, xxx. 6, Ezek. xliv. 7; of the ear, Jer. vi. 10; of the lips, Exod. vi. 12, 30; comp. Jer. ix. 25, 26. Thus too Philo discusses at some length the significance of this rite, as a symbol of moral purgation, de Circum. II. p. 211 M, comp. de Vict. Off. II. p. 258 N. So too Justin. Dial. 12, p. 229 ο δευτέρας ἤδη χρεία περιτομῆς, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐπὶ τῇ σαρκὶ μέγα φρονεῖτε (comp. § 19, p. 236 o), § 43, p. 26: ο οὐ ταύτην τὴν κατὰ σάρκα περιλάβομεν περιτομὴν ἀλλὰ πνευματικήν, Barnab. § 9. πνεύματι Θεοῦ] 'by the Spirit of God,' and not with the ordinances and traditions of men. Thus Θεοῦ, besides being the better supported reading, is also more emphatic than Θεῷ. The latter however presents a closer parallel to Rom. i. 9 ὁ Θεὸς ᾧ λατρεύω ἐν τῷ πνεύματί μου. See the next note. λατρεύοντες] The terms λατρεία, λατρεύειν, had got to be used in a very special sense to denote the service rendered to Jehovah by the Israelite race, as His peculiar people: see especially Rom. ix. 4 ὧν ἡ υἱοθεσία κ.τ.λ. PHIL. καὶ ἡ λατρεία καὶ αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι, Acts xxvi. 7 εἰς ἣν τὸ δωδεκάφυλον ἡμῶν ἐν ἐκτενείᾳ νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν λατρεύων κ.τ.λ.; comp. Heb. ix. 1, 6. Hence the significance of St Paul's words here; 'We possess the true περιτομή, the circumcision not of the flesh but of the heart, and we also offer the true λατρεία, the service not of external rites but of a spiritual worship': comp. Joh. iv. 23, 24. The same opposition between the external and the spiritual λατρεία is implied again in Rom. xii. 1 παραστήσαι τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν θυσίαν ζῶσαν ἁγίαν εὐάρεστον τῷ Θεῷ, τὴν λογικὴν λατρείαν ὑμῶν, besides Rom. i. 9 quoted in the previous note. Compare Athenag. Leg. 13 προσφέρειν δίον ἀπέμακτον θυσίαν καὶ τὴν λογικὴν προσάγειν λατρείαν, and see the note on iv. 18. This definite sense of λατρεύειν explains how it is used absolutely without any case of the object following, as in Luke ii. 37, Acts xxvi, 7. The substitution of Θεῷ for Θεοῦ here was probably an attempt to relieve the apparent awkwardness of this absolute use. κουχώμενοι κ.τ.λ.] in accordance with the precept in Jer. ix. 23, 24, twice quoted in a condensed form by St Paul, 1 Cor. i. 31, 2 Cor. x. 17, ὁ κουχώμενος ἐν Κυρίῳ κουχάσθω. οὐκ ἐν σαρκί] Comp. 2 Cor. xi. 18, Gal. vi. 13, 14. The expression ἐν σαρκὶ extends beyond περιτομή to all external privileges. 4. καίπερ ἐγὼ κ.τ.λ.] 'though having myself confidence.' The Apostle for the moment places himself on the same standing ground with the Judalzers and, adopting their language, speaks of himself as having that which in fact he had renounced: comp. 2 Cor. xi. 18 ἐπεὶ πολλοὶ κουχῶνται κατὰ [τὴν] σάρκα, κἀγὼ κουχῆσου. The proper force of ἔχων πεποίθησιν must not be explained away. The καίπερ ἐγὼ singles out the Apostle (comp. 1 Thess. πεποιθέναι ἐν σαρκί, ἐγὼ μᾶλλον· ⁵περιτομῇ ὀκταήμερος, ἐκ γένους Ἰσραήλ, φυλῆς Βενιαμείν, Ἑβραῖος ἐξ ii. 18), for the Philippians did not likewise possess these claims. καὶ ἐν σαρκί] 'in the flesh as well as in Christ; as if forsooth this one topic did not cover the whole field of boasting.' δοκεῖ πεποιθέναι] 'thinks to have confidence'; 'seems to himself' rather than 'seems to others'; for the former, besides being the more common meaning in St Paul (1 Cor. iii. 18, vii. 40, x. 12, xi. 16 etc.), is also more forcible. With ἐγὼ μᾶλλον we must understand δοκῶ πεποιθέναι in the same sense; 'If they arrogate to themselves these carnal privileges, I also arrogate them to myself.' St Paul is using an argumentum ad hominem; in his own language, he is for the moment 'speaking foolishly,' is 'speaking not after the Lord,' 2 Cor. xi. 17. See the preceding note. 5. This passage has a close parallel in 2 Cor. xi. 21; and the comparison is instructive. With the same depth of feeling and the same general purport, the form of expression in the two passages differs widely. The tumultuous eagerness of the Apostle's earlier style, which appears in the letter to the Corinthians, is replaced here by a more subdued, though not less earnest, tone of remonstrance. Compare also Rom. ix. 3-5, xi. 1. The four clauses at the beginning of the fifth verse, which describe the privileges inherited by the Apostle apart from his own act or will, are arranged in an ascending scale. (1) The due performance of the rite of circumcision shows that his parents were neither heathens nor sons of Ishmael. (2) But as this is consistent with their being proselytes, he specifies his direct Israelite descent. (3) Again, his ancestors might have been descendants of Israel and yet have belonged to a renegade tribe. Against this possibility he guards by naming the faithful tribe of Benjamin. (4) Lastly, many of those, whose descent was unimpeachable and who inherited the faith of the Mosaic law, yet as living among heathens adopted the language and conformed to the customs of the people around them. Not such were the forefathers of Saul of Tarsus. There had been no Hellenist among them; they were all strict Hebrews from first to last. περιτομῇ ὀκταήμερος] Converts to Judaism would be circumcised in mature ago; Ishmaelites in their thirteenth year. Concerning the latter see Joseph. Ant. i. 12. 2. For the dative περιτομῇ 'in respect of circumcision' comp. ii. 7 σχήματι εὑρεθείς, and see Winer § xxxi. p. 270. The nominative περιτομή, read in some texts, is hardly translatable. For ὀκταήμερος 'eight days old' compare τριήμερος (M. Anton. iv. 50), τετραήμερος (Arist. Pol. iii. 15), πενθήμερος (Xen. Hell. vii. 1. 14), δεχήμερος (Thucyd. v. 26, 32), etc. The passages quoted show that the words denote properly not interval but duration, so that 'on the eighth day' is not a very accurate translation. The broken days at the beginning and end are of course counted in to make up the eight. ἐκ γένους Ἰσραήλ] i. e. his parents were not grafted into the covenant people, but descended from the original stock. On the significance of 'Israel, Israelite,' as implying the privileges of the theocratic covenant, see the note on Gal. vi. 16. φυλῆς Βενιαμείν] As Benjamin gave to the Israelites their first king, as Benjamin alone was faithful to Judah at the disruption, so also this tribe had from the earliest times held the post of honour in the armies of the nation. 'After thee, O Benjamin' was a battle-cry of Israel; Judges v. 14, Hos. v. 3. The glory of the Benjamite however did not end here. He re- Ἑβραίων, κατὰ νόμον Φαρισαῖος, κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐν νόμῳ γενόμενος membered with pride that his forefather alone of the twelve patriarchs was born in the land of promise (see the words put into the mouth of Mordecai in Megill. Esth. iii. 4, quoted by Wetstein). He would also recall the great national deliverance wrought by means of a Benjamite, which was commemorated in the yearly festival of Purim. St Paul mentions his descent from Benjamin again Rom. xi. 1. He doubtless derived his name 'Saul' directly or indirectly from the Benjamite king, to whom he himself refers with marked emphasis (Acts xiii. 21). At a very early date the prediction in Jacob's blessing of Benjamin (Gen. xlix. 27). 'In the morning he shall devour the prey and at night he shall divide the spoil,' was applied to the persecuting zeal and later conversion of St Paul; Test. xii Patr. Benj. 11, Tortull. adv. Marc. v. 1, Hippol. Fragm. 50 (p. 140 Lagarde), Ephr. Syr. IV. pp. 114, 193, (comp. p. 288); see Galatians p. 321. On the character of Saul of Tarsus in connexion with the character of the tribe see Stanley Jewish Church II. p. 40. 'Ἑβραῖος ἐξ Ἑβραίων] As Ἰουδαῖος is opposed to Ἑλλην in the New Testament (e.g. Rom. i. 16), so is Ἑβραῖος to Ἑλληνιστής (Acts vi. 1). In other words, while the former pair of terms expresses a contrast of race and religion, the latter implies difference of language and manners. Within the pale of the Jewish Church a man was Ἰουδαῖος, who traced his descent from Jacob and conformed to the religion of his fathers, but he was not Ἑβραῖος also, unless he spoke the Hebrew tongue and retained Hebrew customs: see Trench N. T. Syn. § xxxix. p. 129. Hence here, as in 2 Cor. xi. 22, 'Hebrew' implies something which is not expressed in 'Israelite.' Though St Paul was born in Tarsus, he was yet brought up under a great Hebrew teacher in the Hebrew metropolis (Acts xxii. 3); he spoke the 'Hebrew' language fluently (xxi. 40, xxii. 2); he quotes frequently from the Hebrew Scriptures which he translates for himself, thus contrasting with his contemporaries the Jewish Philo and the Christian writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who commonly use the Hellenistic version of the Seventy. The tradition mentioned by Jerome on Philem. 23 (vii. p. 762, ed. Vallarsil), that St Paul's parents lived in the Galilean town of Gischals and were driven thence by the Roman invasion, contains its own refutation in a manifest anachronism; but it seems to illustrate St Paul's statement here, for it may rest on a reminiscence of the long residence of his family in those parts. For the form of expression 'Ἑβραῖος ἐξ Ἑβραίων, 'a Hebrew and of Hebrew ancestry', comp. Herod. ii. 143 πίρωμιν ἐκ πιρώμιος, Demosth. Andr. p. 614 δούλους ἐκ δούλων καλῶν ἑαυτοῦ βελτίους καὶ ἐκ βελτιόνων, Polyb. ii. 59. 1 οὐ μόνον γεγονέσαι τύραννον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ τυράννων πεφυκέναι, with other passages collected in Wetstein and Kypke. Having thus enumerated his inherited privileges, the Apostle goes on to speak of matters which depended on his own personal choice. Here are three topics of boasting. (1) As regards law, he attached himself to the sect which was strictest in its ritual observance. (2) As regards zeal, he had been as energetic as any of his countrymen in persecuting the Church. (3) As regards righteousness, he had left nothing undone which the law required. 'Ἰων,' not 'the law'; for though the Mosaic law is meant, yet it is here regarded in the abstract, as a principle of action, being coordinated with ζῆλος and δικαιοσύνην. For the 10—2 ἄμεμπτος. $^(7)$[ἀλλὰ] ἄτινα ἦν μοι κέρδη, ταῦτα ἠγημαι διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν ζημίαν. $^(8)$ἀλλὰ μὲν οὖν [καὶ] ἠγούμαι πάντα ζημίαν εἶναι διὰ τὸ ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως Χρισ- 7. ἄτινα μοι ἦν κέρδη. 8. ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε [καὶ] ἠγούμαι. distinction of νόμος and ὁ νόμος see the notes on Gal. ii. 19, iv. 4, 5 21, v. 18, vi. 13. Φαρισαῖος] Acts xxiii. 6 ἐγὼ Φαρισαῖος εἰμι υἱὸς Φαρισαίων (where υἱὸς Φαρισαίων perhaps refers rather to his teachers than to his ancestors, being a Hebraism like 'the sons of the prophets'; comp. Amos vii. 14), xxvi. 5 κατὰ τὴν ἀκριβεστάτην αἴρεσιν τῆς ἡμετέρας θρησκείας ἔζησα Φαρισαῖος, xxii. 3 πεπαιδευμένος κατὰ ἀκριβείαν τοῦ πατρῴου νόμου. Similarly St Paul calls himself ζηλωτὴς τῶν ποτρικῶν παραδόσεων in Gal. i. 14: see the note there. 6. κατὰ ζῆλος κ.τ.λ.] An expression of intense irony, condemning while he seems to exalt his former self: 'I was zealous above them all; I asserted my principles with fire and sword; I persecuted, imprisoned, slew these infatuated Christians; this was my great claim to God's favour.' This condensed irony is more common in the earlier epistles: e.g. 1 Cor. iv. 8, 2 Cor. xi. 1, 7, 19. The correct reading is ζῆλος (not ζῆλον), for which form see Winer § ix. p. 76, A. Buttmann p. 20. In Clem. Rom. §§ 3, 4, 5, 6, where the word occurs frequently, the masculine and neuter seem to be interchanged without any law. διώκων] The references to his persecution of the Church are frequent in St Paul: see the note on Gal. i. 13 καθ' ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. τὴν ἐν νόμῳ] added to qualify and explain δικαιοσύνην; 'Such righteousness as consists in law, in obedience to formal precepts', but not the true righteousness: see ver. 9. Here ἐν νόμῳ is used without the article for the same reason as in ver. 5. γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος] 'showing my- self blameless', i.e. 'I omitted no observance however trivial', for μέμφεσθαι applies to sins of omission. ἄτινα κ.τ.λ.] 'All such things which I used to count up as distinct items with a miserly greed and reckon to my credit—these I have massed together under one general head as loss'. This paraphrase is intended to bring out, though with a necessary exaggeration, the idea faintly expressed by the change from the plural (κέρδη) to the singular (ζημίαν). Otherwise there would be a natural tendency to make both plural or both singular: comp. Menand. Mon. 301 (Meineke iv. p. 348) κέρδος πονηρὸν ζημίαν ἀεὶ φέρει with ib. 496 (p. 354) τὰ μικρὰ κέρδη ζημίας μεγάλας φέρει. For ἄτινα, denoting 'the class of things', see the notes on Gal. iv. 24, v. 19. διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν] 'for Christ', i.e. as it is explained below (ver. 8), ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω. To this end it was necessary first to renounce all other claims to righteousness: see especially Gal. v. 4. 8. ἀλλὰ μὲν οὖν κ.τ.λ.] 'may moreover I do count all things etc.'; see Winer § liii. p. 552. This combination of particles introduces the present statement as an amendment and extension of the former. The advance consists in two points; (1) The substitution of the present for the perfect (ἠγούμαι for ἠγημαι); (2) The expansion of ταῦτα into πάντα. διὰ τὰ ὑπερέχον κ.τ.λ.] The preposition may mean either 'for the sake of' (as in διὰ τὸν Χριστὸν above and δι' ὃν below); or, as the sense of ὑπερέχον suggests, 'by reason of', signifying that the surpassing worth of this knowledge eclipses and annihilates all other gains in comparison; τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου μου, δι' ὃν τὰ πάντα ἐζημιώθην καὶ ἠγούμαι σκύβαλα, ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω ⁹ καὶ εὑρεθῶ ἐν αὐτῷ μὴ ἔχων ἐμὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου, ἀλλὰ as 2 Cor. iii. 10 οὐ δεδόξασται τὸ δεδο- ξασμένον ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει εἵνεκεν τῆς ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης. τοῦ Κυρίου μου] See the note on i. 3. τὰ πάντα ἐζημιώθην] 'I suffered the confiscation, was mulcted, of all things together.' For τὰ πάντα, which is somewhat stronger than πάντα, comp. Rom. viii. 32, xi. 36, 1 Cor. viii. 6, etc. σκύβαλα] The word seems to signify generally 'refuse', being applied most frequently in one sense or other to food, as in Plut. Mor. p. 352 ὑπερίττωμα δὲ τροφῆς καὶ σκύβαλον οὐδὲν ἁγνὸν οὐδὲ καθαρὸν ἐστι' ἐκ δὲ τῶν περιττωμάτων ἔρια καὶ λάχναι καὶ τρίχες καὶ ὄνυχες ἀναφύονται. The two significations most common are: (1) 'Excrement,' the portion of food rejected by the body, as not possessing nutritive qualities: e.g. Joseph. B. J. v. 13. 7. This sense is frequent in medical writers. (2) 'The refuse or leavings of a feast,' the food thrown away from the table: e.g. Leon. Alex. 30 (Anthol. II. p. 196) ὡς ἀποδεικνυδίου γευσόμενος σκυβάλου, Aristo 2 (ib. II. p. 258) δεῖπνον συχνὸν ἀπὸ σκυβάλων, Adesp. 13 (ib. iii. p. 253) ἐρρίφθω ξηροῖς φυρόμενον σκυβάλοις, Q. Mæc. 8 (ib. II. p. 238), Adesp. 386 (ib. III. p. 233); and metaphorically Heges. 4 (ib. I. p. 254) ἐξ ἀλὸς ἡμίβρωτον ἀνηνέγκαντο σαγηνεῖς ἄνδρα πολύκλαντον ναυτιλῆς σκύβαλον. So again σκυβάλισμα, Pseudo-Phocyl. 144 μηδ' ἄλλου παρὰ δατὸς ἰδῆς σκυβάλισμα τραπέζης. As regards derivation, it is now generally connected with σκώρ, σκατός (Benfey Wurzel. I. p. 628, II. p. 172, Lobeck Pathol. p. 92). This derivation countenances the former of the two senses given above; but Suidas explains the word, τὸ τοῖς κυσὶ βαλλόμενον κυσίβαλόν τι ὃν (comp. Etym. Mag. p. 719, 53); and so Pott, Etym. Forsch. II. p. 295, taking σκυ- to represent ἐκ κύνας and comparing σκορακίζειν. This account of the word seems at least as probable as the other; but whether correct or not, it would appear to have been the popular derivation, and from this circumstance the second of the two meanings would become more prominent than the first. At all events this meaning, which is well supported by the passages quoted, is especially appropriate here. The Judaizers spoke of themselves as banqueters seated at the Father's table, of Gentile Christians as dogs greedily snatching up the refuse meat which fell therefrom. St Paul has reversed the image. The Judaizers are themselves the dogs (ver. 2); the meats served to the sons of God are spiritual meats; the ordinances, which the formalists value so highly, are the mere refuse of the feast. The earnest reiteration of St Paul's language here expresses the intensity of his desire to produce conviction: κέρδη, κερδήσω—ἤγημαι, ἠγούμαι, ἠγούμαι· ζημίαν, ζημίαν, ἐζημιώθην—διὰ, διὰ, διὰ—πάντα, τὰ πάντα—Χριστόν, Χριστοῦ, Χριστόν; see aboro i. 9, 14, 27, ii. 2. 9. εὑρεθῶ] 'may be found'; perhaps at the great day of revelation (2 Cor. v. 3), perhaps more generally (1 Cor. iv. 2). For the frequent use of this word in Aramaised Greek see the note on Gal. ii. 17. ἐν αὐτῷ] 'in Christ', as part of Christ, as a member of His body. It is only by becoming one with Christ, that Christ's righteousness can become our righteousness. ἐμὴν δικαιοσύνην] 'Any righteousness that I may have or not have.' τὴν διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ, τὴν ἐκ Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει, ¹⁰τοῦ γνῶναι αὐτόν καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ καὶ κοινωνίαν [τῶν] παθημάτων αὐτοῦ, It is ἐμήν, not τὴν ἐμήν; for the latter would seem to assume the existence of such personal righteousness. Comp. Rom. x. 3 ἀγνοοῦντες γὰρ τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην καὶ τὴν ἰδίαν [δικαιοσύνην] ζητοῦντες στήσαι τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐχ ὑπετάγησαν. St Paul is applying and extending the language of the Old Testament: comp. Ps. lxxi. 16, Is. lxiv. 6. τὴν ἐκ νόμου] See above ver. 6; comp. Gal. ii. 16—21, iii. 10—12, 21, Rom. iii. 21—31, iv. 13, 14, ix. 30—32, x. 4, 5. ἀλλὰ κ.τ.λ.] Here διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ is opposed to ἐκ νόμου, and ἐκ Θεοῦ to ἐμήν, of the preceding clause. διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ] 'through faith in Christ.' The ἐκ of the former clause is changed into διὰ here, because faith is only the means, not the source, of justification: see the note on Gal. ii. 16. ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει] 'on the condition of faith'; as Acts iii. 16. The article (τῇ πίστει) is used here, because πίστεως has gone before; 'the faith thus supposed'. 10. 'That I may know Him. And when I speak of knowing Him, I mean, that I may feel the power of His resurrection; but to feel this, it is first necessary that I should share His sufferings.' The essence of knowing Christ consists in knowing the power of His resurrection; hence the words καὶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ are added by way of explanation. But these words again suggest another thought; no one can participate in His resurrection, who has not first participated in His death. Hence a further addition καὶ κοινωνίαν τῶν παθημάτων αὐτοῦ, which logically precedes τὴν δύναμιν κ.τ.λ., as appears from the explanation following, συμμορφιζόμενος τῷ θανάτῳ αὐτοῦ, εἴ πως κ.τ.λ. τοῦ γνῶναι] not simply 'know', but 'recognise, feel, appropriate'. On γινώσκειν see the notes to Gal. iii. 7, iv. 9. This intense sense of γινώσκειν, and even of εἰδέναι (e.g. 1 Thess. v. 12), is the more common in Biblical Greek, because both words are used in the lxx as renderings of γν which frequently has this sense. τὴν δύναμιν κ.τ.λ.] 'the power of His resurrection'; as the assurance of immortality (Rom. viii. 11, 1 Cor. xv. 14 sq.), as the triumph over sin and the pledge of justification (Rom. iv. 24, 25), as asserting the dignity and enforcing the claims of the human body (1 Cor. vi. 13—15, Phil. iii. 21); thus quickening and stimulating the whole moral and spiritual being (Rom. vi. 4 sq., Gal. ii. 20, Ephes. ii. 5, Col. ii. 12). On this see Westcott's Gospel of the Resurrection ii. § 31 sq. καὶ κοινωνίαν κ.τ.λ.] The participation in Christ's sufferings partly follows upon and partly precedes the power of His resurrection. It follows, as the practical result on our life; it precedes, as leading up to the full and final appreciation of this power. In this latter aspect it is taken up in the explanatory clause which comes immediately after, συμμορφιζόμενος κ.τ.λ. For the expression τὴν κοινωνίαν κ.τ.λ. comp. 2 Cor. i. 5 περρισεύει τὰ παθήματα τοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς κ.τ.λ., 1 Pet. iv. 13 κοινωνεῖτε τοῖς τοῦ Χριστοῦ παθήμασιν, Col. i. 24, Polyc. Phil. 9 πορὰ τῷ Κυρίῳ ᾧ καὶ συνέπαθον. See also for the idea the passages quoted in the next note. The τὴν before κοινωνίαν in the received text, besides being deficient in authority, severs the close connexion between 'the power of His resurrection' and 'the participation in His sufferings.' συμμορφιζόμενος κ.τ.λ.] See Rom. vi. 5 εἰ γὰρ σύμφυτοι γεγόναμεν τῷ συμμορφιζόμενος τῷ θανάτῳ αὐτοῦ, "εἶ πως καταντήσω εἰς τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν. ¹²οὐχ ὅτι ἤδη ἀμοιώματι τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἰσόμεθα, 2 Cor. iv. 10 πάντοτε τὴν νίκρως τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῷ σώματι περιφέροντες, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ φανερωθῇ ἐν τῇ θνητῇ σαρκὶ ἡμῶν κ.τ.λ.; comp. Rom. viii. 17, 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12. The conformity with the sufferings of Christ implies not only the endurance of persecution for His name, but all pangs and all afflictions undergone in the struggle against sin either within or without. The agony of Gethsemane, not less than the agony of Calvary, will be reproduced however faintly in the faithful servant of Christ. For συμμορφιζόμενος see the detached note on μορφὴ and σχῆμα above p. 130. εἶ πως καταντήσω] 'if so be I may attain.' The Apostle states not a positive assurance but a modest hope. For εἶ πως see Acts xxvii. 12 (optat.), Rom. i. 10 (fut.), xi. 14 (fut. or conj.). Here καταντήσω is probably the conjunctive, as εἰ καὶ καταλάβω follows immediately. The conjunctive with εἰ, barely tolerated in Attic prose (though less rare in poetry), is hardly more common in the Greek Testament. The only decisive instance seems to be εἰ καὶ καταλάβω below, ver. 12. In other passages (as Luke ix. 13, 1 Cor. ix. 11, xiv. 5, 1 Thess. v. 10, Rev. xi. 5) the possibility of error or the existence of various readings renders it more or less doubtful. τὴν ἐξανάστασιν κ.τ.λ.] The 'resurrection from the dead' is the final resurrection of the righteous to a new and glorified life. This meaning, which the context requires, is implied by the form of expression. The general resurrection of the dead, whether good or bad, is ἡ ἀνάστασις τῶν νεκρῶν (e.g. 1 Cor. xv. 42); on the other hand the resurrection of Christ and of those who rise with Christ is generally [ἡ] ἀνάστασις [ἡ] ἐκ νεκρῶν (Luke xx. 35, Acts iv. 2, 1 Pet. i. 3). The former includes both the ἀνάστασις ζωῆς and the ἀνάστασις κρίσεως (Joh. v. 29); the latter is confined to the ἀνάστασις ζωῆς. The received reading τῶν νεκρῶν for τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν, besides being feebly supported, disregards this distinction. Here the expression is further intensified by the substitution of ἐξανάστασις for ἀνάστασις, the word not occurring elsewhere in the New Testament. 12. In the following verses, though St Paul speaks of himself, his language seems really to be directed against the antinomian spirit, which in its rebound from Jewish formalism perverted liberty into license. It is necessary to supply a corrective to such false inferences drawn from the doctrine of grace broadly stated. This he does by pointing to his own spiritual insecurity, his own earnest strivings, his own onward progress. 'To continue in sin that grace may abound' gains no countenance either from his doctrine or from his example. Having thus prepared the way, he in the 18th verse directly condemns those professed followers who thus dragged his teaching in the dust. See the introduction p. 70. 12—16. 'Do not mistake me, I hold the language of hope, not of assurance. I have not yet reached the goal; I am not yet made perfect. But I press forward in the race, eager to grasp the prize, forasmuch as Christ also has grasped me. My brothers, let other men vaunt their security. Such is not my language. I do not consider that I have the prize already in my grasp. This, and this only, is my rule. Forgetting the landmarks already passed and straining every nerve and muscle in the onward race, I press forward over towards the goal, that I may win the prize of my heavenly rest whereunto God has called me in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, ἔλαβον ἢ ἤδη τετελείωμαι, διώκω δὲ εἰ καὶ καταλάβω, ἐφ' ᾧ καὶ κατελήμφθην ὑπὸ Χριστοῦ. ¹³ ἀδελφοί, ἐγὼ ἐμαυτόν οὐ λογίζομαι κατεληφέναι· ¹⁴ ἐν δέ, τὰ μὲν ὅπίσω ἐπιλανθανόμενος τοῖς δὲ ἔμπροσθεν ἐπεκτεινόμενος who have put away childish things, who boast that we are men in Christ, so resolve. Then, if in any matter we lose our way, God will at length reveal this also to us. Only let us remember one thing. Our footsteps must not swerve from the line in which we have hitherto trodden.' 12. οὐχ ὅτι κ.τ.λ.] The change of tense is not accidental. The aorist ἔλαβον points to a past epoch, to which ἐζημιώθην, κατελήμφθην, also refer; 'not as though by my conversion I did at once attain'. The perfect τετελείωμαι describes his present state; 'not as though I were now already perfected.' For οὐχ ὅτι compare 2 Cor. iii. 5, vii. 9, 2 Thess. iii. 9, and below iv. 11, 17. διώκω κ.τ.λ.] For the connexion of διώκειν and καταλαμβάνειν see Herod. ix. 58 διωκτέοι εἰσὶ εἰς ὁ καταλαμφθέντες κ.τ.λ., Lucian Hermoi. 77 ὠκύτεροι παραπολὺ διώκοντες οὐ κατέλαβον: compare LXX Exod. xv. 9, Eccles. xi. 10. For the meaning of these two words see the note on ἐπεκτεινόμενος ver. 14; for the conjunctive καταλάβω, the note on καταστήσω ver. 10. ἐφ' ᾧ; may mean either (1) 'Wherefore, whereunto,' thus fulfilling God's purpose; or (2) 'Because,' thus fulfilling his own duty. In this second sense ἐφ' ᾧ is apparently used Rom. v. 12, 2 Cor. v. 4. The former meaning seems more appropriate here, though the latter is better supported by St Paul's usage elsewhere. On the different senses of ἐφ' ᾧ see Fritzsche on Rom. I. p. 299. Others, as the English Version, understand an antecedent, καταλάβω ἐκεῖνο ἐφ' ᾧ (comp. Luke v. 25); but καταλάβω, like κατεληφέναι below, seems to be used absolutely, as ἔλαβον and διώκω also are used. 13. ἀδελφοί] 'my brothers,' with a view of arresting attention; see the notes on Gal. iii. 15, vi. 1, 18. ἐγὼ ἐμαυτόν] 'Facile hoc alii de Paulo existimare possent,' says Bengel. This however seems hardly to be the point of the expression. St Paul is not contrasting his own estimate of himself with other people's estimate of him, but his estimate of himself with others' estimate of themselves. He is in fact protesting against the false security, the antinomian recklessness, which others deduced from the doctrine of faith: see the notes on τέλειαι ver. 15, and on vv. 12, 19, and the introduction p. 70. 14. ἐν δέ] This usage may be illustrated by the classical expression δοοῖν θάτερον. It is difficult to say whether ἐν is a nominative or an accusative. If (with Winer § lxvi. p. 774) we may compare 2 Cor. vi. 13, it is the latter. τὰ ὅπίσω] i.e. the portion of the course already traversed. Compare Lucian Calumn. 12 οἷον τι καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς γυμνικοῖς ἀγῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν δρομέων γίγνεται· κἀκεῖ γὰρ ὁ μὲν ἀγαθὸς δρομεὺς τῆς ὕσπληγος εὐθὺς καταπεσούσης, μόνον τοῦ πρὸς ἐφίμενος καὶ τὴν διάνοιαν ἀποτεῖνας πρὸς τὸ τέρμα κ.τ.λ. ἐπεκτεινόμενος] 'superextensus: ocnlus manum, manus pedem prævertit et trahit,' is Bengel's paraphrase. The metaphor may possibly be derived from the chariot races in the Circus, as the epistle was written from Romo. On this supposition the meaning of ἐπεκτεινόμενος has been aptly illustrated by Virgil's 'Instant verbore torto Et proni dant lora' (Georg. iii. 106). To this view διώκω lends some support, for it is frequently said of charioteers (e.g. Soph. El. 738); but all the terms κατὰ σκοπὸν διώκω εἰς τὸ βραβεῖον τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. Ἰόσοι οὖν τέλειοι, τοῦτο φρονῶμεν· καὶ εἴ τι ἑτέρως φρονεῖτε, καὶ τοῦτο ὁ Θεὸς 15. τοῦτο φρονῶμεν. used are equally appropriate to the foot-race, and there seems no reason for departing from St Paul's usual metaphor. Moreover the not looking back, which showed a right temper in a runner (Lucian l. c.), would be fatal to the charioteer; see Themist. Orat. xv. p. 196 B ἀνδρὶ δὲ ἠνυχοῦντι... ἀνάγκη... τὰ μὲν πρὸς μὴ πᾶν ὑρῶν ὑπίσω δὲ ἀεὶ τετράφθαι τῇ γνώμῃ πρὸς τοὺς διώκοντας κ.τ.λ. The word occurs Iren. i. 11. 3 (comp. i. 2. 2). εἰς τὸ βραβεῖον] 'unto the prize'; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 24. This preposition is used, because the prize marks the position of the goal. The ἐπὶ of the common text is an obvious substitution for a more difficult reading. τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως] 'our heavenward calling'; so Philo Plant. § 6 p. 333 M πρὸς γὰρ τὸ θεῖον ἄνω καλεῖσθαι θέμις τοὺς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ καταπνευσθέντας, comp. Heb. iii. 1. The words ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ must be taken with κλήσεως; see 1 Cor. vii. 22, 1 Pet. v. 10. 15. ὅσοι οὖν τέλειοι] The τέλειοι are 'grown men' as opposed to children; e.g. 1 Cor. xiv. 20, Ephes. iv. 13, Heb. v. 14. They are therefore those who have passed out of the rudimentary discipline of ordinances (Gal. iv. 3, 4), who have put away childish things (1 Cor. xiii. 10—12), who have assumed the Apostle's ground respecting the law. The τέλειοι in fact are the same with the πνευματικοί: comp. 1 Cor. ii. 6 with iii. 1. But these men, who were proud of their manhood, who boasted their spiritual discernment, were often regardless of the scruples of others and even lax in their own lives. Hence the stress which St Paul here lays on the duty of moral and spiritual progress, as enforced by his own example. Thus in ὅσοι τέλειοι, 'all we who attained our manhood, our independence, in Christ', there is the same reproachful irony as in 1 Cor. viii. 1 οἴδαμεν ὅτι πάντες γνῶσιν ἔχομεν, in Rom. xv. 1 ἡμεῖς οἱ δυνατοί, and possibly also in Gal. vi. 1 ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοί. The epithet τέλειοι seems to have been especially affected by the party both at this time and later; comp. Barnab. 4 γενώμεθα πνευματικοί, γενώμεθα ναὸς τέλειος τῷ Θεῷ, Iren. i. 6. 4 ἑαυτοὺς δὲ ὑπερυψοῦσι, τελείους ἀποκαλοῦντες καὶ σπέρματα ἐκλογῆς (comp. § 3, where οἱ τελειότατοι is said in irony, and see also i. 13. 5, i. 18. 1, iii. 13. 5), Clem. Alex. Pard. i. 6 (p. 128 Potter) ἐμοὶ δὲ καὶ θαυμάζειν ἔπεισιν ὅπως σφᾶς τελείους τινὲς τολμῶσι καλεῖν καὶ γνωστικοὺς, ὑπὲρ τὸν ἀπόστολον φρονοῦντες, φυσιοῦμενοί τε καὶ φρυατόμενοι κ.τ.λ., Hippol. Hær. v. 8 οὐδεὶς τούτων τῶν μυστηρίων ἀκροατῆς γέγονεν εἰ μὴ μόνοι οἱ γνωστικοὶ τέλειοι, not without a reference to the secondary sense of the word, 'instructed in the mysteries.' See Clem. Hum. iii. 29 τελείως ἐκφαίνειν τὸν μυστικὸν λόγον... τοῖς ἤδη τελείοις ἔφη. τοῦτο φρονῶμεν] 'let us have this mind', i.e. let us make it our rule to forget the past and press ever forward. καὶ εἴ τι ἑτέρως κ.τ.λ.] 'Then, if only you hold this fundamental principle, if progress is indeed your rule; though you are at fault on any subject, God will reveal this also to you'; comp. Joh. vii. 17 ἐάν τις θέλῃ τὰ θέλημα αὐτοῦ ποιεῖν, γνώσεται περὶ τῆς διδαχῆς πότερον ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστὶν κ.τ.λ. Here ἑτέρως seems to have the meaning 'amiss': see the note on Gal. i. 6. It may however be 'otherwise,' in reference to τοῦτο φρονῶμεν; in which case εἴτι will mean 'in any minor point': 'If you are sound at the core, God will remove the superficial blemishes.' ὑμῖν ἀποκαλύψει· ¹⁶πλὴν εἰς ὃ ἐφθάσαμεν, τῷ αὐτῷ στοιχεῖν. ¹⁷Συνμιμηταί μου γίνεσθε, ἀδελφοί, καὶ σκοπεῖτε Comp. Herm. Vis. iii. 13 ἰὰν τι δὲ δέη, ἀποκαλυφθήσεταί σοι. 16. πλὴν εἰς ὃ κ.τ.λ.] 'only we must walk by the same rule whereunto we attained.' What is meant by this same rule? Is it (1) The rule of moral progress? or (2) The rule of faith as opposed to works? In the former case, the words would simply enforce the preceding τοῦτο φρονέμεν; in the latter, they are added as a parting caution against 'the dogs, the base workers, the concision.' The latter seems preferable, as on the whole the reference to the Judaizers is the more probable, both because St Paul's earnestness would naturally prompt him to recur to this subject, and because the phrase is elsewhere used in the same connexion; Gal. vi. 16 ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν, comp. v. 25. The words after στοιχεῖν in the received text (κανόνι, τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν) are interpolated from Gal. vi. 16, Phil. ii. 2. Of these κανόνι is a correct gloss, while τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν expresses an idea alien to the context. Though πλὴν is now generally connected with πλέον, πλεῖν, as if it signified 'more than, beyond' (e. g. Klotz Devar. ii. p. 724, Curtius Griech. Etym. p. 253), the etymology which connects it with πέλας seems to offer a better explanation of its usage. It will then signify 'besides,' and hence, in passages like the present, 'apart from this,' 'setting this aside'; so that it is conveniently translated 'only': comp. i. 18, iv. 14. In this case it has an accusative form, like δίκην, ἐπίκλην, or the Latin 'clam,' 'palam,' etc. For the dative of the rule or direction (τῷ αὐτῷ) see the notes on Gal. v. 16, 25, vi. 16. The infinitive στοιχεῖν is equivalent to an emphatic imperative; see Fritzsche Rom. III. p. 85, and Winer § xliii. p. 398. For φθάνειν εἰς, 'to reach to' see Dan. iv. 19, Rom. ix. 31. 17—21. 'My brethren, vie with each other in imitating me, and observe those whose walk of life is fashioned after our example. This is the only safe test. For there are many, of whom I told you often and now tell you again even in tears, who professing our doctrine walk not in our footsteps. They are foes to the cross of Christ; they are doomed to perdition; they make their appetites their god; they glory in their shame; they are absorbed in earthly things. Not such is our life. In heaven we have even now our country, our home; and from heaven hereafter we look in patient hope for a deliverer, even the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change the fleeting fashion of these bodies—the bodies of our earthly humiliation—so that they shall take the abiding form of His own body—the body of His risen glory: for such is the working of the mighty power whereby He is able to subdue all things alike unto Himself.' 17. Συνμιμηταί μου] i.e. 'Vie with each other in imitating me,' 'one and all of you imitate me': so συμμιμείσθαι Plat. Polit. p. 274 D. Compare 1 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 1, 1 Thess. i. 6, 2 Thess. iii. 7, 9, ἵνα ἑαυτοὺς τύπον δῶμεν ὑμῖν εἰς τὸ μιμείσθαι ἡμᾶς. In 1 Cor. xi. 1 the injunction μιμηταί μου γίνεσθε is addressed, as here, to the party of reaction against Judaism. σκοπεῖτε] 'mark and follow,' not as generally 'mark and avoid', e.g. Rom. xvi. 17. Under ἡμᾶς are included Timotheus, Epaphroditus, and other faithful companions known to the Philippians. Shrinking from the egotism of dwelling on his own personal example, St Paul passes at once from the singular (μου) to the plural (ἡμᾶς). 18. πολλοὶ γάρ] If the view which τοὺς οὕτω περιπατοῦντας καθὼς ἔχετε τύπον ἡμᾶς. 18 πολλοὶ γὰρ περιπατοῦσιν, οὓς πολλάκις ἔλεγον ὑμῖν, νῦν δὲ καὶ κλαίων λέγω, τοὺς ἐχθροὺς τοῦ σταυροῦ τοῦ I have taken be correct, the persons here denounced are not the Judaizing teachers, but the antinomian reactionists. This view is borne out by the parallel expression, Rom. xvi. 18 τῷ Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Χριστῷ οὐ δουλεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τῇ ἑαυτῶν κοιλίᾳ, where the same persons seem to be intended; for they are described as creating divisions and offences (ver. 17), as holding plausible language (ver. 18), as professing to be wise beyond others (ver. 19) and yet not innocent in their wisdom; this last reproach being implied in the words θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς σοφοὺς εἶναι εἰς τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἀκεραίους δὲ εἰς τὸ κακόν. They appear therefore to belong to the same party to which the passages vi. 1—23, xiv. 1—xv. 6, of that epistle are chiefly addressed. For the profession of 'wisdom' in these faithless disciples of St Paul see 1 Cor. i. 17 sq., iv. 18 sq., viii. 1 sq., x. 15. Compare the note on τέλειοι above. περιπατοῦσιν] An adverbial clause, such as οὐκ ὀρθῶς, might have been expected: but in the earnestness of expression the sentence is uninterrupted, the qualifying idea being for the moment dropped. It reappears in a different form in the words τοὺς ἐχθροὺς κ.τ.λ. attached to the dependent sentence οὐς πολλάκις ἔλεγον κ.τ.λ. νῦν δέ] 'but now', for the evil has grown meanwhile. καὶ κλαίων] The stress of St Paul's grief would lie in the fact, that they degraded the true doctrine of liberty, so as to minister to their profligate and worldly living. They made use of his name, but did not follow his example. τοὺς ἐχθροὺς τοῦ σταυροῦ] See Polyc. Phil. § 12. These words do not in themselves decide what persons are here denounced; for the enemies of the cross may be twofold; (1) Doctrinal. The Judaizers, who deny the efficacy of the cross and substitute obedience to a formal code in its place; comp. Gal. v. 11, vi. 12, 14. (2) Practical. The Antinomians, who refuse to conform to the cross (iii. 10, 2 Cor. i. 5, 6) and live a life of selfindulgence; comp. 1 Cor. i. 17. If the view, which I have adopted and which the context seems to require, is correct, the latter are here meant; see the last note. In the passages, Polyc. Phil. 7 ὃς ἂν μὴ ὁμολογῇ τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ σταυροῦ, Ignat. Trall. 11 ἐφαίνοντο ἂν κλάδοι τοῦ σταυροῦ, the reference is apparently to docetism, as denying the reality of the passion. But belonging to a later generation, these passages throw no light on St Paul's meaning here. 19. τὸ τέλος ἀπώλεια] Comp. Rom. vi. 21 τὸ τέλος ἐκείνων θάνατος: see also 2 Cor. xi. 15, Hebr. vi. 8. ὁ θεὸς ἡ κοιλία] See Rom. xvi. 18 already quoted: comp. Seneca de Benef. vii. 26 'Alius abdomini servit', Eur. Cycl. 335 θύω...τῇ μεγίστη γαστρὶ τῇδε δαιμόνων' ὡς τούμπειν γε καὶ φαγεῖν τούφ' ἡμέραν Ζεὺς οὗτος ἀνθρώποισι τοῖσι σώφρυσιν. So in attacks on Epicurean ethics 'venter' commonly appears as the type of sensual appetites generally, e. g. Cic. Nat. Deor. i. 40, Senec. Vit. Beat. ix. 4, xiv. 3. The Apostle elsewhere reminds these lax brethren, that 'the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking,' Rom. xiv. 17; comp. 1 Cor. viii. 8. The selfindulgence, which wounds the tender conscience of others and turns liberty into license, is here condemned. ἡ δόξα κ.τ.λ.] The unfettered liberty, of which they boast, thus perverted becomes their deepest degradation. Χριστοῦ, ¹⁹ ὧν τὸ τέλος ἀπώλεια, ὧν ὁ θεὸς ἡ κοιλία, καὶ ἡ δόξα ἐν τῇ αἰσχύνῃ αὐτῶν, οἱ τὰ ἐπίγεια φρονοῦντες. ²⁰ ἡμῶν γὰρ τὸ πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχει, ἐξ οὗ καὶ σωτῆρα ἀπεκδεχόμεθα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χρισ- 20. ἡμῶν δὲ τὸ πολίτευμα. Comp. Hosea vii. 8 τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν εἰς ἀτιμίαν θήσω. οἱ τὰ ἐπίγεια κ.τ.λ.] 'Men whose minds are set on earthly things'! For the abrupt nominative occurring without any grammatical connexion and expressing amazement, comp. Mark xii. 38-40; see Winer § xxix. p. 228. 20. ἡμῶν γὰρ κ.τ.λ.] 'Their souls are mundane and grovelling. They have no fellowship with us; for we are citizens of a heavenly commonwealth'. The emphatic position of ἡμῶν contrasts the false adherents of St Paul with the true. About the connecting particle there is some difficulty. While the earliest was all read γάρ, the earliest citations (with several versions) have persistently δέ. I have therefore given δέ as a possible alternative; although it is probably a substitution for γάρ, of which the connexion was not very obvious. τὰ πολίτευμα] This may mean either (1) 'The state, the constitution, to which as citizens we belong', e.g. Philo de Jos. ii. p. 51 μ ἐγγραφῆς τῆς ἐν τῷ μεγίστῳ καὶ ἀρίστῳ πολιτεύματι τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου, de Confus. i. p. 421 μ ἐγγράφονται τῷ τῆς προτέρας πολιτεύματι, 2 Macc. xii. 7 τὸ σύμπαν τῶν Ἰοππιτῶν πολίτευμα; or (2) 'The functions which as citizens we perform', e.g. Demosth. de Cor. p. 262 πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα προηρούμην πολιτεύματα κ.τ.λ., Lucian Prom. 15 ἐπὶ τῷ πολιτεύματι τούτῳ, Tatian ad Græc. 19. The singular points to the former meaning, which is also more frequent. In either case ἐξ οὗ 'whence' will refer not to πολίτευμα, but to οὐρανοῖς. On the metaphor see above i. 27. Compare also Philo de Confus. i. p. 416 μ πατρίδα μὲν τὸν οὐράνιον χώρον ἐν ᾧ πολιτεύ- ονται ξένον δὲ τὸν περίγειον ἐν ᾧ παρῴκησαν νομίζουσαι, Epist. ad Diogn. § 5 ἐπὶ γῆς διατρίβουσιν ἀλλ' ἐν οὐρανῷ πολιτεύονται, Clem. Hom. i. 16 αὐτῇ σε ἡ ἀλήθεια ξένον ὄντα τῆς ἰδίας πόλεως καταστήσει πολίτην. See also M. Anton. iii. 11 πολίτην ὄντα πόλεως τῆς ἀνωτάτης ἧς αἱ λοιποὶ πόλεις ὥσπερ οἰκίαι εἰσίν. It was a favourite metaphor with the Stoics, Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 26 (p. 642 Potter) λέγουσι γὰρ καὶ οἱ Στωικοὶ τὸν μὲν οὐρανὸν κυρίως πόλιν τὰ δὲ ἐπὶ γῆς ἐνταῦθα οὐκ ἔτι πόλεις, λέγεσθαι μὲν γάρ, οὐκ εἶναι δὲ κ.τ.λ.; see below, p. 303 sq. Somewhat similarly Plato says of his ideal state (Resp. ix. p. 592 μ) ἐν οὐρανῷ ἴσως παράδειγμα [τῆς πόλεως] ἀνάκειται τῷ βουλομένῳ ὁρᾶν καὶ ὁρῶντι ἑαυτὸν κατοικίζειν. But the reply of Anaxagoras (Diog. Laert. ii. 7) to one who reproached him with indifference to his countrymen, εὔφημαι, ἐμοὶ γὰρ καὶ σφόδρα μέλει τῆς πατρίδος (δεῖξας τὸν οὐρανόν), ought not to be quoted in illustration, as it refers to his astronomical studies. ὑπάρχει] 'is even now', for the kingdom of heaven is a present kingdom; so Ephes. ii. 19 οὐκέτι ἐστὶ ξέναι καὶ πάροικοι ἀλλὰ ἐστὶ συνπολίται τῶν ἁγίων κ.τ.λ. (comp. ver. 6). σωτῆρα ἀπεκδεχόμεθα] 'we eagerly await as a saviour' On ἀπεκδέχεσθαι see Gal. v. 5, together with the note on ἀποκαραδοκία above, i. 20. 21. μετασχηματίσει] 'will change the fashion'. For μετασχηματίσει and σύμμορφον see the detached note on μορφή and σχήμα, p. 130. τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν] 'of our humiliation', i.e. the body which we bear in our present low estate, which is exposed to all the passions, sufferings, and indignities of this life. The πόθητοι, χαρὰ καὶ στέφανός μου, οὕτως στήκετε ἐν Κυρίῳ, ἀγαπητοί. ² Εὐοδίαν παρακαλῶ καὶ Συντύχην παρακαλῶ τὸ αὐτὸ φρονεῖν ἐν Κυρίῳ. ³ ναὶ ἐρωτῶ καὶ σέ, γνήσιε σύν- οὕτως στήκετε] 'stand fast so, as you are guided by my precept and my example, as becomes citizens of a heavenly kingdom.' On στήκετε see the notes, i. 27, Gal. v. 1. 2. The Apostle at length returns from his long digression (see the notes on iii. 1, 2) to the subject of the dissensions at Philippi. His injunctions here take the form of a direct personal appeal to those chiefly at fault; and two ladies especially are mentioned by name. 2, 3. 'I appeal to Euodia, and I appeal to Syntyche, to give up their differences and live at peace in the Lord. Yes I ask you, my faithful and true yokefellow, who are now by my side, who will deliver this letter to the Philippians, to reconcile them again: for I cannot forget how zealously they seconded my efforts on behalf of the Gospel. I invite Clement also, with the rest of my fellow-labourers, whose names are enrolled in the book of life, the register of God's faithful people, to aid in this work of reconciliation.' Εὐοδίαν κ.τ.λ.] Both these names occur in the inscriptions: Euhodia or Euodia for instance in Gruter p. 695. 4, p. 789. 5, Muratori p. 107. 9, p. 932. 5, p. 1161. 4, p. 1185. 7, p. 1340. 8, p. 1362. 2, p. 1671. 3, 5 (comp. Tertull. ad Scap. 4); Syntyche, Suntyche, or Syntiche, in Gruter p. 890. 7, p. 987. 8, Muratori, p. 857. 7, p. 972. 5, p. 1315. 17, p. 1569. 4, p. 1664. 4. The English Version treats the first as a man's name; and others have in like manner interpreted the second. No instance however of either 'Euodias' or 'Syntyches' has been found in the inscriptions. The former indeed might be considered a contraction of Euodianus which occurs occasionally: but the masculine form of the latter is Syntychus, a very rare name (Gruter p. 372. 5). But, though it were possible to treat the words in themselves as masculine, two female names are clearly required here, as there is nothing else in the sentence to which αὐτοῖς can be referred. Euodia and Syntyche appear to have been ladies of rank, or possibly (like Phœbe, Rom. xvi. 1) deaconesses in the Philippian church. On the position of women in Macedonia and on their prominence in the history of the Gospel there, see the introduction, p. 55 sq. παρακαλῶ] St Paul repeats the word as if, says Bengel, 'coram adhortans seorsum utramvis.' 3. ναὶ] 'γκα,' introducing an affectionate appeal, as Philæu. 20 ναὶ, ἀδελφὲ, ἐγώ σου ὀναίμην. The καὶ of the received text must be considered a misprint, or a miswriting of a few late xss. ἐρωτῶ] 'I ask'; a late use of the word which in the classical language signifies not 'rogo' generally, but 'interrogo' specially. In this late sense of 'requesting,' ἐρωτῶ differs from αὐτῷ, as 'rogo' from 'peto'; the two former being used towards an equal, the two latter towards a superior; see Trench N. T. Syn. § xl. p. 135. γνήσιε σύνεγνε] 'true yoke-fellow,' comp. Æsch. Ag. 842; so 2 Cor. vi. 14 ἐτεροξυγούντες. It is doubtful whom the Apostle thus addresses. On the whole however it seems most probable that Epaphroditus, the bearer of the letter, is intended; for in his case alone there would be no risk of making the reference unintelligible by the suppression of the name. Different commentators have explained it of Barnabas, of Luke, of Silas, of Timotheus, of ζυγε, συνλαμβάνου αὐταῖς, αἵτινες ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ συνήθλησάν μοι, μετὰ καὶ Κλήμεντος καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν συνεργῶν μου, ὧν τὰ ὀνόματα ἐν βίβλῳ ζωῆς. ⁴ Χαίρετε ἐν Κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ, χαίρετε. the chief presbyter or bishop of Philippi. Others again have taken Σύν-ζυγος itself as a proper name, explaining γνήσιο 'truly called.' The case for this interpretation is well stated by Laurent Neutest. Stud. p. 134. It would be plausible, if Σύνζυγος occurred commonly, or occurred at all, in the inscriptions. The passage would then present a parallel to the play on the name Onesimus in Philem. 11. Less can be said in favour of another expedient which makes Γνήσιος the proper name. A very ancient interpretation again (Clem. Alex. Strom. iii. p. 535 Potter, Orig. Rom. I. p. 461 Delarue) takes 'yokefellow' to mean St Paul's wife; but the Apostle would doubtless have written γνησία in this case, and it seems clear moreover from 1 Cor. vii. 8 that he was either unmarried or a widower. The grammatical objection applies equally to Renan's suggestion (St Paul p. 148) that Lydia is meant. For γνήσιο comp. Ecclus. vii. 18, and see the note on γνησίως ii. 20. συνλαμβάνου, κ.τ.λ.] 'assist them, Euodia and Syntyche, since they laboured with me etc.' They may have belonged to the company of women to whom the Gospel was first preached at Philippi, Acts xvi. 13 ταῖς συνελθοῦσαις γυναιξίῳ. For αἵτινες, 'inasmuch as they,' comp. e.g. Acts x. 41, 47, Rom. ii. 15, vi. 2, etc. While ὃς simply marks the individual, ὅστις places him in a class, and thus calls attention to certain characteristic features; hence the meaning 'quippe qui.' On the distinction of ὃς and ὅστις see the notes on Gal. iv. 24, 26, v. 19. The rendering adopted by the English version, 'Help those women who laboured etc.' is obviously incorrect, and would require ἐκείναις αἱ συνήθλησαν. μετὰ καὶ Κλήμεντος κ.τ.λ.] 'with Clement also.' These words ought perhaps to be connected rather with συνλαμβάνου αὐταῖς than with συνήθλησάν μοι. The Apostle is anxious to engage all in the work of conciliation. On the Clement here meant see the detached note p. 168. The καὶ before Κλήμεντος seems to be retrospective (referring to γνήσιο σύνζυγε) rather than prospective (referring to καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν συνεργῶν μου); as in John ii. 2. For its position comp. Clem. Rom. § 59 σὺν καὶ Φορτουνάτῳ. ὧν τὰ ὀνόματα κ.τ.λ.] 'whose names, though not mentioned by the Apostle, are nevertheless in the book of life.' The 'book of life' in the figurative language of the Old Testament is the register of the covenant people: comp. Is. iv. 3 οἱ γραφέντες εἰς ζωὴν ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ, Ezek. xiii. 9 ἐν παιδεία τοῦ λαοῦ μου οὐκ ἔσονται οὐδὲ ἐν γραφῇ οἴκου Ἰσραὴλ οὐ γραφήσονται. Hence 'to be blotted out of the book of the living' means 'to forfeit the privileges of the theocracy,' 'to be shut out from God's favour,' Ps. lxix. 28; comp. Exod. xxxii. 32. But the expression, though perhaps confined originally to temporal blessings, was in itself a witness to higher hopes; and in the book of Daniel first (xii. 1 sq.) it distinctly refers to a blessed immortality. In the Revelation τὸ βιβλίον τῆς ζωῆς is a phrase of constant recurrence, iii. 5, xiii. 8, xvii. 8, xx. 12, 15, xxi. 27, xxii. 19; comp. Hermas Vis. i. 3. See also Luke x. 20, Heb. xii. 23. It is clear from the expression 'blotting out of the book' (Rev. iii. 5), that the image suggested no idea of absolute predestination. For the use of the phrase in rabbinical writers see Wetstein here. 4. χαίρετε] This word combines a ⁵ τὸ ἐπιεικὲς ὑμῶν γνωσθήτω πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις. ὁ Κύριος ἐγγύς. ⁶ μηδὲν μεριμνᾶτε, ἀλλ' ἐν παντὶ τῇ προσευχῇ καὶ τῇ δεήσει μετ' εὐχαριστίας τὰ αἰτήματα ὑμῶν γνωριζέσθω πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. ⁷ καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡ parting benediction with an exhortation to cheerfulness. It is neither 'farewell' alone, nor 'rejoice' alone. Compare for this same combination of senses the dying words of the Greek messenger χαίρετε καὶ χαίρομεν quoted above on ii. 18; see the notes on ii. 18, iii. 1. πάλιν ἐρῶ] 'again I will say'; for ἐρῶ seems to be always a future in the New Testament as in Attic Greek. Compare Æsch. Eum. 1014 χαίρετε, χαίρετε δ' αὖθις, ἐπανδιπλοίζω. See the notes on i. 4. 5—7. 'Let your gentle and forbearing spirit be recognised by all men. The judgment is drawing near. Entertain no anxious cares, but throw them all upon God. By your prayer and your supplication make your every want known to Him. If you do this, then the peace of God, far more effective than any forethought or contrivance of man, will keep watch over your hearts and your thoughts in Christ Jesus.' 5. τὸ ἐπιεικὲς ὑμῶν] 'your forbearance,' the opposite to a spirit of contention and self-seeking. The ἐπιεικὴς stands in contrast to the ἀκριβοδίεως, as being satisfied with less than his due, Arist. Eth. Nic. v. 10. The word is connected with ἄμαχος, πᾶσαν ἐνδεικνύμενος πραΰτητα (Tit. iii. 2, comp. 1 Tim. iii. 3), with εἰρηνικός, εὐπειθής, μεστὸς ἐλέους κ.τ.λ. (James iii. 17), with χρηστός, πολυελείας (Ps. lxxxv. 5), with ἀγαθός ('kind', 1 Pet. ii. 18), with φιλάνθρωπος (2 Macc. ix. 27). This quality of ἐπιείκεια was signally manifested in our blessed Lord Himself (2 Cor. x. 1). ὁ Κύριος ἐγγύς] The nearness of the Lord's advent is assigned as a reason for patient forbearance. So similarly in St James v. 8, μακροθυμήσατε καὶ ὑμεῖς... ὅτι ἡ παρουσία τοῦ Κυρίου ἤγγιετε κ.τ.λ. The expression ὁ Κύριος ἐγγύς is the Apostle's watchword. In 1 Cor. xvi. 22 an Aramaic equivalent is given, Μαρὰν ἀθῶ, whence we may infer that it was a familiar form of mutual recognition and warning in the early Church. Compare Barnab. § 21 ἐγγύς ἡ ἡμέρα ἐν ᾗ συναπολείται πάντα τῷ πονηρῷ, ἐγγύς ὁ Κύριος καὶ ὁ μισθὸς αὐτοῦ. See also Luke xxi. 31, 1 Pet. iv. 7. Thus we may paraphrase St Paul's language here: 'To what purpose is this rivalry, this self-assertion? The end is nigh, when you will have to resign all. Bear with others now, that God may bear with you then.' On the other hand a different interpretation is suggested by such passages as Ps. cxix. 151 ἐγγύς εἰ Κύριε, cxiv. 18 ἐγγύς Κύριος πᾶσι τοῖς ἐπικαλουμένοις αὐτόν (comp. xxxiv. 18), Clem. Rom. § 21 ἴδωμεν πῶς ἐγγύς ἐστιν κ.τ.λ. (comp. Hermas Vis. ii. 3; Clem. Alex. Quis div. 41, p. 958); but this is neither so natural nor so appropriate here. 6. μηδὲν μεριμνᾶτε] 'have no anxieties'; for μέριμνα is anxious harassing care. See Trench, On the Authorized Version p. 13 sq. (on Matt. vi. 25); and comp. 1 Pet. v. 7, where μέριμνα is used of human anxieties, μέλει of God's providential care. τῇ προσευχῇ κ.τ.λ.] While προσευχῇ is the general offering up of the wishes and desires to God, δέησις implies special petition for the supply of wants. Thus προσευχῇ points to the frame of mind in the petitioner, δέησις to the act of solicitation. The two occur together also in Ephes. vi. 13, 1 Tim. ii. 1, v. 5. In αἰτήματα again the several objects of δέησις are implied. More on the distinction of these words may be ὑπερέχουσα πάντα νοῦν φρουρήσει τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. ⁸ Τὸ λοιπόν, ἀδελφοί, ὅσα ἐστὶν ἀληθῇ, ὅσα σεμνά, ὅσα δίκαια, ὅσα ἀγνά, ὅσα προσφιλῇ, ὅσα εὔφημα, εἴ seen in Trench, N. T. Syn. § li. p. 177 sq. πρὸς τὸν Θεόν] 'before God,' 'to Godward,' not simply τῷ Θεῷ. μετ' εὐχαριστίας] Since thankfulness for past blessings is a necessary condition of acceptance in preferring new petitions. Great stress is laid on the duty of εὐχαριστία by St Paul; e.g. Rom. i. 21, xiv. 6, 2 Cor. i. 11, iv. 15, ix. 11, 12, Ephes. v. 20, Col. ii. 7, iii. 17, 1 Thess. v. 18, 1 Tim. ii. 1. All his own letters addressed to churches, with the sole exception of the Epistle to the Galatians, commence with an emphatic thanksgiving. In this epistle the injunction is in harmony with the repeated exhortations to cheerfulness (χαρά) which it contains; see the note on i. 4. 7. καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη κ.τ.λ.] 'then the peace of God'; again an indirect allusion to their dissensions. So too in ver. 9 ὁ Θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης. Compare 2 Thess. iii. 16 αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δώῃ ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην κ.τ.λ. ὑπερέχουσα κ.τ.λ.] 'surpassing every device or counsel' of man, i. e. which is far better, which produces a higher satisfaction, than all punctilious self-assertion, all anxious forethought. This sense seems better adapted to the context, than the meaning frequently assigned to the words, 'surpassing all intelligence, transcending all power of conception.' In favour of the latter however may be quoted Ephes. iii. 20 τῷ δυναμένῳ ὑπὲρ πάντα ποιῆσαι ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ ὧν αἰτούμεθα ἡ νοούμεν. φρουρήσει κ.τ.λ.] A verbal paradox, for φρουρεῖν is a warrior's duty; 'God's peace shall stand sentry, shall keep guard over your hearts.' Compare 1 Thess. iv. 11 φιλοτιμεῖσθαι ἡσυχάζειν for a similar instance. The νοήματα reside in and issue from the καρδία (comp. 2 Cor. iii. 14, 15); for in the Apostle's language καρδία is the seat of thought as well as of feeling. 8. Τὸ λοιπόν] 'Finally.' Again the Apostle attempts to conclude; see the note on τὸ λοιπὸν iii. 1, and the introduction, p. 69 sq. ὅσα ἐστὶν ἀληθῇ κ.τ.λ.] Speaking roughly, the words may be said to be arranged in a descending scale. The first four describe the character of the actions themselves, the two former ἀληθῇ, σεμνά, being absolute, the two latter δίκαια, ἀγνά, relative; the fifth and sixth προσφιλῇ, εὔφημα, point to the moral approbation which they conciliate; while the seventh and eighth ἀρετή, ἔπαινος, in which the form of expression is changed (εἶτις for ὅσα), are thrown in as an afterthought, that no motive may be omitted. ἀληθῇ] not 'veracious,' but 'true' in the widest sense. So St Chrysostom, ταῦτα ὄντως ἀληθῇ ἡ ἀρετή, ψεῦδος δὲ ἡ κακία. In like manner the most comprehensive meaning must be given to δίκαια ('righteous,' not simply 'just'), and to ἀγνά ('pure, stainless') not simply 'chaste': comp. Cic. Fin. iii. 4 'Una virtus, unum istud, quod honestum appellas, rectum, laudabile, decorum, erit enim notius quale sit, pluribus notatum vocabulis idem declarantibus.' προσφιλῇ] 'amiable, lovely'; see Ecclus. iv. 7, xx. 13. It does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. Comp. Cic. Lat. 28 'Nihil est amabilius virtute, nihil quod magis alliciat ad diligendum.' εὔφημα] not 'well-spoken of, well-reputed,' for the word seems never to have this passive meaning; but with PHIL. τις ἀρετή καὶ εἴ τις ἔπαινος, ταῦτα λογίζεσθε· 9ἀ καὶ ἐμάθετε καὶ παρελάβετε καὶ ἠκούσατε καὶ εἴδετε ἐν ἐμοί, ταῦτα πράσσετε, καὶ ὁ Θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης ἔσται μεθ' ὑμῶν. 10Ἐχάρην δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ μεγάλως, ὅτι ἤδη ποτὲ ἀνε- its usual active sense, 'fair-speaking,' and so 'winning, attractive.' Compare Plut. Vit. Thes. 20 ἀ δὲ εὐφημότατα τῶν μυθολογουμένων, Mor. 84 D τιμὴν εὔφημον, Lucian Prom. 3 πρὸς τὸ εὐφημότατον ἐξηγούμενος τὸ εἰρημένον, i. e. putting the most favourable construction on the account. εἴ τις ἀρετή] St Paul seems studiously to avoid this common heathen term for moral excellence, for it occurs in this passage only. Neither is it found elsewhere in the New Testament, except in 1 Pet. ii. 9, 2 Pet. i. 3, 5, in all which passages it seems to have some special sense. In the Old Testament it always signifies 'glory, praise' (as in 1 Pet. ii. 9); though in the Apocrypha (e.g. Wisd. iv. 1) it has its ordinary classical sense. Its force here is doubtful. Some treat εἴ τις ἀρετή, εἴ τις ἔπαινος, as comprehensive expressions, recapitulating the previous subjects under two general heads, the intrinsic character and the subjective estimation. The strangeness of the word however, combined with the change of expression εἴ τις, will suggest another explanation; 'Whatever value may reside in your old heathen conception of virtue, whatever consideration is due to the praise of men'; as if the Apostle were anxious not to omit any possible ground of appeal. Thus Beza's remark on ἀρετή seems to be just; 'Verhum nimis humile, si cum donis Spiritus Sancti comparetur.' With this single occurrence of ἀρετή, compare the solitary use of τὸ θεῖον in the address on the Areopagus, Acts xvii. 29. 9. In the former verse the proper subjects of meditation (λογίζεσθε) have been enumerated; in the present the proper line of action (πράσσετε) is indicated. The Philippians must obey the Apostle's precepts (ἀ ἐμάθετε καὶ παρελάβετε) and follow his example (ἀ ἠκούσατε καὶ εἴδετε ἐν ἐμοί). καὶ ἐμάθετε κτ.λ.] The verbs should probably be connected together in pairs, so that the καὶ before ἐμάθετε is answered by the καὶ before ἠκούσατε. With ἐμάθετε καὶ παρελάβετε we may understand παρ' ἐμοῦ from the ἐν ἐμοί of the next clause. The word παρελάβετε adds little to ἐμάθετε, except the reference to the person communicating the instruction: comp. Plat. Theat. p. 198 D παραλαμβάνοντα δὲ μανθάνειν. ἐν ἐμοί] to be attached to ἠκούσατε, as well as to εἴδετε; 'heard when I was away, and saw when I was with you': comp. i. 30 οἷον εἴδετε ἐν ἐμοί καὶ νῦν ἀκούετε ἐν ἐμοί. 10—19. 'It was a matter of great and holy joy to me that after so long an interval your care on my behalf revived and flourished again. I do not mean that you ever relaxed your care, but the opportunity was wanting. Do not suppose, that in saying this I am complaining of want; for I have learnt to be content with my lot, whatever it may be. I know how to bear humiliation, and I know also how to bear abundance. Under all circumstances and in every case, in plenty and in hunger, in abundance and in want, I have been initiated in the never-failing mystery, I possess the true secret of life. I can do and bear all things in Christ who inspires me with strength. But, though I am thus indifferent to my own wants, I commend you for your sympathy and aid in my affliction. I need not remind you, my Philippian friends; you θάλετε τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν· ἐφ' ᾧ καὶ ἐφρονεῖτε, ἠκαιρεῖσθε δέ. ¹¹οὐχ ὅτι καθ' ὑστέρησιν λέγω· ἐγὼ γὰρ ἔμαθον ἐν οἷς εἰμὶ αὐτάρκης εἶναι. ¹²οἶδα καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι, οἶδα καὶ περισσεύειν. ἐν παντὶ καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν yourselves will remember; that in the first days of the Gospel, when I left Macedonia, though I would not receive contributions of money from any other Church, I made an exception in your case. Nay, even before I left, when I was still at Thessalonica, you sent more than once to supply my wants. Again I say, I do not desire the gift, but I do desire that the fruits of your benevolence should rebound to your account. For myself, I have now enough and more than enough of all things. The presents which you sent by Epaphroditus have fully supplied my needs. I welcome them, as the sweet savour of a burnt-offering, as a sacrifice accepted by and well-pleasing to God. And I am confident that God on my behalf will recompense you and supply all your wants with the prodigal wealth which He only can command, in the kingdom of His glory, in Christ Jesus.' 10. ἐχάρην δὲ κ.τ.λ.] So Polycarp writing to these same Philippians begins (§ 1) συνεχάρην ὑμῖν μεγάλως ἐν Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ κ.τ.λ. The δὲ arrests a subject which is in danger of escaping: see Gal. iv. 20. It is as if the Apostle said: 'I must not forget to thank you for your gift.' ἤδη ποτὲ ἀνεθάλετε κ.τ.λ.] 'at length ye revived your interest in me.' For ἤδη ποτὲ 'at length' (not necessarily referring to present time) see Rom. i. 10, with the passages quoted in illustration by Kypke. For this construction of ἀνοθάλειν, 'to put forth new shoots,' with an accusative of the thing germinated, compare Ezek. xvii. 24 (ξύλον ξηρόν), Ecclus. i. 18 (εἰρήνην, ὑγίειαν), xi. 22 (εὐλογίαν), l. 10 (καρπούς). As the two expressions ἤδη ποτὲ and ἀνεθάλετε combined might seem to convey a rebuke, the Apostle hastens to remove the impression by the words which follow, ἐφ' ᾧ καὶ ἐφρονεῖτε and οὐχ ὅτι καθ' ὑστέρησιν λέγω. ἐφ' ᾧ κ.τ.λ.] 'in which ye did indeed interest yourselves.' The antecedent to ᾧ is 'my wants, my interests,' being involved in, though not identical with, τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν. Such grammatical irregularities are characteristic of St Paul's style: compare for instance ii. 5. To obviate the fancied difficulty, it has been proposed to explain the previous clause [ὥστε] φρονεῖν τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ, in which case τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ would form a strict antecedent to ᾧ. But the separation of τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ from φρονεῖν is harsh and unnatural. ἠκαιρεῖσθε] 'ye had no opportunity'; a late and rare word. The active ἀκαιρεῖν is found in Diod. Sic. Exe. p. 30 (Mai). 11. οὐχ ὅτι] 'It is not that I speak, etc.' For οὐχ ὅτι comp. iii. 12, iv. 17: see A. Buttmann p. 319. For καθ' ὑστέρησιν, 'in language dictated by want,' comp. Rom. x. 2 κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν, Acts iii. 17 κατὰ ἄγνοιαν, etc.: see Winer § xlix. p. 501 sq. ἐν οἷς εἰμὶ κ.τ.λ.] 'in the position in which I am placed.' The idea of αὐτάρκεια is 'independence of external circumstances.' Compare 2 Cor. ix. 8 ἐν παντὶ πάντοτε πᾶσαν αὐτάρκειαν ἔχοντες, 1 Tim. vi. 6. Socrates, when asked 'Who was the wealthiest,' replied, 'He that is content with least, for αὐτάρκεια is nature's wealth' (Stob. Flor. v. 43). The Stoics especially laid great stress on this virtue: see Senec. Ep. Mor. 9 (passim). So M. Anton. i. 16 τὸ αὐτάρκες ἐν παντὶ, where also an11—2 μεμύημαι, καὶ χορτάζεσθαι καὶ πεινᾶν, καὶ περισσεύειν καὶ ὑστερεῖσθαι. ¹³πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με. ¹⁴πλήν καλῶς ἐποιήσατε συνκοινωνήσαντές μου τῇ θλί- other phrase found in St Paul (2 Tim. iv. 5) occurs in the context, νῆφον ἐν πᾶσι. See the notes on πολίτευμα iii. 20, and on ἀπέχειν iv. 18, and the dissertation on 'St Paul and Seneca.' 12. καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι] This clause seems to be shaped in anticipation of the καὶ περισσεύειν which follows, so that the one καὶ would answer the other, 'both to be abased and to abound'; but the connexion is afterwards interrupted by the repetition of οἶδα for the sake of emphasis. So too perhaps 1 Cor. xv. 29, 30 τί καὶ βαπτίζονται...τί καὶ ἡμεῖς κ.τ.λ.; comp. Rom. i. 13. ἐν παντὶ καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν] A general expression corresponding to the English 'all and every'; ἐν παντὶ 'in every case' singly, ἐν πᾶσιν 'in all cases' collectively: comp. 2 Cor. xi. 6 ἐν παντὶ φανερώσαντες ἐν πᾶσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς. μεμύημαι] 'I have been initiated, I possess the secret,' as Plut. Mor. p. 795 Ἐ τὰ μὲν πρῶτα μανθάνων ἔτι πολιτεύεσθαι καὶ μυούμενος, τὰ δὲ ἔσχατα διδάσκων καὶ μυσταγωγῶν, Alciphr. Epist. ii. 4 πρωρατεύειν μνηθήσομαι. The same metaphor is employed by St Paul in μυστήρια applied to revealed truths, and perhaps also in σφραγίζεσθαι (Eph. i. 13). And St Ignatius also addresses the Ephesians (§12) as Παύλου συμμύσται τοῦ ἡγιασμένου, thus taking up the Apostle's own metaphor. χορτάζεσθαι] The word χορτάζειν, properly 'to give fodder to animals,' is in the first instance only applied to men as a depreciatory term, e.g. Plat. Resp. ix. p. 586 Ἀ βοσκημάτων δίκην...χορταζόμενοι. Hence the earlier examples of this application are found chiefly in the Comic poets, as in the passages quoted by Atheneus, iii. p. 99 sq., where the word is discussed. In the later language however χορτάζεσθαι has lost the sense of caricature, and become a serious equivalent to κορέννυσθαι, being applied commonly to men and directly opposed to πεινᾶν, e.g. Matt. v. 6. On χορτάζειν see Sturz de Dial. Mac. p. 200. A parallel instance of a word casting off all mean associations in the later language is ψωμίζειν, 1 Cor. xiii. 3. πεινᾶν] On this form see A. Buttmann p. 38, Lobeck Phryn. p. 61. 13. τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με] 'in Him that infuses strength into me,' i.e. Christ: comp. 1 Tim. i. 12. The word occurs several times in St Paul. 14. πλήν] 'nevertheless, though I could have dispensed with your contributions.' συνκοινωνήσαντες κ.τ.λ.] i.e. 'by making common cause with my affliction, by your readiness to share the burden of my troubles.' It was not the actual pecuniary relief, so much as the sympathy and companionship in his sorrow, that the Apostle valued. On the construction of κοινωνεῖν see the note on Gal. vi. 6. 15. The object of this allusion seems to be not so much to stimulate them by recalling their former zeal in contributing to his needs, as to show his willingness to receive such contributions at their hands. 'Do not mistake my meaning,' he seems to say, 'do not imagine that I receive your gifts coldly, that I consider them intrusive. You yourselves will recollect that, though it was my rule not to receive such contributions, I made an exception in your case.' καὶ ὑμεῖς] 'ye too, ye yourselves, without my reminding you': comp. 1 Thess. ii. 1 αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἶδατε, ἀδελφοί. Φιλιππήσιοι] Stephanus Byzant. says, 'Ὁ πολίτης Φιλιππεύς, Φιλιππηνὸς δὲ ψει. Ἰοἴδατε δὲ καὶ ὑμεῖς, Φιλιππήσιοι, ὅτι ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ὅτε ἐξῆλθον ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας, οὐδεμία μοι ἐκκλησία ἐκοινώνησεν εἰς λόγον δόσεως καὶ λήμψεως, παρὰ Πολυβίῳ. The passage of Polybius to which he refers is not extant. Though Stephanus does not mention the form Φιλιππήσιος, it occurs in the heading of Polycarp's letter (Iren. iii. 3. 4) as well as of this epistle. Φιλιππεύς is found three times in a Buæotian inscription in Keil p. 172 (see Dindorf's Steph. Thes. s. v.). ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου] 'in the earliest days of the Gospel,' especially in reference to Macedonia. Similarly, writing to the Thessalonians soon after his first visit, St Paul says (2 Thess. ii. 13) εἶλατο ὑμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς ἀπαρχὴν (v. l. ἀπ' ἀρχῆς) εἰς σωτηρίαν. The expression occurs in Clem. Rom. § 47 τί πρῶτον ὑμῖν ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἔγραψεν, and possibly this is the meaning of Polycarp § 11 'qui estis in principio epistolæ ejus': see above, p. 141, note 4. ὅτε ἐξῆλθον ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας] 'when I departed from Macedonia' may mean either (1) 'at the moment of my departure,' or (2) 'after my departure.' This latter meaning is justified by the pluperfect sense which the aorist frequently has (see Winer § xl. p. 343); though in fact this is no peculiarity of Greek, but a looseness of expression common to all languages. If this meaning be adopted, the allusion is explained by the contributions sent from Macedonia to Corinth (2 Cor. xi. 8, 9). If on the other hand the former sense were rigorously pressed (though this is unreasonable), contributions might well have been conveyed to him through 'the brethren' who escorted him from Macedonia to Athens, Acts xvii. 14, 15. The 'undesigned coincidence' between the history and the epistles in the matter of these contributions is well put by Paley (Hor. Paul. vii. no. 1). εἰς λόγον κ.τ.λ.] 'as regards'; literally 'to the account or score of'; comp. Thuc. iii. 46 ἐς χρημάτων λόγον ἰσχυούσαις, Demosth. F. L. p. 385 εἰς ἀρετῆς λόγον καὶ δόξης ἦν οὗτοι χρημάτων ἀπέδοντο, Polyb. xi. 28. 8 εἰς ἀργυρίου λόγον ἀδικεῖσθαι. In the passages quoted, as here, the original application to a money transaction is kept more or less distinctly in view; but this is not always the case, e.g. Polyb. v. 89. 6 ξύλα εἰς σφηκίσκων λόγον. With the expression here compare Cic. Læi. 16 'ratio acceptorum et datorum.' δόσεως καὶ λήμψεως] 'giving and taking,' 'credit and debit,' a general expression for pecuniary transactions, derived from the two sides of the ledger: see Ecclus. xlii. 7 καὶ δόσις καὶ λήμψις παντὶ ἐν γραφῇ, xli. 19 ἀπὸ σκορακισμοῦ λήμψεως καὶ δόσεως, Arrian. Epict. ii. 9 τὸν φιλάργυρον [ἐπαύξουσιν] αἱ ἀκατάλληλοι λήψεις καὶ δόσεις, Hermas Mand. v. 2 περὶ δόσεως ἢ λήψεως ἢ περὶ τοιούτων μωρῶν πραγμάτων. The phrase refers solely to the passing of money between the two. The explanation given by St Chrysostom and followed by many later writers, εἰς λόγον δόσεως τῶν σαρκικῶν καὶ λήψεως τῶν πνευματικῶν (the Philippians paying worldly goods and receiving spiritual), is plainly inappropriate; for the intermingling of different things destroys the whole force of the clause εἰς λόγον δόσεως καὶ λήμψεως, which is added to define the kind of contributions intended. εἰ μὴ ὑμεῖς μόνοι] So, speaking of this same period, he asks the Corinthians whether he did them a wrong in taking no contributions from them and preaching the Gospel to them gratuitously (2 Cor. xi. 7). The limitation ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου perhaps εἰ μὴ ὑμεῖς μόνοι, ¹⁶ὅτι καὶ ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δὶς [εἰς] τὴν χρείαν μοι ἐπέμψατε. ¹⁷οὐχ ὅτι ἐπιζητῶ τὸ δόμα, ἀλλὰ ἐπιζητῶ τὸν καρπὸν τὸν πλεονάζοντα εἰς λόγον ὑμῶν. ¹⁸ἀπέχω δὲ πάντα καὶ περισσεύω, πεπλήρωμαι δεξάμενος παρὰ Ἐπαφροδίτου τὰ παρ' ὑμῶν, ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας, θυσίαν δεκτὴν εὐάρεστον τῷ Θεῷ. ¹⁹ὁ δὲ Θεός μου πληρώσει πᾶσαν χρείαν ὑμῶν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος αὐτοῦ ἐν δόξῃ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. implies that he relaxed his rule later, when he became better known and understood. 16. ὅτι καὶ κ.τ.λ.] 'for not only did you contribute to my wants after my departure from Macedonia, but also in Thessalonica, before I left etc.' So St Paul himself reminds the Thessalonians (1 Thess. ii. 5, 2 Thess. iii. 8) that he did not burden them at all. At the same time it appears from those passages, that his bodily wants were supplied mainly by the labours of his own hands. Thus it would seem that the gifts of the Philippians were only occasional, and the same may be gathered from the words καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ dis here. On the abbreviated expression ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ 'when I was in Thessalonica' see Winer § 1. p. 515; comp. below, ver. 19. καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δίς] 'more than once': comp. 1 Thess. ii. 18. The double καὶ is common in such cases, e.g. καὶ δίς καὶ τρίς, Plat. Phæd. p. 63 D. εἰς τὴν χρείαν] 'to relieve my want,' the preposition indicating the object; see Winer § xlix. p. 495. The omission of εἰς in some old copies is probably due to the similar ending of the preceding word. Otherwise the reading might claim to be adopted, though in this sense the plural τὰς χρείας would be more natural. 17. Again the Apostle's nervous anxiety to clear himself interposes. By thus enlarging on the past liberality of the Philippians, he might be thought to covet their gifts. This possible misapprehension he at once corrects. οὐχ ὅτι ἐπιζητῶ] For οὐχ ὅτι see the notes on ver. 11 and on iii. 12; for the indirectly intensive force of the preposition in ἐπιζητῶ, the note on ἐπιποθῶ i. 8. The repetition of ἐπιζητῶ is emphatic; 'I do not want the gift, I do want the fruit etc.' Compare the repetition of παρακαλῶ ver. 2, and of οἶδα ver. 12. τὸν καρπὸν κ.τ.λ.] 'i.e. the recom- pense which is placed to your account and increases with each fresh demonstration of your love.' 18. ἀπέχω κ.τ.λ.] 'I have all things to the full,' as Matt. vi. 2, 5, 16, Luke vi. 24. For the phrase ἀπ- έχειν πάντα compare Arrian. Epict. iii. 2. 13 ἀπέχεις ἅπαντα, iii. 24. 17 τὸ γὰρ eὐδαιμονοῦν ἀπέχειν δεῖ πάντα ἃ θέλει πεπληρωμένῳ τινι ἐοικέναι: comp. Diog. Laert. vii. 100 καλὸν δὲ λέγουσι τὸ tέλειον ἀγαθὸν παρὰ τὸ πάντας ἀπέχειν tοὺς ἐπιζητουμένους ἀριθμοὺς ὑπὸ τῆς φύσεως κ.τ.λ. See also Gataker on M. Anton. iv. 49. Like αὐτάρκεια, it seems to have been a favourite Stoic word: see the note on ver. 11. As in ἀπολαμβάνειν (see Gal. iv. 5), the idea of ἀπό in this compound is correspondence i.e. of the contents to the capacity, of the possession to the desire, etc., so that it denotes the full complement. The following word περισσεύω expresses an advance on ἀπέχω; 'not only full, but overflowing.' ²⁰ τῷ δὲ Θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ ἡμῶν ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν. ²¹ Ἀσπάσασθε πάντα ἅγιον ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ ἀδελφοί. ²² ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι, μάλιστα δὲ οἱ ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας. ²³ Ἡ χάρις τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν. [ἀμήν.] παρὰ Ἐπαφροδίτου κ.τ.λ.] 'at the hands of Epaphroditus the gifts transmitted from you.' On the preposition παρὰ see the note Gal. i. 12. ὀσμήν εὐωδίας] A very frequent expression in the LXX for the smell of sacrifices and offerings, being a rendering of ריח ניח (e.g. Gen. viii. 21, Exod. xxix. 18, etc.). St Paul employs it as a metaphor likewise in Ephes. v. 2; comp. 2 Cor. ii. 15, 16. So too Test. xii Patr. Ievi 3 προσφέρουσι Κυρίῳ ὀσμήν εὐωδίας λογικὴν καὶ θυσίαν ἀναίμακτον. θυσίαν δεκτὴν κ.τ.λ.] So Rom. xii. 1 παραστῆσαι τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν θυσίαν ζώσαν ἅγιαν εὐάρεστον τῷ Θεῷ κ.τ.λ. comp. 1 Pet. ii. 5, Heb. xiii. 16. The expression εὐάρεστος τῷ Θεῷ occurs Wisd. iv. 10 (comp. Clem. Rom. 49, Ign. Smyrn. 8), and εὐαρεστεῖν τῷ Θεῷ is common in the LXX. 19. ὁ Θεός μου] 'my God': comp. i. 3. The pronoun is especially expressive here: 'You have supplied all my wants (vv. 16, 18), God on my behalf shall supply all yours.' ἐν δόξῃ] These words show that the needs here contemplated are not merely temporary. Πληρώσει ἐν δόξῃ seems to be a pregnant phrase, signifying 'shall supply by placing you in glory'; comp. ver. 16 ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ. This is still further explained by ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, 'through your union with, incorporation in, Christ Jesus.' 20. ἡ δόξα. See the notes Gal. i. 5. ἡμῶν] It is no longer μου, for the reference is not now to himself as distinguished from the Philippians, but as united with them. 21. ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ] probably to be taken with ἀσπάσασθε; comp. Rom. xvi. 22, 1 Cor. xvi. 19. οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ ἀδελφοί] Apparently the Apostle's personal companions and fellow-travellers are meant, as distinguished from the Christians resident in Rome who are described in the following verse: see the note on Gal. i. 2. On St Paul's companions during or about this time see the introduction p. 11. 22. πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι] All the Christians in Rome, not his personal attendants only. οἱ ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας] 'The members of Cæsar's household,' probably slaves and freedmen attached to the palace: see the detached note p. 171, and the introduction pp. 14, 19. The expression οἰκία Καίσαρος corresponds to 'familia' or 'domus Cæsaris' (Tac. Hist. ii. 92) and might include equally the highest functionaries and the lowest menials. Compare Philo Flacc. p. 522 μ εἰ δὴ μὴ βασιλεὺς ἦν ἀλλὰ τις τῶν ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας, οὐκ ὤφειλε προνομίαν τινὰ καὶ τιμὴν ἔχειν; Hippol. Hier. ix. 12 οἰκέτης ἐτύγχανε Καρποφόρου τινὸς ἀνδρὸς πιστοῦ ὄντος ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας. See St Clement of Rome, Appendix, p. 256 sq.