Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comVincent Word Studies - Philippians 3:2 - 3:2
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Beware (βλέπετε)
Lit., look to. Compare Mar 4:24; Mar 8:15; Luk 21:8.
Dogs
Rev., correctly, the dogs, referring to a well-known party - the Judaizers. These were nominally Christians who accepted Jesus as the Messiah, but as the Savior of Israel only. They insisted that Christ's kingdom could be entered only through the gate of Judaism. Only circumcised converts were fully accepted by God. They appeared quite early in the history of the Church, and are those referred to in Act 15:1. Paul was the object of their special hatred and abuse. They challenged his birth, his authority, and his motives. “'Paul must be destroyed,' was as truly their watchword as the cry for the destruction of Carthage had been of old to the Roman senator” (Stanley, “Sermons and Lectures on the Apostolic Age”). These are referred to in Phi 1:16; and the whole passage in the present chapter, from Phi 3:3 to Phi 3:11, is worthy of study, being full of incidental hints lurking in single words, and not always apparent in our versions; hints which, while they illustrate the main point of the discussion, are also aimed at the assertions of the Judaizers. Dogs was a term of reproach among both Greeks and Jews. Homer uses it of both women and men, implying shamelessness in the one, and recklessness in the other. Thus Helen: “Brother-in-law of me, a mischief devising dog” (“Iliad,” vi., 344). Teucer of Hector: “I cannot hit this raging dog” (“Iliad,” viii., 298). Dr. Thomson says of the dogs in oriental towns: “They lie about the streets in such numbers as to render it difficult and often dangerous to pick one's way over and amongst them - a lean, hungry, and sinister brood. They have no owners, but upon some principle known only to themselves, they combine into gangs, each of which assumes jurisdiction over a particular street; and they attack with the utmost ferocity all canine intruders into their territory. In those contests, and especially during the night, they keep up an incessant barking and howling, such as is rarely heard in any European city. The imprecations of David upon his enemies derive their significance, therefore, from this reference to one of the most odious of oriental annoyances” (“Land and Book,” Central palestine and Phoenicia, 593). See Psa 59:6; Psa 22:16. Being unclean animals, dogs were used to denote what was unholy or profane. So Mat 7:6; Rev 22:15. The Israelites are forbidden in Deuteronomy to bring the price of a dog into the house of God for any vow: Deu 23:18. The Gentiles of the Christian era were denominated “dogs” by the Jews, see Mat 15:26. Paul here retorts upon them their own epithet.
Evil workers
Compare deceitful workers, 2Co 11:13.
Concision (κατατομήν)
Only here in the New Testament. The kindred verb occurs in the Septuagint only, of mutilations forbidden by the Mosaic law. See Lev 21:5. The noun here is a play upon περιτομή circumcision. It means mutilation. Paul bitterly characterizes those who were not of the true circumcision (Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29; Col 2:11; Eph 2:11) as merely mutilated. Compare Gal 5:12, where he uses ἀποκόπτειν to cut off, of those who would impose circumcision upon the Christian converts: “I would they would cut themselves off who trouble you;” that is, not merely circumcise, but mutilate themselves like the priests of Cybele.