Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Philippians 1:25 - 1:26
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Php_1:25-26. Τοῦτο πεποιθ .] τοῦτο does not belong to οἶδα , but to πεποιθ ., and refers to the case of necessity just expressed; having which is the object of his confidence, Paul knows that, etc., so that ὅτι is dependent on οἶδα alone,—in opposition to Theophylact, Erasmus, Calovius, Heinrichs, Flatt, and others, under whose view the οἶδα would lack the specification of a reason, which is given in this very τοῦτο πεποιθ ., as it was practically necessary. On the accusative of the object with πεποιθ ., comp. Bernhardy, p. 106; Kühner, II. 1, p. 267; also Wunder, ad Soph. O. T. 259 f. Observe that we may say: πεποίθησιν πέποιθα , 2Ki_18:19. Comp. on Php_2:18.
μενῶ ] I shall remain; contrast to the ἀναλῦσαι , which was before expressed by ἐπιμένειν ἐν τ . σαρκί . Comp. Joh_12:34; Joh_21:22 f.; 1Co_15:6. The loving emotion of the apostle (Php_1:8) leads him to add to the absolute μενῶ : καὶ συμπαραμενῶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν , and I shall continue together with all of you; I shall with you all be preserved in temporal life. From Php_1:6; Php_1:10 there can be no doubt as to the terminus ad quem which Paul had in view; and the πᾶσιν (comp. 1Co_15:51; Rom_13:11) shows how near he conceived that goal to be (Php_4:5). Notwithstanding, Hofmann terms this view, which is both verbally and textually consistent, quixotic, and invents instead one which makes Paul mean by μενῶ the remaining alive without his co-operation, and by παραμενῶ , which should (according to Hofmann) be read (see the critical remarks), his remaining willingly, and which assumes that the apostle did not conceive the καὶ παραμενῶ πᾶσιν ὑμῖν as dependent on ὅτι , but conveys in these words a promise to remain with those, “from whom he could withdraw himself.” What a rationalistic, artificial distinction of ideas and separation of things that belong together! and what a singular promise from the apostle’s lips to a church so dear to him: that he will not withdraw himself, but will remain faithful to them (Schneider and Krüger, ad Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 2)! If παραμενῶ is the true reading, Paul says quite simply: I know that I shall remain (shall not be deprived of life), and continue with you all, i.e. and that I shall be preserved to you all; comp. Heb_7:23; Sir_12:15; Hom. Il. xii. 402; Plat. Menex. p. 235 B; Lucian. Nigr. 30; Herodian. vi. 2. 19.
παραμενῶ , to continue there, just like μενῶ in the sense of in vita manere, Herod. Php_1:30. Hence συμπαραμένειν (Thuc. vi. 89. 3; Men. in Stob., lxix. 4, 5), to continue there with, to remain alive along with. Thus LXX. Psa_72:5; Basil, I. p. 49; Gregory of Nazianzus, I. p. 74 (joined with συνδιαιωνίζειν ).
εἰς τὴν ὑμῶν … πίστ .] ὑμῶν , as the personal subject of the προκοπή and χαρὰ τῆς πίστεως , is placed first, with the emphasis of loving interest; the latter genitive, however, which is the real genitive of the subject, belongs to both words, προκοπὴν κ . χαράν . Hence: for your faith—furtherance and joy. Both points are to be advanced by the renewed labours of the apostle among them (Php_1:26). The blending of them together by an ἓν διὰ δυοῖν (Heinrichs, Flatt) is erroneous. Weiss, however, is also in error in urging that τῆς πίστ . cannot belong to προκοπήν also, because it would be in that case the genitive of the object; the faith also is to be an increasing and progressive thing, 2Co_10:15.
Php_1:26. ἵνα τὸ καύχημα κ . τ . λ .] the special and concrete aim of the general proposition εἰς τὴν ὑμῶν προκ . κ . χ . τ . πίστ ., which is consequently represented as the ultimate aim of the μενῶ καὶ συμπαραμ . πᾶσ . ὑμ . Comp. Php_1:10. The καύχημα , because ὑμῶν is placed along with it (comp. 1Co_5:6; 1Co_9:15; 2Co_2:14; 2Co_9:3), is that of the readers and not of the apostle (Chrysostom: μειζόνως ἔχω καυχᾶσθαι ὑμῶν ἐπιδόντων , Ewald: my pride in you at the last day); nor is it equivalent to καύχησις , gloriatio (Flatt and many others), but it denotes, as it invariably does,[78] materies gloriandi (Rom_4:2; 1Co_5:6; 1Co_9:15 f.; 2Co_1:14; 2Co_5:12; Gal_6:4). Hence: that the matter in which you have to glory, i.e. the bliss as Christians in which you rejoice (compare previously the χαρὰ τῆς πίστεως ), may increase abundantly (comp. previously the προκοπὴ τῆς πίστεως ). The ἘΝ ΧΡΙΣΤῷ ἸΗΣΟῦ that is added expresses the sphere in which the περισσεύειν is to take place, and characterizes the latter, therefore, as something which only develops itself in Christ as the element, in which both the joyful consciousness and the ethical activity of life subsist. If the ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ took place otherwise, it would be an egotistical, foreign, generally abnormal and aberrant thing; as was the case, for example, with some of the Corinthians and with Judaistic Christians, whose ΚΑΥΧᾶΣΘΑΙ was based and grew upon works of the law. The normal ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ of the ΚΑΎΧΗΜΑ of the Philippians, however, namely, its ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ ἘΝ ΧΡΙΣΤῷ ἸΗΣΟῦ , shall take place—and this is specially added as the concrete position of the matter
ἘΝ ἘΜΟῚ ΔΙᾺ ΤῊς ἘΜῆς ΠΑΡΟΥΣΊΑς Π . ΠΡῸς ὙΜᾶς , that is, it shall have in me by my coming again to you its procuring cause; inasmuch as through this return in itself, and in virtue of my renewed ministry among you, I shall be the occasion, impulse, and furtherance of that rich increase in your καύχημα , and thus the ΠΕΡΙΣΣΕΎΕΙΝ will rest in me. Consequently the ἐν in ἘΝ Χ . Ἰ ., and the ἘΝ in ἘΝ ἘΜΟΊ , are differently conceived; the former is the specific, essential definition of περισσεύῃ , the latter the statement of the personal procuring ground for the περισσ . ἐν Ἰ . Χ ., which the apostle has in view in reference to the ΚΑΎΧΗΜΑ of his readers,—a statement of the ground, which is not surprising for the service of an instrument of Christ (Hofmann), and which quite accords with the concrete species facti here contemplated, the personal return and the apostolic position and ministry. The interpretation of Hofmann is thus all the more erroneous, viz. that the increase of their glorying is given to the readers in the person of the apostle, in so far as the having him again among them would be a matter of Christian joy and pride to them. Thus would the apostle make himself in fact the object and contents of the καυχᾶσθαι , which would neither be consistent with the logical relation of the ἽΝΑ to the preceding ΕἸς Τ . ὙΜ . ΠΡΟΚΟΠῊΝ Κ . Τ . Λ ., nor with Paul’s own deep humility (1Co_3:21; 1Co_15:9; Eph_3:8), which he satisfies also in 2Co_1:14 by the mutual nature of the καύχημα between himself and his friends, and in view of the day of Christ. By many (see Calvin, Heinrichs, Rheinwald, Rilliet, and others) ἐν Χ . Ἰ ., and by some even ἘΝ ἘΜΟΊ (Storr, Flatt, Huther), are referred, contrary to the position of the words, to ΤῸ ΚΑΎΧΗΜΑ ὙΜῶΝ , with various arbitrary definitions of the sense, e.g. Flatt: “so that ye shall have still more reason, in reference to me, to glorify Jesus Christ (who hath given me again to you);” Rheinwald: “If I shall be delivered by the power of Christ, ye will find abundant cause for praising the Lord, who has done such great things for me.”
πάλιν ] is connected, as an adjectival definition, with ΠΑΡΟΥΣ . See on 2Co_11:23; Gal_1:13; 1Co_8:7.
[78] This applies also against Huther, l.c. p. 585, who, in support of the signification gloriatio, appeals to Pind. 1sth. v. 65: καύχημα κατάβρεχε σιγᾷ . But in this passage also καύχημα means that in which one glories, as the Scholiast has appropriately explained it: εἰ καὶ τηλικαῦτα εἰσὶ τῶν Αἱγινητῶν τὰ κατορθώματα , βρίκι καὶ ἐπικάλυπτε τῇ σιωπῇ .
REMARK.
From Php_1:20-26 we are not to conclude that Paul at that time was in doubt whether he should live to see the Parousia (Usteri, Lehrbegr. p. 355, and others). For in Php_1:20 he only supposes the case of his death, and that indeed, in Php_1:21, as the case which would be profitable for himself, and for which, therefore, he protests in Php_1:23 that he longs. But on account of the need for his life being prolonged (Php_1:24), he knows (Php_1:25) that that case will not come to pass. This οἶδα (Php_1:25) is not to be weakened into a probabiliter sperare or the like (Beza, Calvin, Estius, and many others, also Heinrichs, Rheinwald; comp. Matthies, van Hengel, Rilliet), with which Grotius, from connecting οἶδα πεποιθ ., even brings out the sense, “scio me haec sperare, i.e. malle;” whilst others fall back upon the argumentum a silentio, viz. that Paul says nothing here of any revelation (see Estius, Matthies, and others), but only expresses an inference in itself liable to error (Weiss). No, although he has supposed the possibility (comp. Php_2:17) of his being put to death, he nevertheless knew that he should remain alive; and it must withal be confessed that the result did not correspond to this definite οἶδα , which Bengel even goes so far as to refer to a dictamen propheticum. By no means, however, is an imaginary situation[79] to be suspected here (Baur), and just as little can a second imprisonment at Rome be founded on this passage (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theodoret, Bullinger, Piscator, Calovius, Estius, Bengel, and many others, also Wiesinger); as to the relation of this passage to Act_20:25, see on Acts.
We have further to notice that Paul, according to Php_1:23, assumes that, in case he should be put to death, he would go not into Hades, but into heaven to Christ,—a conviction of the bliss attending martyrdom which is found in 2Co_5:8 and in the history of Stephen, Act_7:59, and therefore does not occur for the first time in the Apocalypse (Rev_6:9 ff., Rev_7:9 ff.).[80] Wetstein’s idea is a mere empty evasion, that by ἈΝΑΛῦΣΑΙ is doubtless meant the dying, but by ΣῪΝ Χ . ΕἾΝΑΙ only the time following the resurrection (comp. also Weitzel, Stud. u. Krit. 1836, p. 954 ff.); as also is that of Grotius, that σὺν Χ . εἶναι means: “in Christi custodia esse,” and “nihil hinc de loco definiri potest.” It is also altogether at variance with the context (see Php_1:20-21), if, with Kaeuffer, we interpret ἀναλῦσαι as the change that takes place at the Parousia (“ut quasi eximeretur carne”). Comp. on the contrary, Polycarp: ad Phil. 9, ὅτι εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον αὐτοῖς τόπον εἰσὶ παρὰ τῷ ΚΥΡΊΩ , ᾯ ΚΑῚ ΣΥΝΈΠΑΘΟΝ , Clem. Rom. 1 Corinthians 5, of Peter: μαρτυρήσας ἐπορεύθη εἰς τὸν ὁφειλόμενον τόπον τῆς δόξης , and of Paul: εἰς τὸν ἅγιον τόπον ἐπορεύθη , Martyr. Ignat. 26. It is an intermediate state, not yet the fully perfected glory, but in heaven, where Christ is (Php_3:20 f.). Georgii, in Zeller’s theolog. Jahrb. 1845, I. p. 22, following Usteri, Lehrbegr. p. 368, erroneously discovers in our passage a modification of the New Testament view, developed only when the hope of a speedy Parousia fell into the background. Comp. Neander and Baumgarten Crusius (whose view amounts to an inconsistency of the conceptions). Opposed to these views, even apart from 2Co_5:8 and Act_7:59, is the fact that the speedy Parousia appears still to be very distinctly expected in this epistle. See particularly Php_3:20 f. But we find nothing said in the New Testament as to an intermediate body between death and resurrection. See remark on 2Co_5:3. There is a vague fanciful idea in Delitzsch, Psychol. p. 443 f., who in p. 419 ff., however, forcibly shows the incorrectness of the doctrine of the sleep of the soul.
[79] Hinsch even assigns, l.c. p. 71, to the passage with its vivid emotion the character of a historico-critical reflection. He represents the author of the epistle as having in view the various opinions current in his age regarding the close of the apostle’s life, in other words, the question, whether his captivity at that time ended in his being put to death, or in his being set at liberty and beginning a new course of labour. The author adduces the grounds of both views, putting them in the mouth of the apostle, and in ver. 24 decides in favour of the second; the original, of which the present passage is an imitation, is to be found (as Baur also thinks) in 2Co_5:8, Rom_14:8. See Hilgenfeld, in opposition to Baur and Hinsch.
[80] All we can gather from Rom_8:10 f. is merely that the life of believers remains unaffected by the death of the body; as at Joh_11:25 f. They remain in fellowship with Christ; but as to the mode and place of this fellowship, of which they might indeed be partakers even in Hades (Paradise, Luk_16:22 ff; Luk_23:43; Php_2:10), as little is said in that passage as in Rom_8:38, Rom_14:8. But in the passage we are considering, the words σὺν Χριστῷ εἶναι point to an actual being with the Lord in heaven (comp. 1Th_4:14; 1Th_4:17; Act_7:59; 2 Cor. l.c.), and do not therefore apply to the state in Hades (in opposition to Güder, Erschein. Chr. unt. d. Todten, p. 111, and others); see also 2Co_5:8. This union with Christ, however, is not the δόξα as the ultimate goal of hope; see Php_3:20 f.; Col_3:3. To the latter belongs also the bodily transfiguration, which can only take place at the Parousia, 1Co_15:23. This applies also in opposition to Gerlach, d. letzt. Dinge, p. 79 ff., whose distinction between corporeality and materiality [Leiblichkeit und Körperlichkeit] is not in harmony with the New Testament, which distinguishes rather between σῶμα and σάρξ .