Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Philippians 2:10 - 2:10
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Php_2:10 f. Ἵνα ] This exaltation, Php_2:9, was to have, in accordance with the divine purpose, general adoration and confession as its result,—a continuation of the contrast with the previous state of self-renunciation and humiliation. In the mode of expression there may be detected a reminiscence of Isa_45:23 (Rom_14:11).
The ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ . Ἰ ., emphatically prefixed, affirms that, in the name of Jesus, i.e. in what is involved in that most glorious name “Jesus Christ,” and is present to the conception of the subjects as they bend their knees, is to be found the moving ground of this latter action (comp. Psa_63:5; 1Ki_18:24; 1Ch_16:10, al.; 1Co_6:11; Eph_5:20; Col_3:17; 1Pe_4:14; 1Pe_4:16; Jam_5:14). The bowing of the knee represents adoration, of which it is the symbol (Isa_45:23; Rom_14:11; Rom_11:4; Eph_3:14; Ephesians 3 Esdr. 8:73; 3Ma_2:1; and in Greek writers from Homer onward), and the subject to be adored is, according to the context ( ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ . Ἰ ., and comp. Php_2:11), none other than Jesus, the adoring worship of whom has its warrant in the fellowship of the divine government and of the divine δόξα to which He is exalted (comp. the habitual ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου ,, Rom_10:12 f.; 1Co_1:2; 2Ti_2:22; Act_7:59; Act_9:14; Act_9:21; Act_22:16), but has also at the same time its peculiar character, not absolute, but relative, i.e. conditioned by the relation of the exalted Son to the Father (see Lücke, de invocat. Jes. Ch. Gott. 1843, p. 7 f.; comp. Ernesti, Urspr. d. Sünde, I. p. 218),—a peculiarity which did not escape the observation of Pliny (Ep. x. 97: “Christo quasi Deo”), and was, although only very casually and imperfectly, expressed by him. This adoration (comp. Php_2:11, εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ πατρός ) does not infringe that strict monotheism, which could ascribe absolute deity to the Father only (Joh_17:3; Eph_4:5; 1Co_12:6; 1Co_8:6; 1Ti_6:15 f.); the Father only is ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων Θεός , Rom_9:5 (comp. Ignat. Tars. interpol. 5), ὁ Θεός absolutely, God also of Christ (see on Eph_1:17), the Θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ (2Co_6:18; Rev_1:8; Rev_4:8, al.); and the Son, although of like nature, as σύνθρονος and partaker of His δόξα , is subordinate to Him (1Co_11:3; 1Co_15:27 f.), as in turn the Spirit is to the Son (2Co_3:18); the honour which is to be paid to the Son (Rev_5:8 ff.) has its principle (Joh_5:22 f.) and aim (Php_2:11) in the Father, and therefore the former is to be honoured as the Father, and God in Christ fills and moves the consciousness of him who prays to Christ. According to van Hengel, it is not the adoration of Jesus which is here intended, but that of God under application of the name of Jesus; and de Wette also thinks it probable that Paul only intended to state that every prayer should be made in the name of Jesus as the Mediator ( κύριος ). Comp. also Hofmann: “the praying to God, determined in the person praying by the consciousness of his relation to Jesus as regulating his action.” Instead of this we should rather say: the praying to Jesus, determined by the consciousness of the relation of Jesus to God (of the Son to the Father), as regulating the action of the person praying. All modes of explaining away the adoration as offered to Jesus Himself are at variance not only with the context generally, which has to do with the honour of Jesus, making Him the object of the adoration, but also with the word ἐπουρανίων which follows, because the mediatorship of Jesus, which is implied in the atonement, does not affect the angels as its objects (comp., on the contrary, Heb_1:4; Heb_1:6). The two sentences may not be separated from one another (in opposition to Hofmann); but, on the contrary, it must be maintained that the personal object, to whom the bowing of the knee as well as the confession with the tongue applies, is Jesus. Linguistically erroneous is the view which makes ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ . equivalent to εἰς τὸ ὄνομα , for the glorification of His dignity (Heinrichs, Flatt, and others), or as a paraphrase for ἐν Ἰησοῦ (Estius; Rheinwald leaves either of the two to be chosen); while others, by the interpretation. “quoties auditur nomen,[119] brought out a sense which is altogether without analogy in the N. T. See, in opposition to this, Calvin: “quasi vox (the word Jesus) esset magica, quae totam in sono vim haberet inclusam.”
ἐπουρανίων κ . τ . λ .] every knee of heavenly beings (those to be found in heaven), and those on earth, and those under the earth, is to bow, none is to remain unbent; that is, every one from these three classes shall bow his knees (plural). ἐπουρ . includes the angels (Eph_1:20 f., Php_3:10; Heb_1:4; Heb_1:6; 1Pe_1:12; 1Pe_3:22); ἐπιγ . the human beings on earth (comp. Plat. Ax. p. 368 B: ἐπίγειος ἄνθρωπος ); and καταχθ . the dead in Hades (comp. Hom. Il. ix. 457: Ζεὺς καταχθόνιος , Pluto: καταχθόνιοι δαίμονες , the Manes, Anthol. vii. 333). Comp. Rev_5:13; Ignat. Trall. 9, and the similar classical use of ὑποχθόνιος , ὑπὸ γαῖαν (Eur. Hec. 149, and Pflugk in loc.). The adoration on the part of the latter, which Grotius and Hofmann misinterpret, presupposes the descensus Ch. ad inferos,[120] Eph_4:9, in which He presented Himself to the spirits in Hades as the κύριος . Our passage, however, does not yield any further particulars regarding the so-called descent into hell, which Schweizer has far too rashly condemned as “a myth without any foundation in Scripture.” Chrysostom, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Erasmus, and many others, including Baumgarten-Crusius and Wiesinger, have incorrectly understood by καταχθ . the Daemones, which is an erroneous view, because Paul does not regard the Daemones as being in Hades (see, on the contrary, at Eph_2:2; Eph_6:12). There is an arbitrary rationalizing in Heinrichs, who takes the words as neuters: “omnes rerum creatarum complexus” (comp. Nösselt and J. B. Lightfoot), and already in Beza: “quaecunque et supra mundum sunt et in mundo.” We meet with the right view as early as Theodoret. The Catholics referred καταχθ . to those who are in purgatory; so Bisping still, and Döllinger, Christenth. u. Kirche, p. 262, ed. 2.
As regards the realization of the divine purpose expressed in ἵνα κ . τ . λ ., respecting the ἘΠΙΓΕΊΩΝ , it was still in progress of development, but its completion (Rom_11:25) could not but appear to the apostle near at hand, in keeping with his expectation of the near end of the αἰὼν οὗτος . Observe, moreover, how he emphasizes the universality of the divine purpose ( ἵνα ) with regard to the bowing the knees and confession with the tongue so strongly by ΠᾶΝ ΓΌΝΥ and ΠᾶΣΑ ΓΛῶΣΣΑ , that the arbitrary limitation which makes him mean only those who desire to give God the glory (Hofmann) is out of the question.
[119] Erasmus, Castalio, Beza, Bretschneider, and others, arrived at this interpretation simply by understanding ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ . as ad nomen (comp. Grotius: “nuncupato nomine”); but Hoelemann, with forced subtilty, by the analysis: “quasi circumsonitum appellatione nominis.”
[120] To transfer, with Grotius, Hofmann, and Grimm, the genuflexion of the dead to the period after the resurrection, so that, according to Hofmann, the καταχθόνιοι “sleep below and await their resurrection and shall then adore and confess,” would be entirely erroneous, mixing up with the direct, poetically plastic description of the apostle a remotely suggested reflection. He views the bowing of the knee, as it has been done and is continuously being done, and not as it will be done by an entire class only in the future, after the Parousia. Wiesinger, however, has also placed the realization of the ἵνα πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ κ . τ . λ . at the end of the world, when the knees, which hitherto had not willingly bent, would be forced to do so (1Co_15:25 f.). On this point he appeals to Rom_14:11, where, however, the whole text is dealing with the last judgment, which is not the case here. Besides, ἐν τᾦ ὀνόματι is far from leading us to the idea of an adoration partially forced; it rather presupposes the faith, of which the bowing of the knee and the confession which follows are the free living action; comp. Rom_10:9.