Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Philippians 3:12 - 3:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Php_3:12. Οὐχ ὅτι ] By this I do not mean to say that, etc. See on 2Co_1:24; 2Co_3:5; Joh_6:46. Aken, Lehre v. Temp. u. Mod. p. 91 ff. He might encounter such a misconception on the part of his opponents; but “in summo fervore sobrietatem spiritualem non dimittit apostolus,” Bengel.
ἤδη ἔλαβον ] that I have already grasped it. The object is not named by Paul, but left to be understood of itself from the context. The latter represents a prize-runner, who at the goal of the σταδιοδρομία grasps the βραβεῖον (Php_3:14). This βραβεῖον typifies the bliss of the Messiah’s kingdom (comp. 1Co_9:24; 2Ti_4:7-8), which therefore, and that as βραβεῖον , is here to be conceived as the object, the attainment of which is denied to have already taken place. And accordingly, ἔλαβον is to be explained of the having attained in ideal anticipation, in which the individual is as sure and certain of the future attainment of the βραβεῖον , as if it were already an accomplished fact. What therefore Paul here denies of himself is the same imagination with which he reproaches the Corinthians in 1Co_4:8 (see in loc). The reference to the βραβεῖον (so Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Erasmus, Bengel, Heinrichs, Rilliet, and others) is not proleptic;[164] on the contrary, it is suggested by the idea of the race just introduced in Php_3:12, and is prepared for by the preceding καταντήσω εἰς τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τ . νεκρ ., in which the Messianic ΣΩΤΗΡΊΑ makes its appearance, and the grasping of the ΒΡΑΒΕῖΟΝ is realized; hence it is so accordant with the context that all other references are excluded. Accordingly, we must neither supply metam generally (Beza, comp. Ewald); nor τὴν ἀνάστασιν (Rheinwald); nor ΤῸΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΌΝ (Theodoret; comp. Weiss); nor moral perfection (Hoelemann, following Ambrosiaster and others); nor the right of resurrection (Grotius); nor even “the knowledge of Christ which appropriates, imitates, and strives to follow Him” (de Wette; comp. Ambrosiaster, Calvin, Vatablus, van Hengel, Wiesinger); nor yet the καταντᾶν of Php_3:11 (Matthies).
Ἢ ἬΔΗ ΤΕΤΕΛΕΊΩΜΑΙ ] or—in order to express without a figure that which had been figuratively denoted by ἤδη ἔλαβον —were already perfected.[165] For only the ethically perfected Christian, who has entirely become and is (observe the perfect) what he was intended to become and be, would be able to say with truth that he had already grasped the βραβεῖον , however infallibly certain might be to him, looking at his inward moral frame of life, the future ΣΩΤΗΡΊΑ . He who is not yet perfect has still always to run after it; see the sequel. The words ἢ ἤδη δεδικαίωμαι , introduced in considerable authorities before Ἤ , form a correct gloss, when understood in an ethical sense. For instances of τελειοῦσθαι —which is not, with Hofmann, to be here taken in the indefinite generality of being ready—in the sense of spiritual perfection (comp. Heb_2:10; Heb_5:9; Heb_12:23), see Ast, Lex. Plat. III. p. 369; comp. Philo, Alleg. p. 74 C, where the βραβεῖα are adjudged to the soul, when it is perfected. To be at the goal (Hammond, Wolf, Loesner, Heinrichs, Flatt, Rilliet, and others), is a sense, which τετελ . might have, according to the context. In opposition to it, however, we may urge, not that the figure of the race-contest only comes in distinctly in the sequel, for it is already introduced in Php_3:12, but that Paul would thus have expressed himself quite tautologically, and that ΤΈΛΕΙΟΙ in Php_3:15 is correlative with ΤΕΤΕΛΕΊΩΜΑΙ .
ΔΙΏΚΩ ΔΈ ] but I pursue it, i.e. I strive after it with strenuous running; see Php_3:14. The idea of urgent haste is conveyed (Abresch, ad Aesch. Sept. 90; Blomfield, Gloss. Pers. 86). The δέ has the force of an ἈΛΛΆ in the sense of on the other hand; Baeumlein, Partik. p. 95, and comp. on Eph_4:15. We must understand τὸ βραβεῖον as object to διώκω , just as in the case of ἜΛΑΒΟΝ and ΚΑΤΑΛΆΒΩ ; hence ΔΙΏΚΩ is not to be taken absolutely (Rilliet; comp. Rheinwald, de Wette, Hofmann), although this in itself would be linguistically admissible (in opposition to van Hengel), see on Php_3:14. Phavorinus: διώκειν ἐνίοτε τὸ ἁπλῶς κατὰ σπουδὴν ἐλαύνειν ;. also Eustathius, ad Il. xxiii. 344.
εἰ καὶ καταλάβω ] This ΕἸ is, as in ΕἼ ΠΩς , Php_3:11, deliberative: if I also, etc., the idea of σκοπεῖν or some similar word being before his mind; the compound ΚΑΤΑΛΆΒΩ is more (in opposition to Weiss) than ἜΛΑΒΟΝ , and denotes the apprehension which takes possession; comp. on Rom_9:30, 1Co_9:24, where we have the same progression from ΛΑΜΒ . to ΚΑΤΑΛΑΜΒ .; Herod, ix. 58: ΔΙΩΚΤΈΟΙ ΕἸΣῚ Ἐς Ὃ ΚΑΤΑΛΑΜΦΘΈΝΤΕς ; and ΚΑΊ implies: I not merely grasp ( ἔλαβον ), but also actually apprehend.[166]
ἐφʼ ᾧ καὶ κατελήφθην ὑπὸ Χ .] Comp. Plat. Tim. p. 38 D: ὅθεν καταλαμβάνουσί τε καὶ καταλαμβάνονται , 1Co_13:12 : ἘΠΙΓΝΏΣΟΜΑΙ ΚΑΘῺς ΚΑῚ ἘΠΕΓΝΏΣΘΗΝ , Ignatius, Romans 8 : ΘΕΛΉΣΑΤΕ , ἽΝΑ ΚΑῚ ὙΜΕῖς ΘΕΛΗΘῆΤΕ , Trall. 5: πολλὰ γὰρ ἡμῖν λείπει , ἵνα Θεοῦ μὴ λειπώμεθα : because I was also apprehended by Christ. This is the determining ground of the διώκω , and of the thought thereto annexed, ΕἸ ΚΑῚ ΚΑΤΑΛΆΒΩ . Theophylact (comp. Chrysostom and Theodoret) aptly remarks: ΔΕΙΚΝῪς , ὍΤΙ ὈΦΕΊΛΗ ἘΣΤῚ ΤῸ ΠΡᾶΓΜΑ , ΦΗΣΊ · ΔΙΌΤΙ ΚΑῚ ΚΑΤΕΛΉΦΘ . ὙΠῸ Χ . Otherwise, in fact, this having been apprehended would not have been responded to on my part.[167] Respecting ἐφʼ ᾧ , on the ground of this, that, i.e. propterea quod, see on Rom_5:12; 2Co_5:4. The interpretation: for which, on which behalf (Oecumenius, Beza, Grotius, Rheinwald, Rilliet, Weiss, and others), just as in Php_4:10, is indeed linguistically correct and simple; but it assigns the conversion of Paul, not to the general object which it had (Gal_1:16), but to a personal object. In this case, moreover, Rilliet, de Wette, Wiesinger supply τοῦτο previously, which is not in accordance with the objectless ἜΛΑΒΟΝ . More artificial are the explanations: whereunto, in the sense of obligation (Hoelemann); under which condition (Matthies); in so far as (Castalio, Ewald); in the presupposition, that (Baur); which is certain from the fact, that (subjective ground of knowledge; so Ernesti, Urspr. d. Sünde, II. p. 217). According to Hofmann, Paul desires to give the reason why, and for what purpose, he contemplates an apprehension. But thus the reference of ἐφʼ ᾧ κ . τ . λ . would be limited to et ΕἸ Κ . ΚΑΤΑΛΆΒΩ , although the positive leading thought has been introduced in ΔΙΏΚΩ ΔΈ . ἘΦʼ ᾯ Κ . Τ . Λ . serves this leading thought along with that of its accessory definition εἰ κ . καταλάβω .
καί ] also, subjoins to the active καταλάβω the ingeniously corresponding passive relation ΚΑΤΕΛΉΦΘΗΝ . And by ΚΑΤΕΛΉΦΘ . Paul expresses what at his conversion he experienced from Christ (hence the aorist); there is no need for suggesting the idea, foreign to the context, of an apprehended fugitive (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Theodoret, and others, including Flatt and van Hengel). The fact that at that time Christ laid hold of him on his pre-Christian career, and took him into His power and gracious guidance as His own, is vividly illustrated by the figure, to which the context gave occasion, κατελήφθ . ὑπὸ Χ .
[164] As also Hofmann objects, who finds the notion of the verb alone sufficient for expressing what is to be negatived, but yet likewise ultimately comes to eternal life as a supplement; for that which is not yet attained is one and the same with that which is one day to be attained.
[165] This being perfected is not the result of the ἔλαβον (Wiesinger, Weiss), but the moral condition of him who can say ἔλαβον . Note that ἤ is used, and not καί ; καί might have been taken as annexing the result.
[166] 2Ti_4:7 does not conflict with our passage, but is the confession at the end of the course, “exemplum accipientis jam jamque,” Bengel.
[167] Paul is conscious that, being apprehended by Christ, he may not and cannot do otherwise. Comp. Bengel: quoniam; sensus virtutis Christi accendit Christianum.