Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Philippians 3:13 - 3:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Php_3:13-14. Once more, and with loving earnestness ( ἀδελφοί ), Paul says what he had already said in Php_3:12 with οὐχ ὅτι … καταλάβω ; and in doing so, he brings more into relief in the first portion the element of self-estimation, which in his own case he denies; and, in the second part, he sets forth more in detail the idea: διώκω δὲ εἰ κ . καταλ .
ἐγὼ ἐμαυτόν ] ego me ipsum, an emphatic mode of indicating one’s own estimation, in which one is both subject and object of the judgment. Comp. Joh_5:30 f., Joh_7:17, Joh_8:54; Act_26:9, et al. A reference to the judgment of others about him (Bengel, Weiss, and others; comp. also Hofmann) is here out of place.
λογίζομαι ] I judge, I am of opinion,[168] Rom_3:28; Rom_8:18; Rom_14:14; 2Co_11:5, et al.; Xen. Anab. ii. 2. 13; Dem. lxiii. 12.
ἛΝ ΔΈ ] Comp. Anthol. Pal. vii. 455: ἛΝ Δʼ ἈΝΤῚ ΠΆΝΤΩΝ , also the frequent ἓν μόνον ; see Stallbaum, ad. Plat. Symp. p. 184 C, Rep. p. 548 C. It is here usually supplemented by ποιῶ (Chrysostom appears to have understood ποιῶν ). So also Winer, Buttmann, de Wette, Wiesinger, Ellicott. But how arbitrarily, seeing that the context by what immediately precedes suggests simply the supplying of ΛΟΓΊΖΟΜΑΙ (not ΛΟΓΊΖ . ΚΑΤΕΙΛΗΦΈΝΑΙ , Oecumenius, Weiss), and this is in perfect harmony with the sense! Hence we take it thus: “but one thing I think, unum censeo.” This one thing which Paul thinks regarding the matter in question, in contrast to the previous negative ( δέ , as in Php_3:12), is then directly expressed by all that follows from τὰ μὲν ὀπίσω to ἐν Χ . Ἰ . Nearest to this contextual supplement comes the Syriac, which has added οἶδα , and Luther, who has added λέγω . The supplying of λογίζομαι is confirmed by the cognate φρονῶμεν , Php_3:15. Without supplying anything, ἛΝ ΔΈ has either been connected with διώκω (thus Augustine, Serm. de divers. i. 6, Pierce, Storr, van Hengel, and others), or has been taken absolutely: “unum contra!” see Hoelemann, comp. Rheinwald. But the former is to be rejected, because the subsequent διώκω carries its own complete definiteness; and the latter would render the discourse abrupt without reason, since it is not written under emotional excitement, and would, withal, require a supplement, such as Beza gives by ἘΣΤΊ . Hofmann also comes at length in substance to this latter supplement, mixing up an imaginary contrast to that which the adversaries imputed to the apostle: over-against this, his conduct subsequently described was the only thing which was quite right (?).
τὰ μὲν ὀπίσω ] what is behind, cannot be referred to what has been mentioned in Php_3:5-6 and the category of those pre-Christian advantages generally (so in substance, Pelagius; ΤΙΝῈς in Theodoret, Vatablus, Zeger, Wolf, and others, also Ewald and Hofmann); this would be at variance with the context, for ΤᾺ ΜῈΝ ὈΠΊΣΩ ἘΠΙΛΑΝΘ . corresponds to the negation of the having already attained or being perfect in Php_3:12, and must therefore apply to the previous achievements of the Christian life, to the degrees of Christian moral perfection already reached, which are conceived as the spaces already left behind in the stadium of the runner still pressing forward; and not to what had belonged to his pre-Christian conduct (Hofmann). Comp. Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact.
ἘΠΙΛΑΝΘΑΝ .] forgetting, like the runner who dismisses from his mind the space already traversed, and fixes his thoughts only on what still lies before him. This is surely no break in the internal connection (as Hofmann objects); on the contrary, like the runner pressing forward, Paul in his continuous restless striving overlooks the degree of moral perfection already attained, which he would not do, if he reckoned it already as itself perfection. ἘΠΙΛΑΝΘΆΝΕΣΘΑΙ is joined with the genitive and accusative; the simple verb, on the contrary, only with the genitive. See Kühner, II. 1, p. 313. On the use of the word in the sense of intentional forgetting, comp. Herod, iii. 75, iv. 43; 1Ma_1:49. It thus amounts to the sense of nullam rationem habere (Sturz, Lex. Xen. II. p. 294).
τοῖς δὲ ἔμπροσθεν ἐπεκτεινόμ .] but stretching myself out towards that which is before. The dative is governed by the verb compounded with ἐπί (Krüger, § 48. 11. 5; Nägelsbach, zur Ilias, p. 30, ed. 3), the ἐπί intimating the direction. In the case of such an one running “prono et quasi praecipiti corpore” (Beza), “oculus manum, manus pedem praevertit et trahit,” Bengel. On the verb, comp. Strabo, xvii. p. 800; Aristot. Poet. 21; Plut. Mor. p. 1147 A. ΤᾺ ἜΜΠΡ . represent the higher stages of Christian perfection not yet attained.[169]
κατὰ σκοπὸν διώκω ] I hasten towards the goal, therefore in a straight course towards the prize of victory. The opposite: ἀπὸ σκοποῦ , Hom. Od. xi. 344, xxii. 6; Plat. Theaet. p. 179 C, Tim. p. 25 E; Xen. Conv. ii. 10; Lucian, Icarom. 2; and παρὰ σκοπόν , Pind. Ol. xiii. 144. On διώκω without an accusative of the object (in opposition to van Hengel), comp. Xen. Anab. vii. 2. 20, vi. 5. 25 ( δρόμω διώκειν ); Aesch. Sept. 89; Buttmann, Lexil. p. 219; Jacobs, ad Anthol. IX. p. 213. Comp. on Php_3:12. The prize of victory ( τὸ βραβεῖον , see on 1Co_9:24; Clem. Cor. I. 5; Schol. min. ad Soph. El. 680; Oppian, Cyneg. iv. 196; Lycophr. 1154) represents the salvation of the Messiah’s kingdom (see on Php_3:12), to which God has called man. Hence: τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως , a genitive which is to be taken not as appositional (de Wette, Schenkel), but as the genitive of the subject: the βραβεῖον , to which the calling relates. Comp. Luther: “which the heavenly calling holds out.” This is therefore the object of the ἐλπὶς τῆς κλήσεως (Eph_1:18; Eph_4:4; comp. the Platonic καλὸν τὸ ἆθλον καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς μεγάλη , Phaed. p. 114 C).
ἡ ἄνω κλῆσις τοῦ Θεοῦ is the calling which issued from God above in heaven (on ἄνω , comp. Col_3:2, Gal_4:26; and on the subject-matter, Heb_3:1), by which He has called us to the σωτηρία of His kingdom. The general form of expression, not even limited by a pronoun (such as τῆς ἐμῆς ), does not allow us to think only of the miraculous calling of the apostle himself; this is rather included under the general category of the ἄνω κλῆσις τοῦ Θεοῦ , which in the individual cases may have taken historically very different forms. The ἄνω , which in itself is not necessary, is added, because Paul is thoroughly filled with the consciousness of the divine nature of the κλῆσις in its exaltedness above everything that is earthly. Lastly, the κλῆσις itself is, as always (even in 2Th_1:11), the act of calling; not that whereto one is called (de Wette), or “le bonheur céleste même” (Rilliet); and the general currency of the idea and expression forbids us also, since no indication of the kind is given, to conceive of God as βραβευτής or βραβεύς , as the judge of the contest (Pollux, iii. 145; Blomf. Gloss, ad Aesch. Pers. 307), who through the herald summons the runners to the race (Grotius, Wolf, Rosenmüller, am Ende, Hoelemann, van Hengel, Wiesinger); τῆς ἄνω κλ . τ . Θ . serves to define more accurately that which is figuratively denoted by βραβεῖον , but does not itself form a part of the allegory.
ἐν Χ . Ἰ .] is rightly (so also Weiss) joined by Chrysostom to διώκω : ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τοῦτο ποιῶ , φησίν . οὐ γὰρ ἔνι χωρὶς τῆς ἐκείνου ῥοπῆς τοσοῦτον διελθεῖν διάστημα . Comp. Theodoret and Oecumenius. This thought, that the διώκειν just described is done by him in Christ, as the great upholding and impelling element of life in which amidst this activity he moves, is emphatically placed at the end as that which regulates all his efforts. The usual connection of these words with τ . ἄνω κλήσεως τ . Θεοῦ , in which the calling is understood as brought about through Christ (rather: having its causal ground in Christ), yields a superfluous and self-obvious definition of the κλήσις already so accurately defined; although the connecting article would not be necessary, since, according to the construction καλεῖν ἐν Χ . (1Co_7:22; 1Pe_5:10), ἐν Χ . Ἰ . might be joined with κλήσεως so as to form one idea; comp. Clem. Cor. I. 46. A contrast to the calling issued to Israel to be God’s people on earth, is groundlessly suggested by Hofmann.
[168] Οὐ belongs to λογίζομαι . The erroneous reference to κατειληφέναι produced the reading οὔπω (A D à min. vss. and Fathers), which Tischendorf 8. has adopted.
[169] Τὰ ἔμπροσθεν is thus conceived by the apostle as that which still lies further in prospect after every advance in the ethical course; not as that which lay before him in consequence of his conversion (contrasting with his pre-Christian efforts), as Hofmann thinks. It is the ever new, greater, and loftier task which he sees before him, step after step.