Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadCambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges - Philippians 3:1 - 3:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1. Τὸ λοιπόν. “For the rest”; “For what remains.” So below, Php 4:8; and Eph 6:10 : τὸ λοιπὸν … ἐνδυναμοῦσθε, κτλ. For St Paul’s use of the phrase see also (λοιπὸν) 1Co 1:16; (ὃ δὲ λοιπὸν) 1Co 4:2; 2Co 13:1; 2Th 3:1, and (τοῦ λοιποῦ) Gal 6:17. On the whole it seems not so much to introduce an immediate conclusion (as “finally” would do) as to mark a transition on the way to it. It “signifies for the rest, besides, moreover, … forming a transition to other things to which the attention of the … reader is directed” (Grimm, ed. Thayer, s.v. λοιπός).
Here the Apostle is approaching the end of his Epistle, entering on its last large topic, the difference between a true Gospel and a false. Hitherto, on the whole, with much accessory matter, he has been dealing with the blessedness of unity. Now he will deliver a definite message about saving truth in view of particular errors; and then he will close. Τὸ λοιπόν fitly introduces this.
The connexion of the passage has been debated; particularly the bearing of the words τὰ αὐτὰ γράφειν ὑμῖν, following on Χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ. No previous injunction to rejoice appears in this Epistle; and there is no trace of a previous Epistle, which might have spoken so. Bp Lightfoot’s solution is as follows: “The same things” are the exhortations to unity, often made already, and which St Paul was now just about to reinforce. But he was interrupted, and did not dictate again till, perhaps, some days had intervened. He then dropped the intended appeal, and turned instead to the subject of doctrinal error. Lightfoot accordingly, in his edition, breaks the text at the close of Php 3:1, and regards Php 3:2 as the opening of a new paragraph or chapter.
But can we think it likely that St Paul, with his scribe beside him, would have let the Epistle go forth in a state so disjointed?
The following seems a more probable theory: St Paul sees at Philippi the risk of doctrinal error; error which in one way or another would undervalue “Christ, and Him crucified.” The true antidote would be a developed and rejoicing insight into Christ and His work, such as had been given to himself. This shall now be his theme. And this, in a sense, he has touched on already, by his frequent allusions to the Saviour’s union with His people, and above all by such passages as Php 1:20-23, Php 2:5-18. So in treating now of Christ as their righteousness, life, peace, and glory, and of “rejoicing in Him” as such, he is “writing the same things” as before, only in a more explicit way. All “other gospels,” whatever their details, were alike in this, that they beclouded that great joy. Thus the special injunction to “rejoice” affects both the past context and the following; particularly it leads on to Php 3:3 below, καυχώμενοι ἐν Χ. Ἰ.
“From the loss of our glory in Thee, preserve us” (Litany of the Unitas Fratrum, the “Moravian” Church).
χαίρετε. The R.V. margin has “Or, farewell.” But the rendering “rejoice” (A.V. and text of R.V.) is supported by Php 4:3, which seems to take up this phrase, and adds παντότε. And already in Php 2:18 we have had χαίρειν in (obviously) the sense of rejoicing. The Latin Versions read gaudete in Domino. Chrysostom writes in loc. αἱ θλίψεις … αἱ κατὰ Χριστὸν ἔχουσι χαράν.
τὰ αὐτὰ. See the notes above, on the connexion of the passage.
ἐμοὶ μὲν οὐκ ὀκνηρόν, ὑμῖν δὲ ἀσφαλές. The words form an iambic trimeter[3] of a rhythm frequent in the Comedians. They may be a quotation. In 1Co 15:33 we have almost certainly such a quotation: φθείρουσιν ἤθη χρήσθʼ (or χρηστὰ) ὁμιλίαι κακαί: “Ill converse cankers fair morality[4].” For similar apparent verse-quotations in the N.T. see Act 17:28, ἐκ τοῦ γὰρ γένος ἐσμέν: Tit 1:12, Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσται κτλ.: and perhaps Jam 1:17, πᾶσα δόσις ἀγαθὴ καὶ πᾶν δώρημα τέλειον.
[3] I owe this remark to a friend.
[4] The words occur in a fragment of the Thais of Menander; but Socrates (the historian) adduces (Php 3:16, ad fin.) the verse as proof that St Paul was not ἀνήκοος τοῦ Εὐριπίδου δραμάτων. (And cp. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 14, 59.) “Perhaps Menander borrowed … from Euripides” (Alford). Socrates (ibid.) quotes Tit 1:12; Act 17:28; as proofs of St Paul’s acquaintance with Epimenides and Aratus respectively.
We may render here, rhythmically, “To me not irksome, it is safe for you.”