position with regard to the law.
Ver. 8. The apostle places riyovpat in contrast with TJyrjpai as
then, so now also, whatever his opponents may say. 'A/lAa fj,ev ovv
(not ftevovvye) equivalent to imo vero, Winer's Gr., 53, 7, p. 392.*
Havra is that which was denoted at ver. 7 by anva, so that the an-
tithesis lies not in the -rravra (Billiet), but in the ^yovjucu, before
which also nai stands. The- present tense expresses more pointedly,
the opposition to that false doctrine, which would require the con-
verted Gentiles to supplement their Christianity with Judaism.
Further, the apostle counts all but loss for the excellency, etc. Am
TO vTTspe^ov as a substantive (not for -rr\v v-rrepe^ovaav') in order to give
greater prominence to the idea implied in it. The excellency on
account of which all appears as loss, lies in the object of knowledge,
Christ Jesus. The nature of this knowledge, we learn from vers. 9,
10 ; it is a knowledge which presupposes believing fellowship with
* Winer, 6 ed., renders " at sane quidem." [K.
426 PHILIPPIANS III. 9.
him and suffering the loss of all things. Only in this sense does it
correspond with the antithesis in ijyijpai and jjyovfuu. The apostle
adds my Lord, under the constraining influence of grateful love.
The expression did rbv Xpiarov and did TO vnepK%ov are further ex-
plained in what follows first, did rbv Xpiarov ; this, however, has
significance only when considered as that which the other presup-
poses. In order to explain how this knowledge of Christ makes him
determine always to count all things but loss, he shews at vers. 8,
10, that it rests on fellowship with Christ ; the essential pre-
requisite to which is, not the righteousness of the law but the right-
eousness which is through faith in him. To arrive at this knowledge,
then, all self-glorying must be renounced. Accordingly the TOV yvti-
vai of ver. 10 is no other than that mentioned at ver. 8, and the
second half of ver. 8, and ver. 9 indicates that, without which such
a yv&vai is not possible. Thus we understand why the apostle,
in the words, for whom I am deprived of all things, returns to
the idea at ver. 7, and, corresponding to the expression of that idea
in ver. 8 now adds, and count than but dung. Td ndv-a points
back to Trdvra. 'E^/wc^Tyv must, on account of the connexion with
ver. 7, not be understood as middle (I have deprived myself),
but may well enough be taken in a passive sense, as indeed it
usually is (I have been deprived). It is the consequence of the
fjyrjfiai fyniav, and the expression is therefore still stronger. The
words and do count, are not to be separated from for whom, and
for whom I have suffered the loss of all things to be taken as a
parenthetic clause, as appears from the connexion already stated.
This relative clause would, in that case, be useless, and what follows
would not appear as an explanation of the did TO vTrepexov, but would
introduce a further reason for the i}yovnai, whilst, as ver. 10 shews,
no further reason is given, but only the explanation of the did TO
vnepexov. 2/fi;/3aAa, a^strong expression for ^rj/j.ia, equivalent to " re-
fuse" (common derivation from aval ftaAelv, see Passow). The end
for which the apostle suffers the loss of all things, and counts them but
dung, is then stated in the words, that I may win Christ, in which
accordingly we have the explanation of the for whom, as also of the
for Christ, at ver. 7. For his sake, i. e., to gain him, I have been
deprived of all things, and count them always as dross. The ex-
pression Kepdrjou is explained by the antithesis with ^r\\Li(^Qf\vai \
Christ comes as gain, in the place of the loss he has suffered.
Ver. 9. The words Iva XPIOTOV Kepdijau evidently correspond
more to KfyfuudTjv than to tfyovpai, unless, with Van Hengel and
others, we understand nepdaiveiv as expressive of a growing posses-
sion, which would involve 'an idea that hardly belongs to the apostle ;
for this Kepdaiveiv is fully realized by attaining to the righteousness
of faith, and entering into fellowship with Christ, ver. 9 (jwptfjovoOcu
PHILIPPIANS III. 9. 427
at Gal. iv. 19, is a different idea). If the first expression corresponds
more to t-^twflT/v, the not evpedti iv avrti, on the other hand, corres-
ponds more to rfyov^ai. It is quite evident that this evpeOijvai is not
equivalent to elvai. On the other side, as De Wette remarks,
it represents the being actually found, and it is therefore not
necessary to suppose in evpeOu any allusion to the great day of judg-
ment. De Wette and Meyer have justly stated as reasons why pr)
t%wv should not be immediately connected with evpedti ut deprehen-
dar .... non habere (Van Hengel), " that KV avrti and 6td
morewf; Xpiarov do not go together, and thus the significance of the
evpe6& iv avToij taken by itself, would be lost." Mr) K%(*)V is rather to
be understood, with Meyer, as introducing a more specific statement
of what is implied in the evpedti iv avr&. On //??, Winer's Gr., 55,
5. In order rightly to understand the following words, ver. 9, it is
of chief importance to keep in view, as De Wette has shewn, the
twofold signification of diitaioovvrjv as connected with eftrjv and TT)V
m vo^ov. By iprjv, the apostle denotes one's own righteousness
wrought out by himself, as Kom. x. 3, rr\v Idiav dcitaioavvrjv . The
opposite of this, as the passage just cited shews, is 77 rov 6eov diitai-
oavvr}, or, as it is here expressed, rijv IK deov diicaioavvrjv, whilst to
the TT)V KK vofiov is opposed the TT/V did morels Xpiarov. I connect,
however, the Km rq marei at the close with the last dtnaioavvrj, as
denoting the foundation on which this ducaioavvr] deov in the individ-
ual rests, whilst in did Trforeus, faith is represented in its objective
aspect, as the means by which that righteousness is appropriated,
corresponding to the in v6p,ov. The rr\v in deov diKaioavvrjv im ry
marei, taken as one idea, forms then the antithesis to i^v ditcaioov-
VTJV ; it is not a righteousness proceeding from the individual wno
possesses it, but from God, and belonging to the individual only
in so far as it rests on the foundation of faith, as its subjective con-
dition. It will be seen that this interpretation fully brings out the
antithetical relation of the several clauses to one another. 'Em ry
TTiaret is most simply rendered, with Meyer, by " on the ground of
faith." He, however, refers the clause to t^cdi^ which he supplies
after aA/la. But in this case would not K%(*)V be repeated ? And is
not the omission of the article justified by the fact that im marei
completes the idea which stands opposed to the i^rj diKtuoavwrj ?
The examples adduced by Winer, Gr., 20,2, p. 123, amply justify
this. Compare, also, Harless on Eph. i. 15. Against the interpre-
tations " on account of faith," or " on the condition of faith," noth-
ing can be objected grammatically, but it seems the most natural
way to understand im mam in immediate connexion with diicaioav-
vrjv, as we have done. So, also, Olshausen. As parallel passages on
this subject, comp. Kom. iii. 21, 22, ix. 32, x. 3, 5, 6, etc., especially
428 PHILIPPIANS III. 10.
on the idea of righteousness proceeding from God, such passages as
iii. 26. God is the tiiKoi&v rbv KK Tr/areu^, iv. 5, etc.
Ver. 10. Tov yrwvat avrdv. Not to speak oi' the ungrammatical
connexion of this clause with im TQ nicrrei (against which comp.
Meyer and Van Hengel), it is understood either as parallel to the
lva y ver. 8, or as dependent on evpeOti, or finally, as further explica-
tive of the relation expressed in JUT) t^wv, ver. 9. If we have rightly
apprehended the train of thought from ver. 8 to ver. 10, then the
first of these interpretations falls of itself to the ground, as it im-
plies that there is no train of thought, and for this reason it presents
no adequate parallel, as Meyer has also observed. There is room
for doubt as to whether the clause should be connected with e?'y)0a5
or with fir] t^w (so Meyer), and it is all one which we adopt so far
as regards the idea, as in connexion with evpedw it must still be
understood as expressing the relation which is more exactly deter-
mined by the nrj tyw, as the fellowship of faith. If TOV de-
pends on evpeOti, which appears to me more natural than to regard
it as a by-clause having an explicative force, then the construction
will be entirely similar to that at Rom. vi. 6, where also, on a clause
beginning with tva, denoting " end or aim," a new one is made to
depend with TOV and the infinitive. The idea is the following : " the
apostle gives up all, in order that, through the righteousness of faith
(which requires as its condition this renunciation of what belongs to
self), he may be found in Christ, so as in consequence of this fellow-
ship to know what is stated in ver. 10." So at Eph. iii. 17, the being
rooted in love is represented as that which knowledge presupposes.
Thus, as Meyer has also observed, the TOV yvtivai explains the origin
of the knowledge mentioned at ver. 8, and from this its origin, it
appears why the apostle esteems all but loss for its sake ; but this
knowledge is still more exactly defined in respect of its object, so
as to manifest its excellency, in comparison with which everything
else disappears. That I may know him, says the apostle, and the
power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, in
that I am made conformable to his death. This is a knowledge
which is not possible without being in him; no mere speculative
knowledge, but the experimental knowledge and appropriation of
Christ, a knowledge which makes us like to him who is known, and
which reaches its perfection only when we shall see him as he is, 1
John iii. 2. To know him (CLVTOV) is the apostle's aim in renouncing
all that belongs to himself, in virtue of the believing fellowship with
him of which this self-renunciation is the condition. This av-ov,
however, he now further explains from these two points of view, viz.,
his exaltation and his humiliation. In this twofold aspect the
apostle aims at appropriating Christ to himself, and, renouncing all
that belongs to himself, at being entirely transformed into his image.
PHILIPPIANS III. 10. 429
The end, however, which he has in view in this transformation, is
stated at ver. 11 ; it is the resurrection of the dead to which he
would attain. For this very reason, the experience of the power of
Christ's resurrection spoken of at ver. 10 cannot mean the same
thing as the ^avdoramg mentioned at ver. 11 ; as elnug (si forte, if
by any means) always denotes something that is not included in
what precedes, but is indicated as the object to be attained. With
this experience of the power of the resurrection, the other clauses,
and the fellowship, etc., would also not correspond. The apostle
rather denotes an experience belonging to the present life. What
is that knowledge of Christ, however, which he means, must be as-
certained, on the one hand, from the connexion with / count all
things but loss, ver. 8, and, on the other, from the following criteria,
first, that this knowledge presupposes a believing fellowship with
Christ, secondly, that the intended fruit of this knowledge is the
actual resurrection, and finally, that it is the object at which the
apostle and his readers are constantly to aim, ver. 12. The apos-
tle, therefore, cannot be understood as seeking to know the power
(which the resurrection of Christ has, not, by which he was raised
up) the experience of which is already implied in regeneration, or
that fellowship of sufferings which is connected with it, and of
which Col. ii. 12 treats. For they are presupposed in the yv&vai.
As little can he mean the experience of this power in his own resur-
rection, as the end to be attained through this experience. What
kind of experience then of the power of the resurrection, and the
fellowship of his sufferings, lies between these two extremes ? The
life of the apostle himself must furnish the answer. And does not
this present both to our view, as well the power of the resurrec-
tion of Christ, as the form of his sufferings ? It is no longer I that
live, he says of himself at Gal. ii. 20, but Christ liveth in me.
Comp. also Phil. iv. 13. I die daily, he says again at 1 Cor. xv. 31,
again 2 Cor. ii. 14, thanks be unto God which always causeth us to
triumph in Christ. Always bearing about in the body the death of
Jesus that the life also of Christ may be manifested in our body,
2 Cor. iv. 10, seq. To these also belong those passages in which he
founds exhortations on the resurrection of Christ, with whom we are
risen ; even so we also should walk in newness of life, Kom. vi. 4, or
if ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above.
Col. iii. 1. If the apostle, by the power of the resurrection, means
that power which he aims at experiencing in himself, by the renun-
ciation of all that belongs to the old man and the flesh, so as to attain
to the object indicated at ver. 11, then by the fellowship, etc., he
means a second experience, at which he aims as the indispensable
condition of the first, and this experience, viz., the fellowship of his
sufferings is further explained in the words, being made conformable
430 PHILIPPIANS III. 11.
to his death (referring to yvtivcu, Col. i. 10 ; Eph. iii. 18, iv. 2), as
a being actually made like to him. That this expression fdloivship
of his sufferings is not to be confounded with such expressions as
we are buried with him, Rom. vi. 4, appears from what goes before.
Rather, as the life of the Christian is to be a progressive manifesta-
tion of the resurrection of Christ, so in it also is the other side, viz.,
the form of Christ's sufferings, to be manifested. De Wette well
observes that, " as there is no resurrection without death, so neither
also without suffering." Comp. Rom. viii. 17 ; 2 Tim. ii. 11. The
passages above cited will shew how this aspect of Christ was mani-
fested in the life of the apostle. There is no necessity for supposing
in the words being made conformable, etc., any special prospective
allusion to the martyrdom of the apostle. The expression is quite
intelligible without this ; comp. 2 Cor. iv. 10. (Whether ovpfiop-
<fwvfievo$ or <rvju|uop0to/ij/of, which is supported by A.B.D.* versions
and church Fathers, be the true reading, is of little consequence, as
the sense is not affected.) It needs scarcely be shewn that the ex-
planation we have given fully meets the conditions of the context as
stated above. De Wette has justly rejected those interpretations
that would explain the power of the resurrection by " the apostle's
peace of mind," or " the hope of his own resurrection." But Meyer's
interpretation also, according to which the apostle means by this
power the pledge of justification, appears to me (if rov yvtivai, etc.,
is taken as explicative of the knowledge mentioned at ver. 8) to be
too narrow, and not to correspond with the believing fellowship al-
ready presupposed at ver. 9. Is any such pledge of justification
needed at this stage, and not rather implied in the believing fellowship
already existing ? Moreover, this view does not place the power of
the resurrection in any true relation to the fellowship of suffering.
How can the certainty of justification and the fellowship of his suf-
ferings be connected together and both be regarded as exegetical of
avrov ? Is it not natural and necessary, that if, by ihQ fellowship of
sufferings we understand that aspect of Paul's life which corresponds
to the sufferings of his Lord, then by the experience of the power of
the resurrection we should also understand the corresponding repre-
sentation and appropriation of this in his life ? We do not therefore
take this to mean the moral awakening spoken of at Col. ii. 12, but
that manifestation of the life as also of the death of Jesus, of which
the apostle speaks 2 Cor. iv. 10, and which he denotes as something
abiding (~ai'Tor . . . mpt^povrwf). This life, or rather the striving
after it, in which Christ represents himself, and the perfection of
which is denoted at Rom. viii. 29, by ovpftfpjovf rfjg duovos rov vlov
avrov, is the condition of attaining to the end indicated at ver. 11
Ver. 11. On etrro^ si forte, see on ver. 10. Here, it denotes a
humble striving after, as opposed to a false security.
PHILIPPIANS III. 12-14. 431
here, as at 2 Mace. vi. 14 ; Acts xxvi. 7 ; Eph. iv. 13, figuratively
denotes " the attaining of something," literally " to go down to."
Van Hengel improperly limits its signification to time or place : si
forte perveniam ad tempus hnjus eventi. The K^avdaraaig r&v veit-
pwv is (in this passage only) substantially equivalent to dvdaraau; !
serves more vividly to represent the idea, as it denotes the terminus
a quo. What the apostle means by this expression, may be ascer-
tained from such passages as Luke xx. 34, 35, compared with 1
Thess. iv. 16 ; Luke xiv. 14, 15.
Vers. 12-14. The apostle here guards against a misapprehen-
sion that might be occasioned by what he has just said at vers. 7
11. He does this, not from polemical considerations with reference
to the false teachers, but for the sake of the Philippians, that they
might learn of him to think humbly of themselves, and lay aside
that conceit of Christian perfection spoken of at vers. 2, 3. Comp.
especially vers. 13, 15. Not that I have already attained, or am
already perfect, etc. In order to determine what the apostle has
not yet attained, we must, first of all, inquire what is said in the
preceding verses, with regard to which this misunderstanding was
possible. Now this cannot be the resurrection of the dead mentioned
at ver. 11 ; for the apostle himself has represented this as an object
to which he looks forward as future, and after which he strives. So
that there could be no necessity for his guarding them against the
misco'nception that he had already attained it. That to which the
ovtc Zkapov refers, can only be the TO vnep^ov TTJS yvuoeug, ver. 8, or
as it is expressed at ver. 10, yv&v<u avrov. The idea that the apostle
has renounced all, in order to attain a superabundant good, might
certainly be so misunderstood as to imply that he had already at-
tained it, and it is this misunderstanding (as if the perfection men-
tioned at ver. 10 were already realized in him) which he here wards
off. In the expression Shaftov, the figure of a contest in a race
already passes through the apostle's mind, but it is distinctly brought
forward in what follows. The object of this eAa/3ov is not the @pa-
(3elov supplied, from ver. 14 ; it is rather to be supplied from what
goes before, viz., that moral perfection which is indicated in the
yv&vaL, ver. 10. This is confirmed by the explanatory words that
follow, viz., or am already perfect, which denote the result of the
having attained (comp. Winer's Gr., 40, 5, p. 247), and do not
mean, " to be at the mark/' but " to be morally perfect," which
alone agrees with the common usage of the word. (Comp. Van
Hengel, p. 240.) Therefore also the gloss 1} ?/&? dediKaM^ai for i) jjd-r)
Tere/UiWjitat is, in respect of the sense, perfectly correct. Atokw de, the
apostle here carries out the metaphor taken from a race, d KCU nara-
Aa/3w t-0' a), etc. The object of the na-aXafieiv is the same as that of
the t/la/3ov. The /caraAa/3a> is stronger than the simple Aa/3ov. Kai
432 PHILIPPIANS III. 13.
is, with De Wette, to be referred to the aai of the following clause.
It is difficult to determine the sense of the ambiguous t'0' o>. Gram-
matically, it may mean, " under which condition/' " wherefore,"
" because," " to which." The most natural way is, with De Wette
and others (the same as at Luke v. 25), to take e<' o> as equivalent
to TOVTO t'</>' o>, and so to construe it as that TOVTO shall be the object
of araAa/3w : "if also I may lay hold of that for which I also was
laid hold of by Christ." Comp. moreover, Winer's Gr., 48 c. p. 351,
seq., who prefers the signification "for which ;" Meyer, "because."
'Em in a similar connexion as denoting that to which a person or
thing is destined or appointed, 1 Thess. iv. 7 ; Eph. ii. 10, etc. ;
Winer's Gr. a a. Q. p. 351. The figure involved in KareXij^drjv is
the same as in /caraAa/Jw. So in Plato Tim. p. 38, D. : KarakauPdv-
ovai Kal Ka-a^a/jif3dvovrai vrr' aAAj/Awv. The apostle has been over-
taken and laid hold of in his course by Christ, namely, at his con-
version. De Wette rightly observes, that the expression is selected
in accordance with the idea of a reciprocal action ; comp. Gal. iv. 9 ;
1 Cor. xiii. 12. The sentiment expressed in the verse as a whole,
namely, that there is no attaining but merely a following after in
order to attain, is of special importance for the Christian life. That
perfection, in virtue of which our whole life is to become conform-
able to Christ, is a mark of which every one falls short. The fel-
lowship with Christ in the righteousness of faith ver. 9, or the being
apprehended of Christ, ver. 12, is, so far from being the goal at
which we may repose, only the foundation on which our striving
after that perfection is to rest ; the entire leavening of the man by the
power of fellowship with the dead and risen Lord, that is the goal.
Ver. 13 shews that the apostle, in what he has just said, has in
view his readers and their conduct (ii. 2-4) ; hence, not merely the
emphatic repetition of the thought, but also the special address to
them d<teA0oi, and the eyw, the opposite of which is not, others who
may have this idea of the apostle, but others who seem to have this
idea of themselves. As ver. 13 corresponds to the first half of ver.
12, so at ver. 14, the other half, viz., the dtuicw 6, is further ex-
panded. The sentiment already expressed is not simply repeated,
but is more strictly defined, so that, as Meyer justly observes, ver.
13 brings into prominence the element of self '-esteem , whilst ver. 14
more strictly explains the diokw, both with respect to what lies be-
hind, and to the mark that is set before. "Ev<Je supply Trotw (Winer's
Gr., 66, III. b. p. 676). Meyer supplies rroioiv, so that the parti-
ciples following are exegetical of it ; but in the Iv the apostle had
doubtless in his mind the principal idea &WKCJ, and not its subordi-
nate explanations. On the inadmissibility of other supplementary
expressions, or the connexion with <Jtakw itself, see Meyer. The
right way of following after the mark is stated in the words TO /*ev
PHILIPPIANS III. 13. 433
It consists in forgetting that which, is behind,
and stretching forward to that which is before. The eneicreiveadai
represents the racer stretching forward in his anxiety to reach the
goal. The rd dmau and the rd tyTrpoodev denote, the former those
stages of the course that have already been passed over, and the
latter, those that have yet to be passed over ; the rd t-pnpoadev
does not therefore mean the goal itself. As it is the striving
after Christian perfection that is spoken of at ver. 12, the right
explanation of rd omou and rd K^i-npoadev must be, " the progress in
this that has already been made, and that which yet remains to be
made." The former is not to be the object of our contemplation and
self-complacent regard, but the mind is entirely to be directed to-
wards that which is yet to be attained, as a racer thinks not of the
way that is behind, but of that which lies yet before him. It is in-
consistent with the context to refer the rd dniaw to those things in-
dicated at ver. 7, seq., as having been renounced by the apostle.
What belongs to the flesh, as De Wette rightly observes, lies with-
out the limits of the course here represented, and cannot be consid-
ered as a part of it. That must already have been renounced, ere
the race begins, to which the apostle here alludes. This view alone
o.grees with the context ; the apostle places this forgetting the
things that are behind, in opposition to the vain fancy of Christian
perfection. Thus, he says, he presses toward the mark for the prize
of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (Kara otconov, Winer's Grr.,
49, d. p. 357, versus). That the prize (J3paj3elov as 1 Cor. ix. 24)
is here placed as the object of the diuK.et.v } is no reason why J3paf3elov
should be supplied also at ver. 12. Tliere it is the goal itself that is
meant, here it is the prize of victory that beckons to the goal, the
incorruptible crown, 1 Cor. ix. 25, or the crown of righteousness, 2
Tim. iv. 8, or the crown of life, Jam. i. 12 ; Kev. ii. 10, of glory, 1