Pet. v. 4. The apostle himself further explains this Qpafelov in the
words, high calling of God in Christ Jesus. The rj dvu K^oig here
is the same as the ickfjais eTrovpdvio^ at Heb. iii. 1. So also Col. iii.
2, rd dvu opposed to rd &m rijg yyfr. Comp. also Gal, iv. 26 with
Heb. xii. 22. This /cAr/cr^ is thus represented not merely as coming
from above, still less am I inclined, with Meyer, to admit that there
is in the dva) a reference to the special calling of the apostle (against
which comp. Heb. iii. 1) ; but the nature of this calling is described
in general as an heavenly, quse ad ccelum pertinet, and, as is well
observed by Van Hengel, the apostle, " following out the metaphor,
distinguishes his calling from that by which the runners in the race
were wont to be called by the arbiters of the contest." Similarly 1
Cor. ix. 24. If, then, the calling in general is characterized as an
heavenly one, it is no tautology, but rather a more particular descrip-
tion of it, when it is further represented as proceeding from God (1
VOL. V. 28
434 PHILIPPIANS III. 15. 16.
Thess. ii. 12), and as confirmed in Christ Jesus. For I unhesita-
tingly connect ev X. 'I. with K^fjaeur (comp. Winer's Gr., 20, 2, p.
123), not with 6iunu (comp. 1 Cor. vii. 22 ; 1 Pet. v. 10, etc.) By
the K>.fjmc, however, I understand (what it usually denotes) the act
of calling, not that to which one is called, of which latter significa-
tion 2 Thess. i. 11, to which De Wette refers, is no proof.
Vers. 15, 16. The apostle now addresses to his readers the ex-
hortation TOVTO 0povc2yier, to be thus minded, as the inference from
the foregoing (ot>i>), whilst at the same time he supposes the case of
the trepwf 0poven', and expresses his hope with regard to this case,
with the limitation, however, contained in ver. 16. The interpreta-
tion of this passage varies both with respect to the more definite
meaning of TOVTO Qpovufiev, and consequently with respect to the el
n tr/pw? 0pomre, in that some, as Schinz, Meyer, and others, under-
stand by this, the disposition to think humbly of ourselves and con-
stantly to press forward, expressed in vers. 12-14, whilst others un-
derstand by it all that is naid from ver. 4 onwards (so Holemann,
Matthies, and others), or at least from ver. 8 onwards (so De Wette)
as descriptive of that disposition of mind which ought to be culti-
vated ; others again refer TOVTO specially to /3pa/Mov, ver. 14. And
there is no less difference of opinion in regard to the interpretation
of ver. 16, where some explain the d$ o tyOdaapev by moral attain-
ments, others by attainments in Christian knowledge. To the former
belong Schinz, Van Hengel, and M>yer ; to the latter the majority,
Rheiuwald, Matthies, Holemann, De Wette.
The apostle introduces his exhortation by the words oaoc ovv
rlteioi. We may therefore look for a closing exhortation flowing
from what goes before ; but the ovv may just as appropriately in-
troduce an exhortation inferred from the whole of the preceding
context as one specially referring to that disposition of mind de-
lineated in vers. 12-14, as consisting in a humble opinion of self,
and a restless pressing forward. The objection which Meyer urges
against the former view, viz., that only at ver. 12 does the apostle
first aim his address at the peculiar circumstances of the church
itself, is not conclusive ; for at whom else but the church is that
aimed which, at vers. 4-11, is said against the false teachers ? The
right interpretation of the oaot rtvUtof will help to the settlement of
this point. The apostle, in the word OCTOJ, leaves it to the judgment
of the readers to decide, whether or not they belong to the class of
the reAefot ; or rather it is a call addressed to them all to shew that
they are TK^SIOI. But what are we to understand by re'Aoi ? There
can be no doubt that it is not equivalent to rereAetw/^ai, for, the
apostle has just said of himself, that he is not what that word
implies. It is generally explained as being the opposite of vrjmoi,
1 Cor. ii. 6, iii. 1, xiv. 20 ; Heb. v. 13, 14 ; but whilst in all these pas-
PHILIPPIANS III. 15, 16. 435
sages the antithesis has respect to knowledge, it is allowed that it
here refers to moral perfection, to the ethical life, which of itself
presupposes a corresponding proportion of practical intelligence.
And it must certainly be acknowledged that the context forbids our
referring the r&eioi to knowledge. But how ? Would the apostle,
who has just been guarding the Philippians against self-esteem, and
exhorting them to forget what is behind, i. e., the progress already
made, and, ii. 3, to esteem others better than themselves, now call
upon those whose great failing was a conceit* of their moral attain-
ments, to consider themselves as r&eioi in a moral point of view ?
This he could do only ironically, as if he said, " You who think
yourselves to be perfect shew that you are so, and shew it by your
humility ;" but the form of expression employed by the apostle, in
which he addresses the call to himself in common with them, is
conclusive against this. If, on the other hand, the moral perfection
denoted by rK^eioi, is understood as consisting specially in a humble
estimation of self, and a restless pressing forward, then the rovro
is purely tautological. Comp. Meyer on rovro </>povo3juv.
is therefore not to be explained as the opposite of vjjmoi in
the sense of " those less advanced in moral attainments," for in this
sense, the apostle would characterize neither himself nor others as
rekeioi ; nor would he call upon any to cherish the opinion of them-
selves that they are reketoi, in comparison with others. Rather, at
1 Cor. ii. 6, re/leioi does not denote those more proficient in respect of
knowledge, as compared with the less proficient ; but 1 hose are said
to be r/teioi to whom the preaching of the gospel is wisdom, which
is also the case with the vijirtoi, whilst to the opposite class this
preaching is foolishness, which does not apply to the VTJTTIOI iv Xpia-
r&, so that reAeio? is there used as equivalent to Trvevfiariicog, iii. 16.*
As reheioi then does not there mean the opposite of " less profi-
cient," so neither does it here. A Christian can be designated
Tt'Aeto? in a moral point of view, and called to consider himself as
such, not on account of his own moral attainments, in which he
excels others ; for this is not to be the object of his regard (forget-
ting, etc., ver. 14), but solely on account of that moral nature which
he receives through fellowship with Christ ; this, he is to possess
as a Christian, and on the ground of this may he be called upon
(as the apostle here calls upon the Philippians) to press forward in
pursuit of higher moral attainments. The expression, however, is
selected with a view to its connexion with the rerehei&adai, which
the apostle has used without any figure at ver. 12. Just as the
ayiov dvat is itself the strongest obligation to the dyiaa^ioq, so the
* This passage is indeed generally explained in a different way, but, as I think, im-
properly, expositors having allowed themselves without reason to be led away from tho
interpretation given above, by the <if vijmoif, iii. 1.
436 PHILIPPIANS III. 15, 16.
rsteiov elvai of the Christiaa (comp. Passow, on the proper signifi-
cation of the term, viz., " one who has reached his goal"), is the
strongest call to strive after the reAetovodat ; and thus does the
apostle call upon his readers, provided they are reAoi, to strive
after the reteiovoOai in the way pointed out by him. What is here
denoted by rtvlo? may be ascertained from ver. 9, in which is stated
the pre-requisite to the appropriation of Christ mentioned in ver.
10 ; this appropriation of Christ is, as we have seen, the goal spoken
of at ver. 12, the attainment of which brings along with it the
gaining of the prize. The rovro Qpovtifiev, then, is certainly to be
referred to what immediately goes before, which the apostle has
marked as the one thing after which he strives ; but in this is in-
cluded the principal idea in vers. 8-11, as appears from this, that
vers. 12-14 only aim at preventing a misapprehension of that idea,
and setting forth the proper way in which the striving mentioned at
ver. 10 is to be conducted. When the apostle then says at ver. 15,
let us be thus minded, we ure certainly to understand what is stated
at vers. 13 and 14, as to the right way in which this striving is to be
conducted, but not, however, to the exclusion of all reference to
vers. 8-11, as if the Philippians did not need to be exhorted to
strive, as well as to be told in what manner they ought to strive.
Such a restriction, not to speak of the right interpretation of the
riteioi, would also not agree with what immediately follows.' Ktu d
TI trepcjf faoveire, etc. With reference to the <j>povdv just mentioned,
the apostle supposes the possible case of his readers being in any one
respect otherwise minded. He does not say trepov } for he cannot
suppose any radical difference of mind amongst them, but only that
along with a fundamental sameness of mind there may yet exist in
the one or the other respect, a difference with regard to the manner
of this faovelv, by which is meant the striving after the goal. The
context does not furnish more particular information as to what dif-
ferences the apostle had in view. But in striking harmony with
this passage is the apostle's prayer, i. 9, that the love of the Philip-
pian church may increase in all knowledge and judgment. With re-
gard to such differences the apostle expresses the hope, God will
reveal even this unto you. The KOI rovro cannot of course refer to
the rovro ^povwuev, but only to the d n ; in this case also will a true
revelation be given to them, as in the other, with respect to which
they already have (/cat) this revelation. The apostle then does not
himself instruct them on these points of difference, but confides in
the power of the Spirit, who teaches all things and leads into all
truth, that he will supply their deficiency in right knowledge, which
lies at the foundation of the trepwf Qpovelv, and will reveal the cor-
responding knowledge. For dnoicaXvipei is to be understood of a
knowledge to be imparted, comp. Eph. i. 17. There can therefore
PHILIPPIANS III. 16. 437
nave been no essential differences, but only such as vanish on a
more profound acquaintance with the revealed word of truth. We
have already observed, that to restrict the rovro (frpovtipev to the
right method of pressing forward, would not agree with what fol-
lows. For in this case the d n erepug typovelre could only be ex-
plained of a way of pressing forward, different from that described,
a way therefore not characterized by a humble esteem of self, and a
restless pressing forward. So Meyer, p. 105 ; " if in any respect
ye are otherwise minded, viz., deviate from the way indicated in the
rovro (j)pov(Zfj,ev." And Schinz explains, " if you take yourselves to
be perfect," with which indeed Meyer's explanation substantially
accords, with the difference, that Meyer rightly regards the n by
which the idea is limited to one or the other respect. And are we
to suppose that the apostle here alludes to those who would not
strive humbly and ceaselessly, and yet does not in this case exhort
them to humility, and zeal in the pursuit of moral perfection, but
refers them to a revelation from God as if this were the thing which
they principally needed ? How does this correspond with what he
says at ii. 1, seq., where he so earnestly guards them against their
conceit of moral perfection as the fountain of all discord ?
Ver. 16. The apostle hopes that in the case of their beiug other-
wise minded, God will lead them to right knowledge also in this.
But, he proceeds, whereto we have attained, let us ivalk by the same,
etc. The Tr/bp yet, however (comp. Passow), contains a limitation
of the hope just expressed ; it states the condition upon which
alone he can cherish this hope in regard to them, and this condition
is, faithful adherence to that whereto they have already attained,
and such an adherence as displays itself in the conduct. Commenta-
tors are here, as has been already observed, divided in opinion ; some
explaining the K^Qdaa^ev of a progress in morality, others of attain-
ments in knowledge. The former view seems to be supported by
what Meyer has shewn, viz., that t00acra^ev is correlative with oroi-
%eZr, and forms with it a connected figure, the one denoting that
point in the course which has been reached, the other, rw d. oroi.,
holding on in the direction by pursuing which, that point was
reached ; so that if we explain oroi^elv of moral conduct, eig o <j)6.
must mean the same. But aroixelv in itself denotes merely conduct,
not moral conduct, and the rc5 avrw must determine what kind of
conduct is here meant. So at Rom. iv. 12, aroix&v is used of walk-
ing in the footsteps of faith, and at Gal. vi. 16 of walking according
to a rule. If rw avr& is, from what goes before, to be understood of
knowledge, then it will mean, to walk conformably to this knowl-
edge (to conduct one's-self conformably thereto in all things, in
thought, word, and deed). The knowledge attained, is represented
as the point which all have reached ; according to this then, all who
438 PHILIPPIANS III. 16.
have attained to it are farther to walk. The apostle says
not merely " hold fast," because in opposition to the ^repw
all depends on their seeing that the knowledge they have already
gained grows in power and vitality, for only thus can they come to
the hoped for revelation. Again, in opposition to the view which
explains i^Qdoa^v of moral attainments, as De Wette has already
remarked, it may be urged that TrXtjv d$ b Iffldaanev must, on account
of the antithesis, belong to the same class of ideas as d-rroKd^v^ig,
and can therefore only denote a certain degree of knowledge, for it
is not to be overlooked that the aorist tyOdoanev forms an antithesis
with the future aTroKakityei. And what adequate sense can, accord-
ing to that view, be assigned to d$ o tyOdoafiev ? Et$ 5 cannot, as
Meyer himself acknowledges, signify the point which is common to
nil, to which all have attained in the scale of moral perfection, but
must be conceived of as a line with reference to which the individuals
occupy a position more before or behind a meaning quite opposed
to the simple idea conveyed in d$ 6 t00a<ra//v. And when can the
i^daa^Ev be said to have taken place ? Side by side with the striving
in the same way is the iri:pw$ 0pomv, which does not take the same
direction. How are the Philippians to know what lies in the same
direction, and belongs to the l<f>0daanv in their course of conduct,
and what does not ? And with what propriety could it then be said
that, leaving out of sight that in which they differed, they should
pursue the direction that was common to them all, on which they
had all entered ? That would be, even in the case of there being no
krepiM; (frpoveiv, a very unsafe rule ; for the sin that cleaves to every
one, and makes him indolent, prevents his moral strivings from
taking a purely upward direction (TO avw fyreiTe, Pol. iii. 1). .No in-
dividual Christian's course of life can be regarded as a line moving
upwards without deviation, all depending on the direction once
taken being undeviatingly pursued ; there is rather required a fixed
rule by which that direction may be regulated, and this rule is the
knowledge that has been acquired (the word of the Scripture), in-
dicated by 8 f.<f>ddaafj.ev through which the Spirit leads ever further
into the truth on the condition of its being faithfully held fast, and
guides the individual in his progress through life in the right path.
Others render -rrX^v by " interim" (Winer's Gr., 57, 4, Anm. p.
522), which makes no sensible difference in the connexion of the
thought. QOdveiv etf, as at Rom. ix. 31, to " attain to something,"
" to reach it." On the inf. CTTO^ZV, for the imperative of the second
person, see Winer's Gr., 43, 5, p. 283. Against the connexion
with drroKa^v^eij as also the connexion of the whole sentence with
ver. 17, see Meyer's remarks. Finally, with respect to the reading,
the words navovt rb avrb Qpovelv are by the united voice of the most
recent critics pronounced to be spurious. They are not found in
PHILIPPIANS III. 17 IV. 1. 439
A.B. 17, 67**, in several translations, and the Fathers. The rea-
son of their interpolation appears from Gal. vi. 16 ; Phil. ii. 2, and
their spuriousness is confirmed by the uncertainty of their position.
They are glosses intended for explanation, of which TO avrb <j>poveiv
was first inserted, according to D.*F.G., navovi having been after-
wards added.
Ver. 17 iv. 1. To the foregoing exhortation to the Philip-
plans to be of the same mind, and to strive in the same man-
ner with the apostle, and if in anything there is any difference
faithfully to carry out in their conduct the knowledge to which
they have attained, the apostle now adds another injunction (hav-
ing reference chiefly to the last point, viz., the GTOI^CV), which,
like the foregoing, is addressed to the readers from regard to the
perverting example of others. And as in the foregoing exhor-
tation he warns them against the influence of Judaistic false
doctrine in moving them away from the right mark, and mis-
leading them as to the right manner of striving after it, so here
it is the worldly-mindedness, and the immoral courses of others,
against the contaminating example of which he warns them, and
in opposition to which he reminds them of their heavenly call-
ing. This transition is very similar to that at Gal. v. 13, seq.,
where, also, with the warning against Judaistic teaching of the law,
the apostle connects that against immoral conduct ; there, however,
this latter warning is not given with reference to the Judaizing op-
ponents, as if any such influence were to be feared from them, but
rather with reference to the very opposite stand-point, that, viz., of
the eXevdepia, which was abused so as to be an occasion to the flesh.
And in the passage before us, too, it does not seem as if the bad
example of sensuality in disposition and immorality in practice, were
to be charged against those pharisaical Jewish-Christians mentioned
before, which is the view that up till very recently has been held by
almost all commentators, but has been rejected by De Wette, Meyer,
and others. Not that the designation, enemies of the cross, which
the apostle applies to them, is inconsistent with this view ; com-
pare Gal. v. 11, vi. 12, seq:, where this also is said of those Judaiz-
ing Christians, that they themselves do not observe the law. But
the view, which makes the opponents here described the same as
those mentioned before, renders l.he manner in which the apostle
introduces them to notice, ver. 18, unintelligible, for this evidently
suits far better the case of a new class of persons than of those al-
ready mentioned and to be further described. Why should the apostle
not have referred to the persons already mentioned, and, besides,
have given prominence to the fact that such a licentious conduct
connects itself with their false doctrine, notwithstanding all their
boasting about the law ? But we find nothing of this sort, not a
440 PHILIPPIANS III. 17, 18.
word of reference to false doctrine, but only the imputation of
earthly-mindedness, and walking after the flesh. And the very way
in which the apostle speaks of them, with the deepest pain, that
wrings tears from him, induces us to think that he must allude, not
principally to such as had gone astray in doctrine, hut to such as
had sunk back into earthliness and sin, in the way described at Gal.
v. 13, seq. We find also in the Corinthian church those who abused
the Christian freedom, the -ndvra not efwm, by making it an excuse
for the sins of the flesh, 1 Cor. vi. 12. We have only to add to this,
the obdurate rejection of the apostle's warning and admonition to
complete the picture of men such as are described in the passage
before us. Persons of this description must have been, if not in
Philippi itself, yet in its neighbourhood, as the apostle has repeat-
edly occasion to warn the Philippians against them. The view is
altogether wrong, that the apostle here alludes to heathen.
Ver. 17. ZvniunqTai pov yiveode, similarly 1 Cor. iv. 16, \ii\ir\-rai
HLOV y. Accordingly the sense here will be : " be ye imitators of
me," not " imitators of Christ with me," which is not contained in
the words. The aw } however, does not signify " you altogether,"
but according to the words that follow, " you along with others who
are my imitators, who so (ov-w^) walk in this way of following my
example ;" for those others he forthwith denotes in the words, Mark
them who walk so. They are to imitate him and those who walk in
the same mind with him, or, more correctly, they are to imitate him
along with others who do so, and to mark those others in respect of
their imitation of him. Of the words that follow, a0w$-, etc., " as
you have a pattern in us," Meyer has given the true interpretation
in opposition to that hitherto received, as he does not refer Ka6u$ to
ovrwc as a particle of comparison, but takes it as the common argu-
mentative " as," " inasmuch as," so that the two foregoing injunc-
tions are thereby confirmed. This view is also countenanced by the
change of the number in finds, whilst in the other case the singular,
corresponding to the pov, would be used, as also e^ere for fyovai
against this the singular TVTTOV proves nothing, as Meyer remarks,
the many being included in the one. (On -nmov comp. 1 Thess. i.
7 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9 ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; Tit. ii. 7 ; 1 Pet. v. 3.)
Ver. 17 is now confirmed by ver. 18. The reason of his refer-
ring them to his example, and the conduct of those like-minded
with him is, that there are many whose example they are not at
liberty to follow. For many walk, etc. UepnraTovai here can
only be taken in the same sense as in the preceding verse (therefore
not as at 1 Pet. v. 8). Some supply awf, trepo^, or the like,
without reason ; but I am as little inclined to suppose, with
Meyer, that the apostle has here expressed himself in the way he
originally intended. He intended certainly more particularly to
PHILIPPIANS III. 18. 441
describe the conduct of the persons here referred to, in opposi-
tion to the OVTU TrepmaTovv-es, and not originally to describe the
persons, as the antithesis would require. This is plain from the
word -rrepnrarovai, which would be deprived of its proper force if
taken as equivalent to dm ; but by the relative clause which fol-
lows, and which refers to the persons, he is led to describe the per-
sons, to which is subjoined also a description of their conduct. He
therefore drops the -nepnraTovci, in the description of the persons.
So also De Wette and others. The words I have told you often al-
lude to former oral communications. There is as little necessity,
after what has been said, for connecting them with iii. 2 as with i.
15, ii. 21. As the examples mentioned ver. 17 were held up before
the whole church, and consequently did not belong to it, so also these
many. Comp. our remarks supra. But why does the apostle now
say even weeping ? To this Chrysostom has already well replied,
on ETrereive rb ttattov. The words %6pol rov oravpov are properly in
apposition to -n-oA/lot, which enters into the construction of the rela-
tive clause. Winer's Gr., 59, 9. The article rov$ points emphat-
ically to the persons meant they, the well-known enemies of the
cross. The characteristic, enemies of the cross, gives no certain so-
lution of the question whether Judaists, or immoral men generally,
are meant. According to the marks elsewhere given, it is to be un-
derstood of those who, from their earthly and carnal mind, are natu-
rally the enemies of the cross, which requires of them that they
crucify the flesh with its aifections and lusts. Comp. Gal. vi. 14.
The more special characteristics are stated ver. 14. The most fear-
ful of them stands first whose end (TO reAo?, as 2 Cor. xi. 15) is
destruction, whose god is the belly (comp. Horn. vi. 18 ; 1 Cor. xv.
32), and whose glory is in their shame, i. e., consists in that of which
they have to be ashamed, comp. 2 Cor. iv. 2 ; spoken generally, and
therefore not to be understood exclusively of sensuality. Meyer
rightly observes that rj 66%a is to be regarded as subjective, and alo-