το---13.
μᾶλλον εἰς !
δεσμούς µου ™ φανεροὺς ἐν Χριστῷ γενέσθαι ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ " πραιτωρίῳ
Mace. viii. 8. nor’s palace.
So Acts xxiii. 35. = ἐκείνων. See also Kaelker, Quaestiones de elocut. Polybiana, p. 282. This is Paul’s first reference to his own affairs, which were of the deepest concern to the Philippians. Their gift had been prompted by their apprehensions of his sore need. Perhaps, as Calvin suggests, his oppo- nents were using his calamities as a proof of the worthlessness of his Gospel.— μᾶλλον εἰς προκ. . . - ἐλήλ. The use of μᾶλλον seems to imply that they were looking out for bad news of the Apostle. And that would justify the supposition that, shortly before this, a change had occurred in Paul’s circumstances. May not the change be connected with the ἀπολογία of ver. 7? Is it not probable that Paul had been transferred from his hired lodging (Acts xxviii. 30) into the prison where those on trial were kept in custody? O. Hirschfeld (Sitz. Bericht. of Berlin Academy, 1891, pp. 857-858) holds that imprisonment at Rome was of a military character, and that the barracks of various city troops served as prisons. Mommsen (op. cit., 1895, p. 500) agrees with Hirschf. in believing that the castra peregrinorum may have been used esp. for this purpose. The Philippians would naturally expect that this stricter custody must mean severer hardships for the Apostle. Asa matter of fact it has been in his favour, προκοπή is a technical term in Stoic philosophy for ‘“ progress towards wisdom” (see Zeller, Stfoics, etc., p. 294). It is condemned by Phry- nichus (ed. Lobeck, p. 85) as unclassical. Frequent in later Greek, esp. in Plutarch and Polyb.—éAyAvbev. Cf. Mark ν. 26, eis τὸ χεῖρον ἐλθοῦσα (why should ΕἸ]. object to this parallel 2), Acts xix. 27. Ver. 13. For the skilful rhetorical structure of vv. 13-17 see J. Weiss, Beitr., p- 17, who compares Rom. ii. 6-12.---τὰ Seopa is, on the whole, more common ; see Luke viii. 29, Acts xvi. 26, xx. 23. According to Cobet, Mnemosyne, 1858, p. 74 ff. (quoted in W-Sch., p. 85, 7. 8), the neuter form refers to actual bonds, the masc. to the imprisonment. But there seems to be no distinction, e.g., in Attic Inscrr. (see Meisterhans, Gramm. d. attisch. Inschr., p. 112, n. 1025). And Sch. states that the distinction will not apply to LXX.—dav. ἐν Χ. γεν. It has become plain that he is a prisoner wholly