μοί, 2. Γπληρώσατέ pou τὴν χαράν, ἵνα τὸ αὐτὸ 5 φρονῆτε, τὴν αὐτὴν ΡΠ σύμψυχοι,ὶ τὸ ἕν 3 φρονοῦντες " 3. μηδὲν κατὰ
ἀγάπην ἔχοντες, ἢ
433
i or constrn. cf. John
ἱἐριθείαν ἢ 54 * κενοδοξίαν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ᾿ταπεινοφροσύνῃ ἀλλήλους ἡγού- ar xg; ἢ
1So ΑΙ, Trg., Lach. with $BeDcEKLP. συνψ. Τι, W.H., Ws. with
2So most edd. with ScBDFGKLP, d, e, g, syrr. arm. zth., Clem., Bas., Hil.,
Ambrst., Victorin.
3So Myr. with Der-Eer-FGKLP, f, g, syrr. go., Chr., Thdrt., Hil.
το αυτο W.H. (mg.) with ΑΟ 17, 73, vg. go., Euth.cod.
Edd. μηδε
with SABC 17, 31, 37, 116, d, e, m, vg. cop. arm. eth., Euth.cod., Victorin., Aug.,
Ambrst.
4Om. κατα TR., Myr. with QCDEFGKLP, f, 6, go., Bas., Chr., Thdrt.
Edd.
κατα ΥΔΒΟ 17, 31, 37, 116, d, e, πι, vg. cop. syrr. arm., Euth.cod., Vict.,
Hil., Aug., Ambrst.
minn., including 37) might easily assimi- late the following o At this stage the type of text found in the leading uncials happened to arise. And so the error was stereotyped, although corrected later by Greek Fathers. Curiously enough this same conjecture has been made by Hpt. We do not overlook the difficulties in- volved, but allow it to stand for want of anything better.—omAdyyxva. See on i. 8. He appeals to their pity.
Ver. 2. Semper in discordiis aperta est janua Satanae ad spargendas impias doc- trinas, ad quas repellendas optima munitio est consensus (Calv.).—mnp. + + + ἵνα. The tva clause seems exactly = Latin gerund. Cf. an infinitive used in the same way in Acts xv. Το, τί πειράζετε τὸν Θεὸν ἐπιθεῖναι κ.τ.λ., also Polyc., Martyr., x., 1 (quoted by Burton, MT., p. 92). ἵνα is probably ‘“‘hypotelic”’ as Ell. (on Eph. i. 17) terms it, z.¢., ‘‘the subject of the wish is blended with and even (at times) obscures the purpose ᾽᾽.---τὸ a. φρον. The general description of agreement which is analysed and defined in the succeeding clauses. Perhaps a common phrase in popular language. See Sepulchr. Inscr. (Rhodes, 2nd cent. B.c.), of a married couple, ταὐτὰ λέγοντες ταὐτὰ φρονοῦντες ἤλθομεν τὰν ἀμέτρητον ὁδὸν εἰς ᾿Αἴδαν (Dsm., NBS., p. 84).---τ. att. ay. The same feelings.—ovpy. The same point of view in their common interests.—76 év expresses the one concrete aim of their views, perhaps with special reference to the unity of the Church (so Lips.). Minute distinctions, however, must not be forced, as there is doubtless here much of what Vaughan terms ‘the tautology of earnestness”.
ο νους TIT.
Ver. 3. μηδέν. Probably, sc., φρο- νοῦντες, although no addition is neces- sary. This is the prevalent thought in the Apostle’s πηϊπά.---ἐριθείαν. It is no wonder that Paul should warn against this danger, seeing it was one of his most grievous vexations at Rome.—j. Read with best authorities μηδὲ κατά (see crit. note).—kevoS. Only here in N.T. Three times in LXX. Combined with ἀλαζονεία and µεγαλαυχία. The boastful expression of pride. Egotism and boastfulness were apparently the perils besetting the Philippian Church. These were natural excrescences of the zealous spirit which pervaded this com- munity. Itis a strange phenomenon in religious history that intense earnestness so frequently breeds a spirit mingled of censoriousness and conceit.—tq ταπει- νοφρ. The construction seems exactly parallel to Rom. xi. 20, τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ ἐξεκλάσθησαν = “on account of,” “by reason of’. Perhaps the article em- phasises the generic idea (so Myr.). ταπεινός with derivatives, used in classi- cal writers to denote a mean condition of self-debasement, had been already exalted by Plato and his school to describe that state of mind which submits to the Divine order of the universe and does not impiously exalt itself. It underwent a further stage of development in Christian literature, when it came to signify the spirit which most resembles that of Christ Himself. See an instructive note in Moule (CT. ad loc.).