Vv. 17-19. A SOLEMN WARNING AGAINST THE EARTHLY, SENSUAL MIND. —Ver. 17. ovppip. The compound is significant. Uno consensu et una mente (Calv.). This emphasis on their unity justifies the interpretation of τῷ αὐτῷ favoured above. Paul is compelled to make his own example a norm of the new life. It was not as in Judaism where the Law lay ready to hand as a fixed stan- dard. There was, as yet, no tradition of the Christian life.—oxoweire. A ΡΝ, close scrutiny. Cf. Rom. xvi. 17 (but there = “‘ mark Be to avoid” ad oe probably points back to pov. It seems more natural to give pod τὸ its common argumentative force, ‘‘ even as ᾽'.---τύπον =(1) “stamp” of a die, (2) “copy, figure,” as the stamp bears a figure on
16—19.
Ὁ περιπατοῦντας, ἢ καθὼς ἔχετε “ τύπον ἡμᾶς.
461
18. πολλοὶ γὰρ περι- > Ephiv. 17;
πατοῦσιν, οὓς πολλάκις ἔλεγον ὑμῖν, νῦν δὲ καὶ κλαίων λέγω, τοὺς iv. ts τ
ἃ ἐχθροὺς τοῦ “ σταυροῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ: 19. ὧν τὸ Στέλος © ἀπώλεια, - 2. Thess.
[ή ~ - ὧν ὃ Θεὸς ἡ Ἀ κοιλία, καὶ ἡ δόξα ἐν τῇ ᾿ αἰσχύνῃ αὐτῶν, οἱ τὰ
ἃ See note inj,
ν. 3 al. ) g See note in/r.
al,
the face of the die, (3) ‘‘ mould, pat- tern,’’ by transference from the effect to the cause. Wetst. quotes Diod. Sic., Ex. (?), τὸν ἑαυτοῦ βίον eis καλῶν ἐπιτη- δευμάτων μίμησιν ἀρχέτυπον τιθέναι. See also Radford, Expositor, v., 6, p. 380 ff.
Ver. 18. πολλοὶ κ.τ.λ. To whom does he refer? Plainly they were per- sonsinside the Christian Church, although probably not at Philippi. This (against Ws.) is borne out by the use of περιπατεῖν compared with περιπατοῦντας (ver. 17) and στοιχεῖν (ver. 16), by κλαίων which would have no meaning here if not applied to professing Christians, and further by ἐχθρούς which would be a mere platitude if used of heathens or Jews. Some (e.g., Schinz, Hort, Cone, etc.) refer this passage to the same per- sons as he denounces at the beginning of the chapter, the Judaising teachers. And no doubt they might fitly be called ἐχθροὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ (cf. Gal. vi. 12-14). But the rest of the description applies far more aptly to professing Christians who allowed their liberty to degenerate into licence (Gal. v. 13); who, from an altogether superficial view of grace, thought lightly of continuing in sin (Rom. vi. 1, 12-13, 15, 23); who, while bearing the name of Christ, were concerned only with their own self-indulgence (Rom. xvi. 18). If there did exist at Philippi any section dis- posed to look with favour on Judaising tendencies, this might lead others to exaggerate the opposite way of thinking and to become a ready prey to Anti- nomian reaction. Possibly passages like the present and Rom. xvi. 18 point to the earliest beginnings of that strange medley of doctrines which afterwards developed into Gnosticism. That this is the more natural explanation seems also to follow from the context. The Apostle has had in view, from ver. τα onwards, the advance towards perfection, the point already attained, the kind of course to be imi- tated. It seems most fitting that he should warn against those who pretended to be on the straight path, but who were really straying on devious by-ways of their ΟΥΥΠ.---οὓς πολλάκις ἔλεγον κ.τ.λ.
e Contrast Gal. vi. 14. h Rom. xvi. 18. Cf. 1 Cor. vi. 13; Sirach xxiii. 6.
iii. 9; 1 Tim. iv. 12; 1 Pet. f Rom. vi. 21; 2 Cor. xi. 15; 1 Pet. iv. 17 i See note infr.
“Whom I often used to call,” etc. (so also Grotius, Heinrichs, Hfm.). Cf. Zésch., Eumen., 48, οὕτοι γυναῖκας ἀλλὰ Γοργόνας λέγω. Hatz. (Einl., p. 223) remarks that in the Greek islands they say μὲ λέγει or λέγει με = “he names me”. Paul speaks with a depth and vehemence of feeling (πολλοὶ... πολ- λάκις. . . κλαίων) which suggest his genuine interest in those disloyal Chris- tians who had once seemed to receive his message. If we imagine that the terms he uses are too strong to apply to pro- fessing Christians, we must remember that he speaks in a most solemn mood and from the highest point of view.— τ. ἐχθροὺς τ. στ. τ. Χ. If we are right in taking λέγω = “call,” “name,” τοὺς ἐχθ. will come in as the remoter accusa- tive. Otherwise it must be regarded as assimilated to the relative clause, as in I John ii. 25. The true Christian is the man who is ‘‘crucified with Christ,” who has ‘‘crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts”. The Cross is the central principle in his life. ‘‘ If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.” Those here described, by their unthinking self-indulgence, run directly in the teeth of this principle. The same thing holds good of much that passes for Christianity in modern life. ‘‘Who has not known kindly, serviceable men hanging about the Churches with a real predilection for the suburban life of Zion . . . and yet men whose life just seemed to omit the Cross of Christ” (Rainy, op. cit., p. 286). It is quite probable that Paul would feel their conduct all the more keenly inas- much as Judaisers might point to it as the logical consequence of his liberal prin- ciples.