Read the Book - 5th Pass (Background from content) (03/05/24)

Who wrote it?	Paul and Timothy are clearly identified as the authors.  It is likely that Epaphroditus is involved as well, as he would appear to have been sent with the letter.
Who was it written to or for?	The letter is to the church in Philippi.
Why was it written?	It seems there was a fair amount of communication between Paul and this church, even from his imprisonment in Rome, such that they knew that Epaphroditus had been ill, and Paul knew of their concern for him.  Then, too, with Paul in prison, they had concern as to his situation as well.  In all, the letter has far more of a sense of fellowship than of addressing concerns.  There is some notice of the general problem of Jewish opposition, and attempts to distort or displace the Gospel, but they are relatively subdued here.
When was it written?
What was happening in the world at that time?	Rome remains in power, of course, and Nero would be emperor by this point.  The church is pretty well established throughout the region, from Israel, up through Asia Minor and Greece, and now, over as far as Rome.  It is becoming a known quantity, if not necessarily a welcome development.  But we are not yet at the point of official persecutions.  Paul still has expectation of a fair trial before Nero.
What was happening to God's people at that time?	At least at Philippi, it would appear the church is doing well.  Again, other than there possibly being a bit of personality clash between some of the leaders, and the constant issue of Jewish persecution, there do not seem to be any pressing issues in that church.  There are concerns expressed by them, and thus, concerns Paul has for them.  But they are more of the nature of mutual care, the desire to help one another, and alleviate any pains that may be alleviated.
What was happening to the author at that time?	Paul is in prison, clearly.  So, we are looking at that time after his bringing of the contribution to Jerusalem.  This would be some years later, as he had been imprisoned in Caesarea Philippi for some time before being sent on to Rome.  Then, too, the passage across the Mediterranean had taken some months, by the sounds of it.  But Paul expresses expectation of release, and his imprisonment has not been so terrible as all that – an expense, yes, as prisoners were expected to see to their own accommodations – but he had liberty to minister and be ministered to, and it’s clear that he has availed himself of every opportunity to continue preaching Christ.  And it’s having an effect.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Harper's: (03/06/24)

Written by Paul from prison in Rome somewhere around 59-61 AD.  Epaphroditus had brought a gift of support from Philippi, and fallen sick in Rome, to the alarm of friends back home.  Paul thus pens a letter of gratitude to be sent back along with Epaphroditus.  His ministry in Philippi had been an exciting period, answering a divine call to Macedonia.  He went through Macedonia again after his time in Ephesus, and once more, when returning to Syria.  No church was dearer to Paul than this one.  Here are love and confidence expressed between friends, the more appreciative given his current imprisonment.  The letter is full of rejoicing, a joyful hymn from one who knew Christ to be his all-sufficient Lord.  The church was not without its perils, both within and without, and they are encouraged to withstand and defeat these perils.  Self-seeking and pride are ever a danger to Christian unity.  This is a very pastoral letter, though light on theological instruction compared to others of his epistles.  That said, the letter contains some of the ‘most sublime and profound’ statements, particularly as touches on the incarnation of Christ.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

H-G Key: (03/06/24)

Philippi was named after Philip the Macedon, father of Alexander the Great.  It became part of the Roman empire when Mark Anthony defeated Brutus in nearby battle.  Augustus Caesar made it a Roman colony.  It was a major stop on the highway, and thus, strategic to the spread of the gospel.  Paul came to Philippi at the Lord’s prompting, ‘an event which has affected all of our lives in the West’.  This was the first ever European congregation.  Likely, Paul revisited Philippi as he traveled from Ephesus to Corinth, and we know from Acts 20:6, that he was there in the spring.  Ironic, given Paul’s imprisonment in Philippi, that he writes to them from prison in Rome some ten years later.  Normally, Paul saw to his own support, but he did accept support from the Philippians as he continued to minister in Thessalonica and Corinth, and now again in Rome.  Epaphroditus had brought the gift, but come near to death in illness while there.  Paul now sends him back with this letter of gratitude and reassurance.  There is not, strictly speaking, a theme to this letter, the main focus mostly on the all-sufficiency of Christ, ‘the very meaning of life and death’.  Paul’s joy and love are evident throughout.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Calvin: (03/07/24)

Not only was Philippi in that region where Mark Anthony defeated Brutus, but also where Caesar conquered Pompey.  This was the first place where Paul established a church in Macedonia, which church both persevered and grew, both in number and in ministry.  They had sent their pastor, Epaphroditus, to Paul with a gift of support for his needs while imprisoned, and he had no doubt learned of the state of that church from their pastor, both the good and that which needed attention.  It does seem that false apostles had sought to trouble them, but they remained steadfast, which steadfastness Paul commends and also encourages.  He speaks of his bonds and his situation primarily to allay any dismay they may have had on his account, showing that even here, the gospel was still being ministered.  The first part of this letter concludes with an encouragement to unity and patience.  This is followed by an urging of humility on their part, lest dissensions be given an open door.  There is also note here of a promised visit from Timothy, as well as explanation as to why Epaphroditus had delayed his return.  The third chapter addresses the issue of false apostles, and particularly their emphasis on circumcision.  True piety is displayed as contrast to their arrogant pride, and the true goal of faith is set forth as being fellowship with Christ in both His death and His resurrection.  The final chapter begins with some particularly pointed admonitions, but moves quickly to general counsel, concluding with an appreciation for their support.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Matthew Henry: (03/07/24)

Philippi was a chief city of Macedonia, named for Philip of Macedon, and later made a Roman colony.  Near here, in the Campi Philippici, Julius Caesar fought and defeated Pompey, as Mark Anthony also fought and defeated Cassius and Brutus on another occasion.  Now, Paul writes to them from his imprisonment in Rome, the year being 62 AD.  Though he had care of all the churches, he clearly felt a particularly fatherly kindness and care for this church of his planting.  “To those to whom God has employed us to do any good we should look upon ourselves both as encouraged and engaged to study to do more good.”  Having begotten them in faith, he desires them to be nourished by the gospel.  His call to first minister to them had been an extraordinary event, a vision in the night.  Seeing that God went before him, he undertook by any and all means to carry on the good work begun with them, to build upon the foundation laid.  He had suffered at Philippi, scourged and put in stocks, yet still felt such a kindness for the place.  “We must never love our friends the less for the ill treatment which our enemies give us.”  The small beginnings in that ministry – Lydia and the jailer with a few more – did not discourage him.  Clearly, that church was flourishing, and Paul had known their kindness on several occasions, including his present situation.  “He had reaped of their temporal things, and he made a return in spiritual things.”  No other church, it seems, had been in contact with him to support him in his imprisonment, “and he gives them a prophet’s, an apostle’s reward, in this epistle, which is of more value than thousands of gold and silver.”

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Adam Clarke: (03/07/24)

Philippi was in the region of Thrace, part of Macedonia, and near the northernmost extremity of the Aegean Sea.  It sat about midway between Nicopolis and Thessalonica, first established as Crenides, but renamed for Philip of Macedonia, father of Alexander the Great.  Julius Caesar made it a colony of Rome, which Augustus enlarged, the result being that the city’s inhabitants were accounted freemen of Rome.  Near here, on multiple occasions, battles were fought which decided the fate of the Roman empire.  Paul first preached here around 53 AD, after a vision in the night caused him to set sail from Troas for Samothracia and Neapolis, from whence he traveled to Philippi.  There, he converted Lydia of Thyatira.  There, he cast a demon out of a Pythoness, and on that account was persecuted, scourged, and put in stocks, being moved to a more civil imprisonment upon the magistrates learning that he was a Roman citizen.  The Philippians loved their apostle, sending support to him as he labored in other churches, which seems to have been a practice unique to this church.  The letter was written toward the end of 62 AD, about a year after Ephesians.  This date is arrived at by consideration of what the letter says of events, noting that Paul’s imprisonment was nearing its end, it having been the case long enough that ministering from his cell had advanced the gospel even into the household of Caesar.  Likewise, note of the lengthy stay of Epaphroditus intimates a later stage in his imprisonment.  Observe that not only had Epaphroditus brought their gift of support to him, but there had been sufficient passage of time for news to travel to Philippi and back, concerning his illness, such that they knew of his illness, and Paul knew of their concern.  Seeing events developing as they are, Paul considers both the possibility of deliverence such that he might return to see them, and the possibility of condemnation and death.  Correlating all of this with the record of events in Acts, we recognize that we are nearing the end of his two year long imprisonment in Rome.  The correspondence of this letter with the record of Acts is telling, and confirms its authenticity.  The letter itself is of a pleasant and easy style, evidence of Paul’s contented state of  mind.  Yes, there are troubles both for him and for the church, as false apostles and Judaizers seek to disturb its peace, but he expresses comfort for them, and urges steadfastness.  “There is a divine unction in this letter which every serious reader will perceive.”

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Barnes' Notes: (03/07/24)

Philippi is only briefly noted in the New Testament, as being where Paul went after Troas, and where he made convert of Lydia, as well as the jailor who later had charge of him.  Per Acts 20, it appears he went there again after being in Corinth, as he made his way back to Judea.  Paul speaks of his mistreatment by the magistrates when writing to the church in Thessalonica.  Philippi is named after Philip, father of Alexander the Great.  Its history prior to Philip’s taking of the city is little known, other than that it is built on the site of an old Thasian settlement by name of Crenides, also known for a time as Dathos.  The Thasians were the inhabitants of the island of Thasus, who came to mine gold and silver in that region.  The city lay northeast of Amphipolis, near the Thracian border, some 20 miles from the sea near Mount Pangaeus.  It was originally part of Thrace before Philip invaded and took the city.  Rome also recognized the advantageous nature of its location, and established a colony there, which led to it becoming one of the most flourishing cities of the empire.  It was also set on a principal highway from Asia to Europe, and thus, had commercial and military importance.  Historically, the city held importance as being where Augustus Ceasar and Mark Anthony defeated the forces of Brutus and Cassius, thus defeating the republican party, and firmly establishing the empire.  The city is now in ruins, but remains of its forum and palace remain.  The road from Neapolis to Philippi yet remains in use.  This was the first foothold of the Gospel in Europe, giving it greater importance even than the battles fought there.  Here, Paul had come in response to a vision, going, as was his wont, to the capital city to deliver his message of the gospel.  His first convert there was Lydia of Thyatira, a city in Asia Minor.  She, being converted, showed Paul and his companions hospitality.  Later, he cast a demon out of a diviner, thus destroying her employment.  This caused a disturbance, and Paul and Silas were imprisoned in stocks.  But God intervened, with the result that their jailor and his family came to faith and were baptized.  Paul was honorably released from prison and made his way from there shortly thereafter.  We know he visited Philippi at least once more prior to being imprisoned in Rome, and it is supposed that he did so again after his release, a release of which he expresses some confidence in this letter.  The letter is written from Rome, where Paul is yet awaiting trial, and that, nearer the end of his time in prison.  He had been their long enough that he was having impact on his guards and on the populace as regards the gospel.  And it’s clear that Epaphroditus had been with him some time.  Add the notes of anticipation as regards the matter of his imprisonment being soon concluded, and we have clear indication that we are near the end of that imprisonment.  All of this leads us to place the date of writing near the end of 61 AD or the beginning of 62 AD.  Clearly, it precedes that fire in Rome in 64 AD or it would surely have been mentioned.  Nor would he have been likely to suppose a favorable outcome given the persecutions that followed upon that fire.  He writes primarily in thankfulness for their support, and in hope of soon being freed.  Much of the letter discusses his circumstances and plans.  This is perhaps the most tender of his epistles, with none of the needed reproof evident in others of his letters.  Paul was not one to shrink either from commending the commendable or reproving what needed correction.  The letter “breathes the spirit of a ripe Christian, whose piety is mellowing for the harvest.”  He might have expectation of release, but could not but have looked death in the face as well.  Having one such as Nero as judge could not have inspired much hope of justice, and it may well be that the early signs of his later persecution of Christians were already present.  He is, then, at the mercy of Nero, dwelling among strangers, and facing the potential of death.  Naturally, there would be a certain solemnity and tenderness in this letter, then.  The letter is full of gratitude and tender regard, a father’s care for their welfare.  This must be borne in mind as we seek to interpret this letter.  It is not written so much with the authority of Apostleship as with the heart of a father, advising more than commanding.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

Fausset: (03/08/24)

There is plentiful evidence for the authenticity of this letter, both from its own content and from external sources.  The main purpose of the letter is to express thanks for the gift sent by the church in Philippi, and to encourage humility and love.  It is noteworthy that this is the only one of Paul’s epistles in which no sharp censure or doctrinal correction is expressed.  It breaks readily into three sections; the first concerning his situation and plans, cautions against the legalism promoted by the Judaizers, and general admonitions and thanks.  It is written from Rome, where Paul is then imprisoned amidst the palace bodyguards.  It comes towards the end of that imprisonment, so after Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon.  Luke is apparently elsewhere, else his greeting would have been included.  It seems that the second year of his imprisonment was more confining.  He was no longer preaching himself, but others were doing so.  We know that in that second year of imprisonment, the prefect Burrhue, who had had charge of him, died, and Nero had divorced Octavia to marry the Jewish proselyte Poppaea, and promoted wicked Tigellinus to the position of prefect.  Prior to this, Paul had been in a hired house at his own expense, but now, he was brought into the camp of the guard, under stricter custody.  So, we know he arrived in 61 AD, and his time in that hired house ended in February of 63 AD, so this letter would have come shortly thereafter, call it spring to summer of 63 AD.  But God was at work, and Tigellinus considered Paul beneath his notice.  Another danger to Paul, Nero’s favorite, by name of Pallas, died.  We can further assert the late date of the letter given the mention of deacons and elders in that church, evidence that the church had already formed its governance after the instruction given in Titus and the letters to Timothy.  There is strong feeling in this letter, rather than an official tone.  He does not note his apostleship, as in other epistles, but writes as a friend to equals.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

ISBE: (03/08/24-03/09/24)

The church in Philippi was established by Paul around 50 AD, when he came from Troas with Timothy and Silas, having had a vision.  Acts 16 gives the account.  From Neapolis, he followed the Egnatian Road to Philippi, some ten miles inland.  This road ran through the city east to west, and on the plains southwest of the city, Mark Anthony defeated the murderers of Caesar in 42 BC.  The city was granted citizenship in Rome in 31 BC.  This is given notice in Paul’s discussion of citizenship in the letter.  While there was a Jewish presence, Roman consciousness ruled, and they were not permitted a synagogue within the city walls, thus the place of prayer by the river Gangites, where Paul encountered Lydia.  She being converted and baptized, became also hostess to the group, thus becoming the first church in Europe, apart from some scattered Jewish Christians in Rome, perhaps including Priscilla and Aquila, who left for Corinth in 50 AD.  The opposition to Paul’s effective influence in Philippi was likely in reaction to his suspected Judaism.  His arrest may reflect awareness of Claudius having driven the Jews from Rome in 50 AD.  We know that in Alexandria, the Greeks were accusing Jews of disturbance in 52 AD.  Thus, the accusation of introducing Jewish customs unworthy of a Roman, and they were flogged and imprisoned.  That led to the conversion of their jailor, and news of his Roman citizenship led to apologies for this treatment, and the request that he leave the city, which they did, moving down the Egnatian Road to Thessalonica.  While ministering there, the Philippian church sent material support at least twice, perhaps primarily coming from Lydia.  Paul knew their support in Corinth as well.  He returned through Macedonia in 57 AD, and likely wrote 2Corinthians from this city.  He returned again at Easter in 58 AD.  It seems unlikely he made a fourth visit before being martyred in 64 or 65 AD.  As to the origins of the letter, theories, as ever, abound, but some things seem reasonably certain.  No reasonable doubt exists, for example, as to Paul’s authorship.  Literary critics, as is their wont, have sought to attack the integrity of the epistle, seeing difficulties and enigmas in the shifting flow of the letter.  Some suggest Paul himself may have revised the letter before sending it, but there are no grounds for supposing any such activity on his part.  More likely, had he found fresh cause to write to the church, he would have simply written another letter [as with Thessalonica].  The argument of this critics is not due to variant manuscript evidence, but a supposition of outright revision, a rearranging of the sequence of the letter.  But why would any copyist decide to make the letter more complicated by such actions?  Others posit a conglomeration of local letters is presented here, but then, why leave all the local, personal details pointing to Philippi?  In short, all these efforts are unconvincing.  Clearly, the letter was written quickly and with less of the considerations needful for a more theological writing.  He writes to Philippi from imprisonment.  [More discussion as to theories of it being written from elsewhere follow, but are not interesting to me.]  We know he was in Rome from 60 to 62 AD, living in private quarters under guard.  Good roads would allow for relatively quick communication between Rome and Philippi. Epaphroditus could have been in Rome, and news of his illness back in Philippi within six to eight months.  Note that Paul’s mention of the praetorium is such as cannot be taken to refer to the palace, but rather to the guard.  Such a reference is not uncommon in Greek writings of the time.  This guard was always in Rome during these first centuries of the Christian era, though a portion would accompany the emperor on his travels.  Paul’s use of the term makes perfect sense for one currently in Rome and writing to Roman citizens.  The letter is quite personal, though containing both theological instruction and admonitions.  It is perhaps the most personal of his letters apart from Philemon.  We may break the letter into sections alternating between the personal and the theological.  It begins with information as to his affairs, moves to admonition through the first half of chapter 2, returns to discussion of outcomes for the rest of that chapter, then shifts to admonitions through the first part of chapter 4, closing with a more informational discussion of the support he had received from them.  Paul’s joy, and his regard for this church are evident throughout.  This joy is not just a response to gifts received, but an appreciation of Christ’s assured return.  Christ is thus also central to the letter, being the subject of his preaching even in so hostile an environment as he was currently in.  He sees suffering as a means of drawing us closer to our Lord, and exhorts one and all to walk worthy of the good news that is ours in Christ.  Christ is held forth as our example of selfless care for others.  We are pointed to His kenosis, emptying of Himself in laying aside the fulness and the power of His deity, becoming a servant of utmost obedience, thus fulfilling many prophecies regarding the Servant.  We must be His successors in obedience and blamelessness, willing to share His sufferings.  Mention of bishops and deacons makes clear that no one officer stood in authority over the church, but rather, a collaborative administration.  This was quickly becoming the normal system of governance in the churches.  The caring nature of the Philippians is evident, but also a bit of an issue as concerns doctrine, where some difficulties appear to have been creeping in.  Paul thus exhorts them to harmonious unity of faith.  This is not a call to some specific confession of faith, nor of some specific hermeneutic, but rather a call to greater love and unity in serving one another.  “The perfection of Christian diakonia […] will bring about the spontaneous improvement of Christian doctrine.”  Follow Christ and this will follow.  But unity is not to extend to the tolerance of heresy, which destroys Christian peace.  Paul was familiar with its effects, dealing as he was with jealousy and strife even from his prison cell in Rome, and Philippi knew the same trials.  Chief in his thoughts would appear to be those Judaizers who so troubled the early church, and those others from the Jewish community who sought by every means to terminate Christianity.  This was, after all, the basis for his current imprisonment.  Christian zealots, tending as they do to be off base, are another danger addressed here, and another that Paul was facing from prison even as the church faced it in Philippi and elsewhere.  Here is legalism refuted and accounted as refuse.  We must not allow material interests to dominate over the spiritual life in Christ.  It is no earthly triumph of the Church to which we lend our effort, but rather, a hope in the eschatological, heavenly kingdom of Christ.  Here is our hope.  Here is our joy.  It starts in what God has done, and holds fast to the promise of what He shall do.  Thus is Paul happy to live or to die as Christ deems best.  We work for salvation because God is at work in us.  We rejoice in Christ, knowing He abides in us, and knowing He is coming again.  It is to this we look forward.  It is in this we rest.  And because of this, we know His present peace and give Him all honor.

Read some Background - 6th Pass (Add some authors)

McClintock and Strong: (03/09/24)

This is the sixth of Paul’s letters in the NT.  Prior to the 18th century there had been no question as to its authenticity, confirmed by several of the early fathers.  It is quite possible that some of those who first heard this letter yet lived when Polycarp wrote to that church, which gives reference to this epistle.  [There follows a bunch of discussion regarding text critical concerns.  Not really interested, and well enough addressed in the previous article.]  Rome is pretty clearly the location from which Paul writes, all arguments to the contrary notwithstanding.  The internal evidence for this is overwhelming, setting the time as being that period covered in the closing chapter of Acts.  Time must have been allowed for four journeys between Philippi and Rome since Paul’s imprisonment if we are to account for the circumstances presented, and Luke’s absence from the greeting would indicate it was written after he had left Rome, so very near the end of that two year period, when Paul’s situation was becoming more dangerous.  This article places the writing, on that basis, around 58 AD, which is much earlier than others have suggested.  Philippi was built near a gold mine, and established as a Roman stronghold near the borders of Thrace.  In 42 BC it had been the scene of war, where Brutus and Cassius were defeated.  Paul’s visit came some 90 years later.  [So, approximately as distant in time as we are now from WWII.]  He came with Silas, who had been with him since he departed Antioch, Timothy, whom he added to his crew in Derbe, and Luke, recently met in Troas just prior to departing for Macedonia.  This was, at the time, the furthest Paul had gone from Jerusalem.  He began his ministering there among the Jews, and Lydia, a proselyte from Asia Minor believed and was baptized, perhaps even that first day.  The missionaries took up residence in her house, continuing to minister along the riverside and converting many.  Forced to leave that city, he left Timothy and Luke to carry on while he and Silas made their way to Thessalonica.  Likely Timothy and Luke brought with them the first of Philippi’s contributions when the followed after.  Or, at least, Timothy rejoined Paul there.  Luke may have stayed on in Philippi.  He is absent from the record as of this point, and when we once more find him with Paul, it is at Philippi.  After his time in Corinth and Ephesus, Paul once more traveled through Macedonia, around 54 AD, likely stopping by Philippi, where Timothy joined him.  From here, he wrote his second epistle to Corinth before traveling there, and on his return trip, unable to take ship due to Jewish threats, he once again passed through Macedonia, spending Easter in Philippi in 55 AD.  Here, Luke rejoins the group as they depart for Judea.  Now, in 57 AD, we find Epaphroditus sent to Paul with further support.  [NB – this leaves no room for the years imprisoned in Caesarea Philippi, which might explain the early date assigned.]  We must briefly consider the state of the Roman church at the time, from such evidence as we have.  The writing of Romans would indicate its presence in 55 AD, and gives us a sense of affairs then, and we can look to the end of Acts to see its state when this letter was written.  The church there may well have been planted by some present at that first Pentecost outpouring, and was composed of proselytes and Jews, as well, perhaps, as some more directly converted from paganism.  Romans gives evidence of two factions in that church, the one inclined to hold to Jewish law as well as faith, the other repudiating such practices.  Even now, in his imprisonment, there were those in the church who rejected his teaching.  Though a prisoner, Paul retained freedom to preach and to meet with his fellow laborers to maintain an active mission to the city.  He was also in communication with churches elsewhere through letters and messengers.  “From his prison, as from a center, light streamed into Caesar’s household and far beyond.”  We have no reliable news of Philippi’s response to the letter, no news at all, really, until about 107 AD, when Ignatius visited en route to being martyred in Rome.  Polycarp came soon after.  From their writings, we see a church still steadfast in faith, and joyful amidst suffering for the sake of Christ.  Their religion appears more ‘practical and emotional than speculative’.  The lack of references to the OT suggests that the church here was primarily drawn from pagan backgrounds, and we see that false teachers tried in vain to make inroads in that church, both Judaizers and Gnostics.  Also, the tendency towards petty quarrels remained a constant.  We see the beginnings of what would become established church order in Paul’s address of the bishops and deacons.  The Macedonian churches were, for the most part, relatively poor.  But Philippi’s association with the gold mines may have enabled their generosity, and also have been at the root of warnings against becoming too materialistic.  It would seem, then, that Paul’s letter had some impact insomuch as they remained steadfast even at the time of Polycarp.  It may not have progressed much, but neither had it fallen.  They stood fast, holding forth, ‘the light of an exemplary though not a perfect Christian life’.  The point of the letter is plain:  gratitude for their gift, news of his condition, and advice as to theirs.  Perhaps the concerns of his impending trial, and the near departure of Epaphroditus explain the somewhat disjointed flow of thought in his writing here.  But his love for them runs deep, as is evident throughout.  There is much to commend in Philippi, and nothing in need of censure, though there is an encouragement to remain on guard against evil influences.  So, we have effectively three sections to the letter; an opening effusion of affection in the first half of the first chapter, discussion of his situation and hopes through the end of the second and into cautions in the third.  The final chapter forms the third part, with some individual admonitions, general exhortations, and thanks for their aid.  The joyful, thankful air of this letter is the more striking for his circumstances, rather like those midnight hymns when imprisoned in Philippi.  His other letters work hard to instruct, correct, and heal churches in difficulty, but here, though he is by no means blind to their faults, there is no such effort at censure or correction.  Here is little to nothing of notice as to his office, expressing rather ‘the free action of a heart glowing with inspired Christian love’.  It is a letter between friends and equals, connected for all eternity in Christ.  It is thus a most moving letter, expressing godly love, “love, at once tender and watchful.”

Read some Background - 7th Pass (Resolve background info) (03/10/24-03/13/24)

The Setting in Philippi (03/11/24-03/12/24)

I find much more of interest in the background information for this letter than I recall seeing with prior studies.  There is a great deal of interesting history as concerns Philippi, and this should play a role in how we understand the letter, as well as the account of Paul’s visit in Acts 16.  I should also have to say it has me thinking I may pursue a sideline exercise before I even get started, to explore that history just a bit more.  But let’s start with what we have.

The first bit of background that comes clear is that this was always a city associated with wealth, or at least access to wealth.  At first it seems an odd choice of location for the first planting of a church in the west.  It’s not a seaport, nor even particularly convenient to the sea, given that it is some ten miles inland, and that, over mountainous terrain.  Yet, it is apparently from the sea that its first settlers arrived, coming, according to Barnes, from the island of Thasus to establish the place as a base from which to mine gold and silver.  And though the city had passed first to the Thracians of the north, then to the Macedonian empire that produced Alexander the Great, and eventually to Rome, those gold mines hadn’t gone anywhere.  And Rome, being Rome, had built out a highway east and west of the city, such that in spite of its distance from the Aegean, it was yet a location of strategic importance, both in defending the Thracian border of the empire, and as sitting astride this major trade route.  The city was, then, rather well to do, which may explain their ready generosity towards Paul’s ministry.

As to that strategic importance to the empire – to a few empires, really – we find that it was named for Alexander’s father, Philip, when he took the region and rebuilt the city for himself.  Later, we have it as onlooker, at least, to some of the most significant wars of Rome, among them, that which led to the final transition from republic to empire, as Augustus Caesar and Mark Anthony defeated the last defenders of the Republic.  To what degree this city had a role in that event is unclear to me, but what is clear is that Augustus saw its value, making it a Roman colony and sending some of his retired generals to see to its establishing.  Now, that war was only some ninety years back when Paul first came to the city, so about as distant in time as we are presently from the events of World War II.  I suppose the significance of that war has faded somewhat as far as more recent generations are concerned, but I still remember it as highly significant when I was a youth.  It fired the imagination, and made one rather proud of his country and that generation.  Watching this British series, ‘The Repair Shop’, it’s interesting to see just how significant memories of that war remain in those places that felt its ravages more directly.  All this to say that there would have been those in this city who could recall, if not their own involvement in these world events, at least tales from their forebears.

Okay, so some ten years after that war, the city was granted Roman citizenship, its populace declared freemen of Rome.  This lent a certain pride to its citizens, a sense of importance.  And it also strongly influenced its culture.  It was in every way a Roman city, even if its populace was rather diverse.  Amongst other impacts of this civic reality, it meant, per the ISBE, that the Jews who dwelt in that place were not permitted to have a synagogue within the city proper.  It is for this reason that we find Paul’s first efforts of ministry happening by the riverside.  “And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to a riverside, where we were supposing that there would be a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women who had assembled” (Ac 16:13).  One might ask where the men were, but again, it was a Roman city, and did not deign to observe Jewish religious practices.  Observe?  They were straight out refused.  So, the menfolk may well have been required to be at their trades.  And though the city was rich enough, it may well be that the Jewish population was not numbered among the wealthy.  This remains unclear.  But Luke, in his account in that chapter, makes sure that we know this city was a Roman colony.  Luke’s familiarity with the city has suggested to many that he was a native of this place, which may well explain his disappearance from the narrative after Paul’s departure from the city.  But I’m getting ahead of myself just a bit. 

We may note, however, that the charges against Paul, that they were Jews pushing Jewish practices on Romans, which Romans could not lawfully pursue (Ac 16:20-21), would reflect this sort of religious segregation in the city.  Now, I would have to say that I am unaware of there being any such restriction on the Roman citizenry, but perhaps, being freemen of a colonial origin, they felt their citizenship just a bit more precarious and thus felt a need for stricter adherence to Roman ways.

We can add to this some of the then-present intrigues in Roman policy.  When Paul first comes to Philippi, it is not so very long after Claudius had driven the Jews from Rome, that same event which had led to Priscilla and Aquila coming to Corinth.  Now, it’s hard for me to quite fathom the realities of travel in that time, but if we assume, say, a year to cover Paul’s time in Macedonia and Athens, and this begins the same year as Claudius’ expulsion of the Jews, that would mean it had taken those two nearly a year to go from Rome to Corinth, which seems a bit long.  Consider, for example, that we are required to understand that news had gone back and forth between Philippi and Rome twice in the two years that Paul was imprisoned.  So, a one-way trip couldn’t have taken much more than, say, four months.  Of course, you had a somewhat more direct, and less weather-dependent path overland to Philippi, but still, one has to wonder what those two were doing between Rome and Corinth that it took so long.  Again, I digress.  The point that applies to this present account is that this colony, hearing of Claudius’ actions, may have, on that account, been more aggressively opposed to Jewish influences than usual.

Be that as it may, Paul comes to this place, as we learn, in response to a clear vision in the night (Ac 16:9-10), having been stymied by God in his efforts to move eastward in ministry.  And it is on this account, in the company of Luke, that he makes his first church plant on Western soil, Philippi adding to its honors the great honor of being the first European congregation, at least as some account it.  Others note that if Priscilla and Aquila, already Christians, were expelled from Rome in 50 AD, there must have been at least some scattering of Christians there already, and the mention of Rufus in Romans 16:13, noted as a son of Simon the Cyrene in Mark’s gospel (Mk 15:21), who bore the cross of Jesus, makes it at least possible that the church there was established by some present for that first Pentecost outpouring.

As to the connection of Paul and this church, it clearly remained quite strong and quite dear, as is evident from the flavor of this epistle.  He notes that they alone supported him in this time of his imprisonment, and also that this was hardly the first time.   They had sent funding to his ministry when he was down the road in Thessalonica – more than once.  And he hadn’t been there all that long.  They had sent support when he was in Corinth.  And now, though they had apparently not been able to do so while he was in Caesarea Philippi, and certainly not while he was casting about on the sea, they had sent support to him in his imprisonment in Rome.  They had also been strong contributors to that contribution Paul had taken to Jerusalem prior to his imprisonment.  They were, then, richly invested in support of the progress of the Gospel, even if they were not necessarily so strongly evangelical as were the Thessalonians.  Again, the assocations with trade and with the gold mines nearby may explain their capacity for generosity.  Worth noting that this gives indication that wealth is not itself opposed to faith, nor poverty somehow a holier pursuit.  It’s not what you have.  It’s what you’re doing with it.  Matthew Henry sums up the relationship between Paul and this church by observing their support and noting that Paul, in return, “gives them a prophet’s, an apostle’s reward, in this epistle, which is of more value than thousands of gold and silver.”

A few further striking details emerge as concerns this church.  We have further letters to them, attested as coming from Ignatius and Polycarp.  I think we might find letters from Clement as well, which I would suspect would be the same Clement mentioned at the end of this epistle as being important to that church.  This would have come about, presumably, subsequent to John’s passing, but still potentially within the lifetimes of some who had heard this letter read out when first it arrived at that church.  Both Ignatius and Polycarp had come to that city, Ignatius, at least, en route to his martyrdom in Rome.  This, per the M&S, would be around 107 AD, and their writings demonstrate familiarity with a church there that was still steadfast in faith, and still joyful even in the midst of suffering for Christ, which is to say, still holding true to the admonitions of this letter.

The evidence is, then, that while this church was no less troubled by false apostles and trials than any other of the churches, they stood fast.  It is their steadfastness which Paul both commends and encourages in this letter, and it still their steadfastness which those later fathers encountered and encouraged.  May the same be said of us in our own churches, our own situations; that come what may, we held fast to the Lord and His glorious Truth, heeding not those who seek to spread a different gospel, nor falling back into our wayward past.

McClintock and Strongs has a few observations as regards the Philippian church.  First, they note that their religion appears to have been more ‘practical and emotional than speculative’ in nature.  This may sound something of a negative to our ears, but I don’t think it is intended to be so.  We have, perhaps, grown overly attached to ideas of educated, highly trained pastors, men of letters, as it were, and somewhat subconsciously concluded that education marks the man of faith, rather than faith that runs deep.  But consider the perspective this article supplies more carefully.  What would it mean to have a speculative religion?  It reduces it to something more nearly related to philosophy.  It sets that person’s mindset nearer to that of the ones Paul encountered in Athens.  Now, I don’t believe there is anything inherently wrong in pursuing the big questions such as why mankind is what he is, how it is that life has come to exist here, and so far as we have as yet discovered, only here.  There is nothing inherently wrong with considerations of ethics, of seeking to improve the morals of society.  The trouble comes in that without God, these moral, ethical considerations have no firm basis; become matters of one man’s opinion over against another’s.

A religion that is reduced to this level is, effectively, no religion at all.  I know that I have heard many comment on how the seminary experience, which we hold to be so necessary, is of a nature that could readily dampen rather than strengthen the fires of faith.  But a religion that is both emotional and practical?  Here is fuel for that fire!  And may I just say that both are needed in balance.  Religion that is purely emotional rapidly becomes a mess.  Religion that is purely practical devolves once more into mere ethics, and the two have that same tendency to leave us just following our own thoughts if we are not careful to keep them firmly rooted in Christ.  Words of caution, then, as well as commendation.

That article also observes the lack of Old Testament references in this epistle (and I assume, also in those writings of Ignatius and others to this church), and observe on this basis that the church in Philippi was likely drawn primarily from pagan backgrounds, as opposed to the synagogue.  That said, we must acknowledge that the first convert, Lydia, was a proselyte.  She was not Jewish, but presumably had developed some familiarity with the Scriptures.  But point taken. 

Finally, as to their development, we can see from this letter that while no serious inroads had been made by them, false teachers did indeed seek to trouble that church.  Alongside this, we find evidence that the pride which would naturally come of citizenship and wealth had its effect on them.  Petty quarrels were not unheard of.  Paul gently addresses the matter here, or maybe not so gently, given that he names the two primarily prone to these issues of pride, but not with the stern rebuke we might expect from him, given others of his letters.  A cynic might see this as being a bit soft in light of their financial support, but we have no just cause to suppose that is the case.  Again, as concerns these concerns, I am given to understand that those church fathers that are mentioned took note of the same tendencies when they wrote to this church forty or more years later.  Overall, though, the testimony of this church is quite positive.  As this McClintock and Strong’s article observes, they stood fast, and held forth, “the light of an exemplary though not a perfect Christian life.”  I don’t suppose better could be said of any church.  Nor, were it said, do I suppose it could be considered believable.

So, then, may the same be said of us, that while we are not perfect Christians, we are exemplary ones.  May we be found similarly steadfast in our faith, holding firmly to that which we have thus far obtained, and striving, like our brother Paul, to lay hold of what lies ahead; working diligently in the clear awareness that it is God Who is at work in us.

The Situation in Rome (03/12/24)

Okay, so we have spent some time considering the church to which Paul is writing.  Now, we can turn to Paul’s own circumstances, which provide so much of the content in this letter.  In my quick attempts to answer the background questions, I was thinking that being as we are prior to Nero’s more pronounced persecutions of the Christians as scapegoats for that fire that consumed portions of Rome, persecution was not really an issue for the church at the time.  But that is significantly short of the reality.  For one, as was already noted, Claudius had already had a turn at purging the Jews from Rome, and this may well have played into the treatment the Jews generally, and Paul specifically encountered when first he made his way to Philippi.

In part, this seems to have been because he was assumed to be presenting just one more sect of Judaism.  This might inform how we hear him when he notes how the guards with him are now quite clear that he is imprisoned not for spreading Judaism, but for preaching Christ (Php 1:13).  Note has also been made of the worsening situation with Nero himself.  He had been encouraged to relieve himself of his first wife and marry instead another, who was a proselyte, though not, as it would seem, one who practiced her faith.  Murder was involved in the matter, to get that former wife out of the way.  And the one who had encouraged all this palace intrigue had been promoted to the position of having charge of the Praetorian Guard.  This had, at least according to one article, led to changes in Paul’s circumstances.  Whereas he had been in a rented home at his own expense previously, and readily able to receive visitors and to preach to whoever might come, now he was taken into the camp of the guard, having less freedom to associate, which might explain the activities of those ambitious preachers he mentions in Philippians 1:15.

But God remains in control of his circumstances, and Paul remains well aware of that fact.  Whereas the presence of this ostensibly Jewish preacher might have been cause for some consternation to the new bride of Nero, which in turn might well have led to a situation akin to John the Baptist, lest he make noise about their marriage, instead this new commander found Paul beneath his notice.  Others who might have been cause of trouble to him died, if not for any directly associated reason perceptible to man.  So, we find Paul cautiously optimistic about his chances of release, if keenly aware of the potential for his death.  It is clear that while these are naturally concerns for him, they are not primary concerns.  His primary concern remains the proclaiming of Christ, and Him crucified.  And, as he observes, his attending to this mission is having an effect, reaching even into the household of Emperor Nero.  That seems so unlikely, given what we know of his reign, and yet, there it is.  And while those in his household may have had to keep their faith more concealed, it was there.  And who knows but what some or all of those who had come to faith from his household were among those martyred in the depths of his madness?

Zhodiates notes a certain irony in that this letter, written from prison, is addressed to the church in that place where he had first been imprisoned.  It’s a fair observation, though the fact that Paul also wrote to churches in Ephesus, Colossae, and Laodicea from this same imprisonment might somewhat lessen the sense of irony.  I would suggest it is all the more ironic, given his early history as persecutor of the nascent Christian church, intent on bringing all who practiced faith in Christ to Jerusalem to stand trial, and likely face death by stoning, as Stephen had.  And we might note that it was this stoning of Stephen for his testimony to Christ enthroned in heaven which serves as our first introduction to Paul (Ac 7:58).  Now, that, I think, is irony, that this one who had thus afflicted the church at its outset now finds himself imprisoned for the cause of Christ, and finds the same fire of faith burning in himself.

At this stage, we assume we are nearing the end of Paul’s imprisonment, some two years after he had arrived in Rome.  Fausset observes the lack of any mention of Luke in the letter, taking this as evidence that he was not present at the time.  It could well be that he had gone to Philippi with the first letter, or that he was there already.  We simply don’t know a great deal about his whereabouts for most of the timeframe of Paul’s ministry.

But here we are, with Paul.  He has been in Roman custody now some four years and more, taking into account all the events after he brought the church’s contribution of support to Jerusalem.  He has had plenty of time to consider the possible outcomes, plenty of time to encounter his own mortality.  And he has had plenty of time to pray and commune with our Lord.  The contentment of which he speaks towards the letter’s end is profound.  It goes beyond questions of provision and supply, and speaks to the soul fully at rest in Christ.  In all, then, his present situation, and his closeness with this Philippian church as one of his great successes, gives good cause for the tone of this letter as being solemn at some moments, and tender at others.

Timing and Correlation (03/13/24)

As regards the date at which this letter was written, we have a rather wide range of opinion, from an early data of 58 AD to as last as 63 AD.  It seems to me that the early date, given by McClintock & Strong’s, fails to take into account the period of Paul’s imprisonment in Caesarea Philippi, and other references set the period of his Roman imprisonment more firmly in the period of 60-62 AD, though Fausset’s pushes it a year later.  I observe, also that the M&S article places Paul’s presence in Philippi for Easter as place in 55 AD, where others set it in 58 AD.  All of this leaves me inclined to run with the majority opinion, and set the time of this letter’s writing at 62 AD.

There are numerous factors suggesting that it was written nearer the end of his imprisonment there, rather than the start.  First, and perhaps most telling, is that Epaphroditus has been with him, news of his illness has made its way back to Philippi, and news of their concern has come back to him again.  Given that news had to travel by foot in that era, this would be a matter of some several months.  We know, also, that this letter was written subsequent to those to Ephesus and Colossae, and one might suppose that delivery of those letters may have given occasion for two of those journeys to Philippi, depending how travel was undertaken.  We could add Paul’s expectation of seeing his case resolved, one way or the other, in the near term.  I have to say, though, that such expectation could as readily have applied nearer the start.  But it does suggest that perhaps some changes in the situation at Rome may have informed his expectations.

So, what has happened?  I’ll turn to the article from Fausset for answers.  Nero, who had been married to a Roman woman by name of Octavia, divorced her to marry Poppaea, a Jewish proselyte.  I touched on this point in the previous part of this background exercise.  One Tigellinus had been instigator in this matter, and as reward, he was elevated to the position of prefect, having charge over the Praetorian Guard, as well as over the prisoners.  This article notes that with him in charge, prisoners such as Paul were placed under stricter custody, which one may see reflected in that others are now ministering in Paul’s place; the suggestion being that he was no longer at liberty to do so, even from his imprisonment.  Now, if this was the event that left Paul thinking events were coming to a head, I cannot see that they would have given him reason to expect a happy outcome.  But be that as it may, while he fully recognized the potential of being put to death, his actual expectation was release.

I want to touch very briefly on the question of Luke before moving to the final section of this background pursuit.  His whereabouts during certain phases of Paul’s ministry becomes a bit of a mystery.  We have those two portions of Acts where he is clearly together with Paul.  The first occasion where we have clear indication of him being with Paul is when Paul departed Troas to visit Philippi for the first time (Ac 16:10-40).  What is quite striking here is that right up to their departure from Troas, references to Paul and his companions are third person, ‘they’.  But the moment we have been told of this vision Paul had, these references shift to the first person, ‘we sought to go into Macedonia’.  And this first person reference switches just as abruptly back to the third person as Paul departs that city.  This tends to suggest that Luke remained behind in Philippi at that time, and it has been suggested, if I recall, that he was in fact from that city.  The M&S suggests Timothy also remained in Philippi at that juncture, I suppose on the basis that only Paul and Silas are mentioned as preaching when they get to Thessalonica (Ac 17:4), and also as departing that city (Ac 17:10).  So, where was Timothy?  Perhaps he did remain with Luke in Philippi, and one suggestion is that he came with the first of their contributions while Paul was there in Thessalonica.  But then, where was he when Paul and Silas left?  Did he go back to Philippi?  It’s unclear.

The next we find Luke in Paul’s immediate company is when Paul is transferred from Caesarea Philippi to Rome, in Acts 27.  So, it would seem he was with Paul for that perilous voyage across the Mediterranean, and remained through at least the first two years of his imprisonment (Ac 28:30).  But at the close of his account, Paul is still preaching ‘with all openness, unhindered’.  Yet, here, word from Paul is that Timothy alone remains with him, or at least that no other still with him would care more for that church than he (Php 2:19).  One can see, then the likelihood that Luke had already departed.  Perhaps he had carried first news of Paul’s imprisonment, or perhaps he had simply made his way home after delivering those earlier epistles.  We know he was still with Paul when Colossians was written, as his greeting to that church is included.  But, if he had been bearer of that letter, one might suppose mention of his greeting would be unnecessary.  I note that such greeting is absent from Ephesians, so perhaps he had been sent with that epistle while Tychicus returned to Colossae with the epistle to that church.  And speculating further, perhaps he had returned to his home city afterwards.  We simply do not know.

Okay, a bit of a distraction, that, but interesting.  Let me move on to the final part of this exercise.

Theme and Style (03/13/24)

Few of our background articles address the question of theme for this letter, though the Zhodiates touches on the subject, suggesting that there really isn’t a proper theme to the letter, though there is a main focus.  That, I have to say, feels a bit like quibbling over semantics, but let it stand.  Having admitted a main focus, it is identified as being upon the all-sufficiency of Christ, and Him being ‘the very meaning of life and death’.  I might have worded that a bit differently, but again, semantics.  I will say that strikes fairly near to my own attempt at identifying a theme; being content in every circumstance as you walk with Christ.  So, we would seem to be in agreement there.

The other aspect of this epistle, which I have sought to incorporate in my sense of a theme, is the note of rejoicing which resounds throughout this epistle.  I am hardly alone in noticing this.  The ISBE observes the same, saturating sense of joy in the letter.  The M&S observes how Paul’s spirit in this letter reflects that spirit evident when he and Silas were imprisoned in Philippi, seeing in the nature of this epistle an echo of that midnight hymn singing which marked that occasion.  And there, as here, I might note, God intervened.  Barnes had observed this in regard to the events developing in Rome, but surely this had been nowhere so evident as when that Philippian prison was shaken open in the night.  How often that observation applies in the life of Christ’s Church:  “But God intervened.”  How often this has applied in my own life, and continues to do so.  This is, I think, the story of faith.  What happened?  God intervened.  And where would we be had He not?

Indeed, the ISBE, in considering the evident joy in this letter, observes that here, in this “God intervened” reality of faith, is our joy.  Our joy starts in what God has done, and our joy persists as it holds fast to the promise of what He shall yet do.  And that, I should have to say, drives us right back to the theme of rejoicing in this epistle.  Look what He has done!  Look at you, prospering in faith.  Look at me, still preaching the gospel even from my prison cell, and still to great effect, because even here, the Lord is with me.  Indeed, what can man do to me.  In life or in death, I am His, and in His will.  And the same is true for you, Philippians.  And the same is true for us, church of the 21st century West.

One of the more striking aspects of this letter is the closeness expressed in Paul’s writings.  In every other of his epistles, there has been a need to assert his authority, to remind the church of his Apostolic office.  There has ever been the pastoral care, the pastor’s heart expressed, even when the most serious corrective actions must be undertaken or advised.  But it has been the voice of authority, made necessary to properly indicate the severity of the issue.  There is none of that in this epistle.  There is no notice given of his apostleship at all.  Rather, there is a deep sense of fellowship, a sense of writing to friends, to equals.  This is a letter between brothers, not instruction of a commander to his troops.  There is a deep sense of that eternal connection that joins us to our fellow Christians in Christ.  It is, then, a letter that, as the M&S observes, expresses a godly love, “love, at once tender and watchful.”  It does not dismiss the failings of these fellow believers, but neither does it scold.  There is a tenderness to the letter, perhaps demonstrative of Paul’s having faced his potential end and found Christ beside him.  Perhaps, as with some of John’s or Peter’s writing, there is the sense that time is getting short, even if he should be released.  There is something, I think, in perceiving the advance of time that leaves us a bit more reflective, a bit more tender to the cares of those who come after us.  Perhaps Clarke deserves to have the last word on this aspect of things, for he phrases it rather well.  “There is a divine unction in this letter which every serious reader will perceive.”

Now, having observed that Paul is not blind to the faults of his friends in Philippi, we must note the one issue he appears to address here, however gently, and that is the issue of threats to Christian unity.  There is ever and always the danger of those false preachers and false prophets who seek to disturb the peace of the Church, who seek to stir up dissension and dissatisfaction with the apostolic order.  But there is also danger from within, and that is perhaps the greater danger.  We are, after all, rather sensitive to outside messages.  We have, hopefully, become more careful in listening to those who come with novel ideas of doctrine, though perhaps not so careful as we like to think.  We want to be seen as welcoming, after all, and there is risk in that, of trying so hard to think the best of these newcomers that we fail to note the error being introduced until its poison has done its damage.

But there is that inner danger, and one to which I fear we are all prone, and that is the danger of self-seeking and pride.  These are the seeds of disunity in the church, and it in light of this, that we find Paul exhorting harmonious unity of faith.  As the ISBE observes, this is not a call to marching in lockstep.  It is not a demand that we all hold to some specific confessional formula, nor that we all adhere to some singular hermeneutic, some specific interpretation or exposition.  Rather, as that article suggests, we are called to a greater love, to a unity of serving one another.  I much appreciated this observation.  “The perfection of Christian diakonia […] will bring about the spontaneous improvement of Christian doctrine.”

What, then, is the message?  Self-seeking pride will ever tend to disruption and factionalism.  But this antidote of fellowship and fellow-care, comes down to following Christ.  If we will follow Him, this fellowship and unity will follow.  Just understand that unity is not to be extended to the point of tolerating heresy.  Far be it from us!  For all that the Apostles preached of unity, and of the primacy of Love, never did this prevent them from a most hearty and stringent opposition to heresy and falsehood.

This self-seeking pride seems most often to take on a flavor of legalism.  It becomes all about I do this, I will never do that.  You must do as I do, if you would be as holy as I am.  Here is Christian zealotry, and Christian zealotry has a strong tendency to drive the zealot off base, and to take others with them as they veer away.  It would seem this was an issue in Philippi.  Thus, the gentle admonition to Euodia and Syntyche, though we must note the positive with them:  They shared Paul’s struggles in the cause of the Gospel (Php 4:3).  They are not enemies of faith, by any stretch, but they may be acting enemies to themselves at present, with this competition between them.  The same sort of issues are evident in Paul’s own situation, as he observes those who preach while he is confined, in hopes of causing him grief, or gaining a following at his expense (Php 1:17).

This, I think strikes closest as a matter for personal attention, at least for me.  I expect it is so for others as well, for we are all of us prideful in our varied ways.  We all of us tend to suppose ourselves in possession of better knowledge and understanding of God, perhaps even advanced beyond our brothers in one aspect or another.  And humility comes hard to us.  Correction comes harder.  Nobody, particularly years into the life of faith, is keen to receive such correction as might require a significant shift in one’s understanding.  It’s one thing, when one is younger in the faith, to discover some aspect of the gospel that you have misunderstood and must needs correct.  It’s quite another when, having made such course corrections in the past, you hit another that might perhaps even require undoing one of those former course corrections.  We become too sure of ourselves, and too proud.  And factions arise.  And we begin to take sides, to insist that we shall only associate with those who agree with our interpretation.  Beware!  Pride is on the rise, and pride leads ever and always to a downfall.

And with that word of warning to myself, I think I shall call it a wrap.