Introduction

The church in Philippi

The time and place of the epistle’s writing

The occasion and purpose of writing

The character of the epistle

The content of the epistle

The authenticity of the epistle

Literature

THE EPISTLE OF THE HOLY APOSTLE PAUL TO THE PHILIPPIANS

The church in Philippi.

When Apostle Paul brought the preaching of the Gospel to Europe, the first city of Europe to hear the message about Christ was the Macedonian city of Philippi, named after its founder, the Macedonian king Philip, and later acquiring the name: “Colony of Augustus Julia” and considered a very important city (cf. Acts 16:12). Paul arrived here in the company of Silas, Timothy, and Luke. Paul’s listeners here were mainly Gentiles—there were very few Jews in Philippi—and the church there was composed mainly of Gentiles. After Paul and Silas departed, Timothy and Luke spent some time in Philippi. The second time Paul appeared in Philippi was when he, after Pentecost of the year 57, departed from Ephesus for Corinth (1 Cor 16:5 and following verses) and then a third time visited here in the spring of the year 58, when he was heading with relief funds to Jerusalem (Acts 20:3 and following verses). And at the time when the Apostle was far from the Philippians, he received information about them through his coworkers or through other people. From these reports and from his own personal observations the Apostle drew conclusions in his epistle about the good state of the Philippian church, both inward and outward (see Phil 1:3).

The time and place of the epistle’s writing.

As is evident from the epistle, the Apostle was in bonds (Phil 1:7) and most likely in Roman bonds. The last is confirmed by the greeting placed at the end of the epistle from those belonging to the household of Caesar (Phil 4:22), and besides the mention of the praetorian guard, whose soldiers were guarding Apostle Paul (Phil 1:13). The same is also confirmed by the mood evident in the epistle and the intentions held by the Apostle at that time. The Apostle speaks with confidence (Phil 1:25) that he will soon be freed from his bonds, and such confidence he could have gained only during his time in Rome: during his imprisonment in Caesarea his fate could not yet have been decided. Then he intends to visit Philippi after his release, his thoughts are directed precisely toward this journey, and during his time in Caesarea his thoughts were occupied with the impending journey to Rome. The epistle was written, thus, evidently during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment, from which he was released, and namely at the end of his two-year stay in Rome, as is evident from the fact that his case at the time of writing the epistle was already tending toward a favorable decision for the Apostle (cf. Phil 1:12). If Paul’s arrival in Rome fell in the spring of the year 61, then the writing of the epistle falls in the summer of the year 63. By this time the epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon had already been sent, so that the epistle to the Philippians is the last of Paul’s epistles written during his first Roman imprisonment.

The occasion and purpose of writing.

A member of the Philippian church, Epaphroditus, who suffered a serious illness while in Rome with Paul, recovered and was preparing to return to his native city. This served as the occasion for Apostle Paul to address the Philippians with an epistle. At the same time he wanted to calm the troubled hearts of the Philippians regarding his own situation, which had changed for the better. Finally, he considered it his sacred duty to give them instruction regarding Christian life and at the same time to thank them for the help they had sent him with Epaphroditus in Rome.

The character of the epistle.

Ten years of friendly relations between Paul and the Philippians imprinted a special character on his epistle to them. Here the Apostle chiefly expresses his loving feelings toward the readers. One senses that the Apostle regards them as a loving father regards his children, in whom he is completely confident as in such who will not disgrace his good paternal name. It is remarkable that the Apostle repeatedly expresses joy, a joyful feeling that filled him, despite the fact that his case was not yet finally decided... One’s attention is drawn to the severity with which he treats the false teachers from among those promoting Judaism who threatened the wellbeing of the Philippian church. He calls them dogs, predicts ruin for them.

The content of the epistle.

The epistle is not arranged according to a strictly worked-out plan, but has the appearance of a genuine, completely natural letter. First—in the first chapter—comes the usual introduction (Phil 1:1-11), then the Apostle reports on his own situation (Phil 1:12-26) and then exhorts the readers to struggle for faith, to unity of mind and humility (Phil 2:1-4), depicting before them the image of the humble Christ (Phil 2:5-11), and to obedience to God (Phil 2:12-18). Then follow again reports about the people surrounding Paul (Phil 2:19-30). This is the first part of the epistle. In the second part, encompassing chapters III and IV, the Apostle warns the readers against those promoting Judaism, calls them to Christian self-perfection and addresses exhortations to individual people, and then again to the whole church. The epistle concludes with thanksgiving and greetings.

The authenticity of the epistle.

An epistle that is so closely woven with individual events from the life of Apostle Paul and the Philippian church he founded would be absurd to regard as inauthentic. One cannot suppose that some pseudonymous author found it necessary to forge the tone of Apostle Paul. And indeed, doubts about the authenticity of the epistle have rarely been expressed. Only Baur suggested the later origin of this epistle, and then in the 70s H. Holsten repeated Baur’s idea, adding that nevertheless the epistle was written “in the spirit of Paul,” “in the language of Paul.” But all the grounds which he drew for his position about the inauthenticity of the epistle, all the indications of contradictions between this epistle and other completely authentic epistles (Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians), are not at all convincing. From an external standpoint, the authenticity of the epistle is sufficiently attested. For instance, Polycarp of Smyrna already refers to it.

Literature.

Among the patristic commentaries on the epistle to the Philippians, the most important are the works of St. John Chrysostom and the Blessed Theodoret. Among Russian commentaries—the outstanding ones are the works of Bishop Theophan (Govorov) and Mr. I. V. Nazaryevsky (The Epistle of the Holy Apostle Paul to the Philippians. Sergiev Posad, 1898, pp. 103–165). The best German commentaries include the works of Meyer, in the edition of Haupt (1897), and Paul Ewald in the edition of Zahn (1908).

* * *

Notes

This city now represents only ruins, bearing the name “Filibejik.”

Farrar says: “This epistle was dictated by an exhausted and shackled Jew, the victim of crude prejudice and the prey of self-satisfied enmity, dictated at a time when he was irritated by hundreds of opponents and comforted only by a few who loved him. And yet the essence of it can be expressed in two words (which Paul used in this epistle): ‘I rejoice, and you rejoice.’ If we compare the spirit of the most famous classical writers in their misfortune with that which was usual in the far deeper anguish and more terrible sufferings of the Apostle Paul, if we compare the epistle to the Philippians with Ovid’s ‘Tristia,’ with Cicero’s letters from exile, or with the treatise which Seneca addressed to Polybius from his exile in Corsica, then the difference which Christianity produced in man’s relation to happiness becomes fully evident” (Life and Works of Apostle Paul, trans. Lopukhin, p. 720–721).

For example, Holsten points out that the Apostle renounces the name “apostle” and accepts instead the title “servant of Jesus Christ” (Rom 15:16), that the writer treats objective unified truth indifferently (Phil 1:15-18), that he has lost the idea that the pre-worldly Christ is the heavenly man (Phil 2:6 and following verses). Anyone can see the nitpicking of Holsten, which makes him doubt the authenticity of the epistle, but the groundlessness of Holsten’s objections will be shown even more clearly in the commentary on the epistle... A detailed refutation of the negative views on the origin of the epistle to the Philippians can be found in Mr. Nazaryevsky, pp. 51–102.