Explanatory Notes: Philippians 1:27-2:11

Paul's Core Message (1:27-2:30)
1:27 Only conduct your lives worthily of the gospel of the Christ so that, whether I come and see you or you hear things about me because I am absent, you are standing in one spirit, in one soul as you contend for faith in the gospel,
With this verse, Paul seems to begin a new train of thought. He has been sharing thoughts on his current situation--his imprisonment and likely outcome in particular. But now he shifts to what would seem to be his central charge to the Philippians. His main admonition to them, it would seem, is that they need to be unified, to think of each other rather than each focusing on his or her own agenda.

The way this new section begins is striking because Paul does not begin it with some transitional word like "therefore." He begins simply with the word "only," which implies that he is qualifying what he has just said. What he has just said is the positive boasting in the outcome of Paul's trial and his arrival in Philippi alive. Paul has been upbeat, hopeful, and has looked forward to a time of celebration.

With his "only," he begins a charge, a more serious note of instruction and gentle warning about things he has no doubt heard from Epaphroditus. The Philippians have sent Epaphroditus to Paul with material support while he is in prison awaiting trial. And Paul has almost certainly heard news of their conflicts from him as well.

They will all celebrate when Paul arrives, no doubt, and glorify God. But whether Paul comes or even if it turns out that he cannot, they must walk worthily in relation to the gospel about the Messiah. Messiah Jesus is the king of the cosmos. He is the Lord, the master. This is the heart of the good news, that our God reigns through Jesus, the Christ. Being the subject of a king is not a light matter. It demands conduct worthy of the king.

The word that Paul uses for "live your life" is quite unique for Paul's exhortations, it is a word related to a political body, like a nation. The idea of living worthy of your king is thus not so far removed from the connotations Paul is conveying. When one considers both that Paul is a prisoner of another state, Rome, and that he is writing to individuals who live in a Roman colony where Latin is the official language, Paul's statement takes on politically subversive tones. He implies that the citizenship of himself and the Philippians is not with Rome, but with the kingdom of the Christ.

What worthy living does Paul have in mind? He has in mind the unity of the local assembly. Perhaps the disunity of the Christians of those where he is at is fresh on his mind. He has just described a mixed context where some wish him well and others wish him ill. But even more to the point, he will mention two women who worked with him at Philippi who are at odds with each other in some way. Paul's central charge to the church at Philippi is to be unified.

1:28 ... at the same time not being frightened by any of those who oppose [you], which is a sign of destruction for them, but [an indication] of salvation for you--and this [indication] from God.
If Paul faith in Jesus as Christ is politcally subversive, then it is natural that believers will encounter difficulty by the earthly powers that be. It does not seem too likely that the believers at Philippi experienced much opposition from Jewish opponents. Indeed, some have suggested--although it is far from certain--that Jews at Philippi met outside the city at the river because they did not have ten men to form a synagogue. The difficulty with suggestions like these are that we do not know whether such later rules of synagogue formation were operative at the time of Christ.

Other kinds of opposition might come from family or those who found the "atheist" ways of Jews and Christians either ridiculous or, worse, dangerous to society. Roman society had no problem with Jews believing in their God. They only considered it perverse that they did not worship all the other gods, thus often dubbing them "atheists." You simply did not want gods of any kind angry at you, and failure to acknowledge gods thus was a potential liability to a society--the gods might get angry at you.

But unlike those who might think obedience to God only brings prosperity, Paul saw opposition as a sign of the validity of one's faith, an indication that you will be saved when Christ comes to judge the world. If God will overthrow the powers of this age, then opposition by the powers of this age shows you are on His side.

1:29 For you have been graced on behalf of Christ not only to have faith on him but also to suffer for him,
Again, many are not prone to think of suffering as a gift from God. But Paul here indicates that suffering is a great privilege for those who have faith in Christ. It is an honor to suffer for the king. In fact, the opportunity to place faith in Christ is also a great honor, a gift from God.

We probably should not read some highly developed theology into such statements. Paul is not explaining here the relationship between election and faith. He is not making some comment in relation to total depravity. He is simply stating in very general terms that it is a great honor to serve the God who is all in all, and His appointed king of the cosmos, Jesus.

1:30 ... as you have the same struggle of the sort you saw in me and that you now hear is in me.
According to Acts, Paul was imprisoned when he first stayed at Philippi. This imprisonment resulted from conflicts between Paul and the owners of a slave prophetess. Assuming this background, the Philippians had seen Paul struggle with opposition that resulted from his proclamation of the gospel, both from the Romans and from the polytheistic environment of the ancient city.

So particularly if Paul writes from Ephesus, he faces similar opposition from Romans and local merchants of items relating to other gods. If at Rome, he clearly faces difficulties with the Romans. What we can possibly infer from this verse is that the Philippians themselves are experiencing some difficulty in relation to the Roman administration of Philippi or, perhaps less severely, from local individuals.

2:1-2 Therefore, if some encouragement [is] in Christ, if some comfort of love, if some fellowship of spirit, if some bowels and mercies, make my joy full by thinking the same thing [and] having the same love, being like-souls,
So the Philippians are to live worthily of their king in relation to outside pressures and forces. Paul continues here with the next aspect of worthy living, namely, how they are to behave toward one another internally. The word "therefore" suggests that the like-mindedness he is about to encourage relates directly to outside pressures. As they face opposition, they need to have a united face.

The core part of this sentence is Paul's statement to "make my joy full." It seems more likely than not, therefore, that the conditions he mentions have, in the first place, to do with fellowship with him. If there is some encouragment for me in Christ, then you will become unified. If there is some comfort of your love for me, then you will become like-minded. If you fellowship with me in spirit and have "bowels" directed toward me, you will have the same love.

But of course, he clearly wants them to encourage each other, comfort each other in love, show "bowels" of longing toward each other and have a common fellowship in spirit as well. Perhaps then it is not too important to try to determine which party gets the love first in Paul's mind.

But unity with one another is the central message of Philippians, with rejoicing in suffering coming in at a close second. He urges the Philippians to "think the same thing" and be of "like souls." This is a commonality of purpose and loyalty to Christ.

2:3-4 ... thinking about the common interest, not [about things] because of selfish ambition or arrogance, but with humility taking others into consideration before yourselves, each person not only looking out for their own interests but also each for those of others.
Paul now expresses more specifically what it means to think as one and be commonly "souled." It is to put the interests of others above your own. Selfish ambition puts yourself as an individual above your brothers and sisters in Christ. Arrogance thinks that you are more important to God than others. Paul's admonition is basically that they should love one another and look out for the interests of each other.

2:5 Think this way, which was also in Christ Jesus, who...
Some have suggested that the verses that follow are only Paul going off on a tangent to praise Christ. However, such scholars generally suggest this idea because their theology does not have much room for the "imitation of Christ" as a part of Christian thinking.

But the attitude of Christ in the poetry that follows parallels Paul's instructions to the Philippians too closely to sever the connection. Paul wants the Philippians to have the same servant attitude toward one another that Christ demonstrated.

What follows is a poem about Christ. Many if not most scholars believe that this material existed before Paul wrote Philippians. First, it has a unique poetic structure, set off by the relative pronoun "who." Secondly, it includes vocabulary that is unusual in the other writings of Paul we have. Thirdly, comments appear occasionally that seem to interrupt the poetic structure, no matter how it is reconstructed. These interruptions are best explained if Paul is expanding on a poetic structure that existed before he quoted them.

If we conclude that this material existed before Paul wrote Philippians, other questions come to mind. Did Paul himself write it earlier? If not, who wrote it? Does it come from Christians even before Paul believed in Jesus? What kind of a poem is it? Is it a hymn? Did early Christians sing it?

We simply do not have enough evidence to answer all these questions for certain, although we will suggest some possibilities as we move through this "poem."

2:6-7a ... although he existed in the form of God,
he did not consider equality with God plunder,
but he emptied himself,
having taken the form of a servant,
More debate centers on the first line of the poem than over all the rest put together. For example, should we take the line to read "although he was in the form of God" or "because he was in the form of God? Both are possible interpretations.

Throughout the centuries, it was traditional to understand the first two lines to mean something like, "because he was in the form of God, he didn't have to steal equality with God." In other words, Jesus didn't have to try to become equal to God; he was God. This interpretation has sometimes been called the "not a thing he siezed" interpretation (or in Latin, a res rapta), because equality with God was something Jesus already had.

However, "emptying himself" makes more sense if it is a significant contrast with "not plundering." By translating the first line with the sense of "although he was in the form of God, he didn't plunder," we have a better contrast with "but, by contrast, he emptied himself." "Emptying himself" seems to contrast with the first two lines more significantly than it would in the traditional interpretation, which basically ends up saying, "Jesus was equal to God, but he emptied himself."

Even if we translate the first line with "although," there is still more than one possible way to take what the poem is saying. The first we might call the "not a thing to sieze" interpretation (or in Latin, a res rapienda). In this interpretation, Jesus was in the form of God, but was not equal to God. Jesus decides not to try to sieze equality with God but instead even empties himself of the form of God.

Those who interpret the poem this way usually take the phrase "form of God" to mean the image of God, like Adam had. Although Jesus was like Adam, in the image of God, he did not grasp at being equal with God like Adam did. Instead, he emptied himself.

We might raise a couple of significant questions about this line of interpretation. For example, it is not clear that "form of God" is exactly the same thing as "image of God." Form and image are synonyms, but if the poem was thinking Adam, why didn't it simply use the word for image? Secondly, it is hard to see where "form of God" points to something different from "equality with God."

Most scholars currently understand the train of thought to be that, although Jesus pre-existed in some divine form (whatever that might mean for Paul), he did not exploit this equality with God. Rather, he emptied himself and became human in form. This interpretation assumes Christ's pre-existence. It would not, of course, assume that Paul had some developed sense of the Trinity. Most see the "form of God" in some relation to the glory or Shekinah of God, God in what visible form we might speak of.

Jesus does not take advantage or exploit this equality with God. Instead he empties himself and takes the form of a servant. Some suggest that the servant motif echoes Isaiah 53, where the suffering servant suffers for the people of God.

However, in our opinion, the direct contrast of "form of God" is with "form of a servant" in the next verse. Although it is difficult to identify a consistent poetic structure throughout this poem, the material through verse 8 is fairly consistent if we think of two stanzas of four lines each. "Form of a servant" thus helps us hone in on what exactly "form of God" has in mind. And it seems fairly clear from the contrast that it is not visible form but status that is contrasted.

Although Jesus had the status of God and was Son of God, he did not exploit or take advantage of this authority--of being "equal to God." Instead, he emptied himself of this status, and took the form of a servant rather than a king. Although this interpretation is a minority position, it fits the parallelism of the first four lines better than any of the other suggestions.

As such, it is not clear whether Paul has the pre-existent Christ in view or not here--or whether the author of the poem did. He and/or they easily might have, but it is not at all clear from this first stanza alone.

2:7b-8 ... having become in the likeness of mortals,
and having been found in shape as a mortal,
he humbled himself,
having become obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
The parallel structure of this stanza with the first is obvious. Like the first stanza, the first and fourth line have a similar expression, here "having become." In both stanzas, the main verb is found in the third line. Also in both stanzas, Christ willingly lowers himself as a model of the kind of attitude Paul is urging the Philippians to have.

If the stanzas divide up in this way, then we do not immediately see "having become in the likeness of mortals" as the direct outcome of Christ emptying himself of the form of God. Yes, becoming like mortals is taking the form of a servant in the hierarchy of the cosmos. It is not assuming the role of a god or the son of a god. It is lowering oneself to the status of a mortal.

Only with the second line of this stanza does visible human shape come into view. Once again, Paul could certainly have a sense of leaving divine shape and taking on human shape. But this interpretation is far less clear than is often assumed when the poem is read through the eyes of later Christian understanding.

Christ's humility to the point of death mirrors the attitude Paul has had toward his own death and the attitude he wants the Philippians to have toward each other. But of course Paul was never in the form of God! We know from elsewhere in Paul's writings that the cross was the centerpiece of his preaching (1 Cor. 1:23) and that he believed Christ's death to have redeemed God's people from the curse of sin and the Law (Gal. 3:13-14).

Christ's action of "obedience to death" here probably illuminates Paul's understanding of the expression, the "faith of Jesus." While we agree that Paul often has human faith in view when he talks about human justification in the divine court, we also agree that Paul inherited from the early church a sense that the faithfulness of Jesus was instrumental in salvation. We will see this dynamic more clearly when we get to Philippians 3:9.

The expression, "even death on a cross," seems in tension with the structure of the poem up to this point. For this reason, perhaps most interpreters see this line as an expansion of the original poem by Paul. Mention of the cross certainly fits with Paul's signature interests.

Others have suggested that Paul would not have interrupted a known hymn or poem with such comments, that they would have been irritating to individuals who might even be singing along. But if Paul continuously modifies Scripture as he quotes it, surely we cannot assume he wouldn't have modified previous hymnic or poetic material. It was the nature of Jewish translation and interpretation to expand and modify as you quote.

It thus seems far more likely than not that Paul did not create this poem himself. When and where it was created, of course, we have no way of knowing. Some have tried to reconstruct an Aramaic original, which in theory might explain why some of the lines of the poem are disproportionate to the others (e.g., line 2). But such reconstructions remain very speculative and have failed to create a consensus.

2:9-11 Therefore, God also highly exalted him
and graced him with the name above every name,
so that, at the name of Jesus, every knee would bow--of those in the heavens and on the earth and under the earth--and every tongue confess,
that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father.
If the two previous stanzas had a nice parallel structure, the final "stanza" goes in a different direction. It is of course possible to force a four line structure on these words, but it does not go easily. For one thing, these verses have more subordinate clauses, more logical connectors.

Our first thought is that perhaps it is at this point that Paul began to expand a previous poem that ended in verse 8. The problem here is that the vocabulary in these verses are as or more unique to Paul than that of the first eight lines. Even more significantly, the poetry gives off the kind of "mixed signals" that point to Pauline addition. In the end, we will probably never know for certain what the history of this poem truly was and what original form it took.

The direction of the first eight lines was down, down, down. Christ empties himself of divine status to that of a mortal. Then he humbles himself from mortal status down to the shame of someone crucified. Now the poem moves in the other direction, in the direction of Christ's exaltation. So also the audience, after humbling themselves before the world, will be vindicated with glory.

Christ may have been in the form of God before, but in response to his obedience, God now "highly exalts" him, super-exalts him, perhaps even with a higher status than he had at the beginning of the poem. God gives him the "Name above every name," which is almost certainly YHWH, the divine name. This fact comes out in the final part of the poem with the affirmation of Jesus as Lord. "Lord" was the Greek word that Jews used to translate YHWH.

So it is a virtual certainty that Jesus is given the divine name at the point of his exaltation to God's right hand here. Psalm 110:1 likely stands close in the background--"The LORD said to my Lord, sit at my right hand." It is more difficult for us to wrap our heads around what it might mean for Jesus to become YHWH at some point in time. At the very least, it meant that Jesus assumed the role and status of cosmic king over all the creation.

The statement, "that at the name of Jesus" distracts from the flow of this final "stanza." We wonder if it is an addition by Paul. It makes clear exactly who all creatures are bowing before. Another likely addition is "those in the heavens, those on the earth, those under the earth." It refers of course to all the creation, from heavenly powers to the creatures of the earth to the dead. It is, by the way, another rare hint that Paul does in fact believe that the dead are conscious "under the earth" in the time before the final resurrection.

Although it is very speculative, the final stanza might thus have read in this way originally:

Therefore God highly exalted him
And gave him the Name above every name,
That every knee should bow and tongue confess
That Jesus Christ is Lord.

The application of Isaiah 45:23 to Jesus is astounding. In its original context, this verse clearly refers to God, and it does so in a context that is emphasizing that YHWH is the only God that truly exists. Paul and the poem's author thus apply one of the starkest monotheistic passages of the Old Testament to Jesus, a man that had only recently walked the earth.

At the same time, the poem applies this status and identity to Jesus from the standpoint of the resurrection, as other Scriptures such as Romans 1:3; 10:9; Acts 2:36; 13:33; and Hebrews 1:4-5 do. The Trinitarian debates of later centuries are not yet in view. To call Jesus "Lord" or even "YHWH" is thus to refer to his final and exalted cosmological role in the coming kingdom of God. He is supreme over all the creation and will rule in the kingdom as God's Son.

The final line, "to the glory of God the Father" allows Paul to make such exalted statements. It indicates that Paul still functions within a monotheistic perspective. Jesus is the Messiah, the cosmic king over all creation. But, in Paul's view, Christ will ultimately "hand over the kingdom to God the Father" (1 Cor. 15:24), "so that God may be all in all" (15:28). Despite the cosmic exaltedness of Jesus, he always subordinates him ultimately to God the Father.