The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (130 page)

Nevertheless, the Ephesian hypothesis also faces some objections from scholars: (1) the theory is built on implicit inferences because there is no explicit mention of an imprisonment in Ephesus; (2) the collection for the poor believers in Jerusalem was of central importance during Paul's Ephesian ministry, but there is no hint of it in Philippians; and (3) Paul spoke somewhat harshly about those around him except for Timothy (Phil 2:19—21), which would be a strange way of characterizing Ephesus because his friends Priscilla and Aquila were in Ephesus at the same time as the apostle.
²⁴

The mixed nature of the evidence for provenance precludes a dogmatic position. Caesarea appears to be the least likely option.
²⁵
The choice between Rome and Ephesus is difficult. Scholars weigh the geographical arguments against a Roman imprisonment in various ways. Some treat it as the lynchpin issue, while others regard it as irrelevant.
²⁶
Many scholars occupy a middle position and contend that the geographical arguments are somewhat exaggerated. The so-called literary affinities between Philippians and Paul's earlier letters may not provide any persuasive proof either way for the provenance of the letter.
²⁷

In the end, although many respectable scholars affirm an Ephesian provenance, the arguments for a Roman imprisonment seem stronger. The hypothesis of the Roman provenance of the Prison Epistles is persuasive because it depends on a known imprisonment, enjoys more abundant external evidence, and has a long-standing tradition.
²⁸
These considerations may force the Ephesian hypothesis to bear a slightly greater burden of proof.

The hypothesis of a Roman provenance for Philippians is even stronger than that for the other Prison Epistles due to the references to the Praetorium (Phil 1:13) and Caesar's household (Phil 4:22). Lightfoot showed that evidence in ancient inscriptions, Tacitus, Pliny, Suetonius, and Josephus supports the view that the Praetorium was not a place but the group of men who formed the Praetorian Guard. Lightfoot's interpretation seems confirmed by the words “and to all the rest,” which appears to be a reference to persons rather
than places. Although inscriptions refer to a member of the Praetorian Guard being present in Ephesus, Bruce is probably correct that the man had previously served as a member of the Guard while living in Rome before relocating to Ephesus. Although one generally found a Praetorium in the capitals of imperial provinces, Ephesus was the capital of a senatorial province (Asia) and was unlikely to have had a contingency of the Praetorian Guard stationed there.
²⁹
Thus the reference to the Praetorium supports the Roman provenance of the letter.
³⁰

What is more, although “Caesar's household” might be a reference to the staff that supervised the imperial bank for Asia in Ephesus as some scholars have claimed,
³¹
the phrase more naturally, and far more commonly, refers to those holding various positions in the imperial court in Rome.
³²
The Ephesian provenance theory of the letter appears destined to become the consensus view of NT scholars in the near future, but the Roman provenance theory is still favored by the balance of the evidence. Fortunately, questions of provenance do not drastically alter one's interpretation of the message of the letter.

Destination

Philippians 1:1 indicates that Paul addressed the letter to the believers in Christ Jesus “who are in Philippi.” The straightforward nature of this declaration has created a consensus among NT scholars that Philippi is the destination of the letter. The Acts narrative reveals that Philippi represents the first church Paul planted in Europe (Acts 16:6-40) on his second missionary journey in c. 49—51.
³³

The city of Philippi was best known in the ancient world as the site of the battle in which Antony and Octavian emerged victorious over Brutus and Cassius (who helped assassinate Julius Caesar) in 42 BC. Octavian later defeated Antony (31 BC) and rebuilt Philippi and gave it the
ius italicum
(“law of Italy”), which was the highest privilege a colony could obtain.
³⁴
The city was a site of historic interest long before these events.
³⁵
It was founded by Philip II of Macedon in 358—57 BC, who named it after himself. It was situated in a very fertile region eight miles from the Macedonian sea and enjoyed an abundance of springs and gold (Strabo,
Geography
7.331). Philippi became part of the Roman
Empire in 168 BC and prospered due to its strategic location along the Via Egnatia, the main land route between Rome and the East.

Occasion

The text of Philippians suggests several possible reasons for writing. It is important to note that Paul addressed both pastoral problems and personal concerns. Two major pastoral problems surface in Philippians. First, Paul had apparently heard a report of disunity among the Philippians, which included a specific conflict between two women in the church, Euodia and Syntyche. Paul urged them to be united to live in harmony together in the Lord (4:2). Second, Paul sounded a serious warning against false teachers and their teachings.
³⁶

Paul also included numerous personal concerns. To begin with, the apostle sought to provide the Philippians with an update regarding his own circumstances and the advancement of the gospel since he regarded them as partners in the gospel (1:5) who labored in prayer for him (1:19). In addition, the evidence suggests three other personal concerns: (1) a commendation of Timothy in order that the Philippians would welcome him upon his arrival (2:19—23); (2) an announcement of Paul's desire to visit the church in the future (2:24); and (3) a report on Epaphroditus and his illness (2:25-30).

Purpose

Paul's main purpose in Philippians is connected to the main theme of the letter: partnership in the gospel and walking worthy of the gospel. “Partnership” or “fellowship” is the customary rendering here for the Greek word
koinonia.
The Philippians’ partnership in the gospel should be understood in an active, not passive, sense.
³⁷
D. A. Carson captured the sense well when he wrote, “Christian fellowship, then, is self-sacrificing conformity to the gospel. There may be overtones of warmth and intimacy, but the heart of the matter is this shared vision of what is of transcendent importance, a vision that calls forth our commitment.”
³⁸
This partnership involved, but was not limited to, the Philippians’ financial support for Paul's missionary work (4:15—16).

“Living one's life in a manner worthy of the gospel” (1:27) is shorthand for living in a manner that befits the greatness of the gospel. This “worthy walk” involves both Christian unity and a willingness to suffer for the advancement of the gospel. This necessary unity was not “peace at any cost” but was instead a unity that was inspired by a shared faith in the gospel message. Paul called believers to stand together as one in a battle for faith in the gospel. This stand involved resisting false teachings that compromised the message
of the gospel, courageous suffering of persecution for the sake of the gospel, and being undaunted in the proclamation of the gospel.

LITERATURE

Literary Plan

Some scholars have analyzed Philippians along rhetorical lines as epideictic
³⁹
or deliberative.
⁴⁰
In terms of epistolary analysis, greater sensitivity toward literary models and ancient letter writing has shown promise in identifying Philippians as a “letter of friendship.”
⁴¹
Others have compared Philippians to the genre of “family letters.”
⁴²
Despite the insights these studies have generated, the “friendship” or “family” letter approach has difficulty accounting for the function of 3:1—4:9 and 4:10—20 in the letter, and some question how much actual light the hypothesis sheds on the letter as a whole.
⁴³

Other scholars argue for a chiastic structure of Philippians. P. Wick identified the structure as follows:

A (1:12-26)= A' (3:1-16)

B (1:27-30) = B' (3:17-21)

C (2:1-11) = C (4:1-3)

D (2:12-18) = D' (4:4-9)

E (2:19-30) = E' (4:10-20).
⁴⁴

A. B. Luter and M. V. Lee followed a more traditional chiastic approach.
⁴⁵
Their proposed structure is as follows:

(1:1—2) Opening Greetings

    A (1:3—11) Prologue: Partnership in the Gospel

        B (1:12-26) Comfort

            C (1:27-2:4) Challenge

                D (2:5-16) Example

                    E (2:17—3:1a) Models of Gospel Partnership

               D' (3:1b-21) Example

           C (4:1-5) Challenge

        B' (4:6-9) Comfort

   A' (4:10-20) Epilogue

(4:21-23) Closing Greetings

The fact that the proposals of Wick and Luter and Lee only agree on 4:10—20 as a textual unit calls the search for macrochiastic structures into question.
⁴⁶

Many scholars, most notably J. T. Reed, have analyzed Philippians at the discourse level and concluded that the letter is a unified and coherent composition from start to finish.
⁴⁷
The unity and internal coherence of Paul's letter to the Philippians are further demonstrated in the outline and Unit-by-Unit Discussion below.

OUTLINE

The complexity of the preceding discussion may lead one to conclude that the search for an outline is hopeless. But a simpler structural solution is available: introduction (1:1—2); body (1:3—4:20); and conclusion (4:21—23). The body appears to subdivide into three natural sections: the opening (1:3—11); the body proper (1:12—4:9); and the closing (4:10-20).

1. INTRODUCTION: GREETINGS TO THE PHILIPPIANS (1:1-2)
   
2. BODY: THE PHILIPPIANS’ PARTNERSHIP WITH PAUL IN THE GOSPEL (1:3-4:20)
   
   1. Opening: Thanksgiving and Prayer for the Philippians (1:3-11)
      
   2. Body Proper: Exhortation to Unity for the Sake of the Gospel (1:12-4:9)
      
      1. Positive Examples of Putting the Needs of Others First (1:12-2:30)
         
         1. The Example of Paul (1:12-30)
            
         2. The Example of Jesus (2:1-11)
            
         3. The Example of Timothy (2:19-24)
            
         4. The Example of Epaphroditus (2:25-30)
            
      2. Warning Against False Teachers and Internal Disunity (3:1—4:9)
         
         1. The Threat of the False Teachers and Paul's Example (3:1—21)
            
         2. The Threat Arising from Internal Disunity (4:1-7)
            
         3. Final Encouragement (4:8-9)
            
   3. Closing: Thanksgiving for the Philippians’ Present and Previous Gifts (4:10-20)
      
3. CONCLUSION: FINAL GREETINGS (4:21-23)
   

UNIT-BY-UNIT DISCUSSION

I. Introduction: Greetings to the Philippians (1:1-2)

Following standard epistolary conventions, Paul identified himself as the sender and Timothy as a cosender of the letter.
⁴⁸
He referred to the recipients of the letter in Philippi and specifically mentioned the elders and deacons of the church at Philippi (1:1). In the salutation, Paul, as customary, changed the standard greeting
(chairein)
to the theologically pregnant grace-wish (
charis
, 1:2).

II. Body: The Philippians’ Partnership with Paul in the Gospel (1:3-4:20)

The body of the letter centers on the theme of gospel partnership. Paul stressed the urgent need for unity in the cause of the gospel. This unity not only arises as a natural outgrowth of the gospel; it also remains necessary for continued growth of the gospel. Paul urged the Philippians to unite against those things that threatened the progress of the gospel.

A. Opening: Thanksgiving and Prayer for the Philippians (1:3—11)
Paul's thanksgiving centers on the Philippians’ participation and partnership in the gospel. The apostle rejoiced that this partnership which extended from the past into the present (1:5) would continue to the end because the one who began the work could be trusted to complete it (1:6). He commented on how fitting these feelings were in light of his firm conviction that the Philippians were fellow recipients of divine grace together with Paul in his work of defending and confirming the gospel (1:7). Paul also called God as witness to the sincerity of these affections for the Philippians (1:8). He concluded this section with a prayer for the continued growth of the Philippians in the gospel (1:9—11).

Something to Think About:
The Uniquely Christian Virtue of Humility

I
f humility is defined in Paul's terms as “considering] others as more important than” ourselves (2:3), then clearly humility is a uniquely Christian virtue. In this fallen, sinful universe, with its “survival of the fittest” mentality, the prize goes usually to those who are aggressive, assertive, and pursue their own interests, even if this means stepping over others to get ahead. Considering others as more important than ourselves does not come naturally.

But this is exactly what Christians are told to do in Scripture. How can this be so? In short: because humility is supremely epitomized in the life of Christ
,

who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for his own advantage. Instead He emptied Himself by assuming the form of a slave, taking on the likeness of men. And when He had come as a man in His external form, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death
—
even to death on a cross (2:6—8).

Jesus was God
—
yet he humbled himself, not once but repeatedly, in an ever-descending sequence: from God to man; from man to slave; from obedient slave to death
—
a death on an ignominious Roman cross. In this Jesus became a model for his followers to emulate (see John 13:1—20, especially vv. 12—17; Paul may well have had that passage in mind as he wrote this passage). Rather than arguing over who is the greatest
—
as Jesus’ disciples often did in the first century and still do in the twenty-first century
—
Jesus calls on us, as Paul put it, to “carry one another's burden” and “in this way…[to] fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2).