The Epistle reflects, in familiar ease, his relations to this beloved flock, which rested on the
love of Christ. It is not systematic, not polemic, nor apologetic, but personal and autobiographic,
resembling in this respect the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, and to some extent, also, the Second
Epistle to the Corinthians. It is the free outflow of tender love and gratitude, and full of joy and
cheerfulness in the face of life and death. It is like his midnight hymn of praise in the dungeon of
Philippi. "Rejoice in the Lord alway; again I will say, Rejoice" (Phil. 4:4).^1179 This is the key-note
of the letter.^1180 It proves that a healthy Christian faith, far from depressing and saddening the heart,
makes truly happy and contented even in prison. It is an important contribution to our knowledge
of the character of the apostle. In acknowledging the gift of the Philippians, he gracefully and
delicately mingles manly independence and gratitude. He had no doctrinal error, nor practical vice
to rebuke, as in Galatians and Corinthians.
The only discordant tone is the warning against "the dogs of the concision" (κατατομή,
3:2), as he sarcastically calls the champions of circumcision (περιτομή), who everywhere sowed
tares in his wheat fields, and at that very time tried to check his usefulness in Rome by substituting
the righteousness of the law for the righteousness of faith. But he guards the readers with equal
earnestness against the opposite extreme of antinomian license (3:2–21). In opposition to the spirit
of personal and social rivalry and contention which manifested itself among the Philippians, Paul
reminds them of the self-denying example of Christ, who was the highest of all, and yet became
the lowliest of all by divesting himself of his divine majesty and humbling himself, even to the
death on the cross, and who, in reward for his obedience, was exalted above every name (2:1–11).
This is the most important doctrinal passage of the letter, and contains (together with 2 Cor.
8:9) the fruitful germ of the speculations on the nature and extent of the kenosis, which figures so
prominently in the history of christology.^1181 It is a striking example of the apparently accidental
occasion of some of the deepest utterances of the apostle. "With passages full of elegant negligence
(Phil. 1:29), like Plato’s dialogues and Cicero’s letters, it has passages of wonderful eloquence,
and proceeds from outward relations and special circumstances to wide-reaching thoughts and
grand conceptions."^1182
The objections against the genuineness raised by a few hyper-critical are not worthy of a
serious refutation.^1183184
The Later History.
The subsequent history of the church at Philippi is rather disappointing, like that of the other
apostolic churches in the East. It appears again in the letters of Ignatius, who passed through the(^1179) χαίρετε "combines a parting benediction with an exhortation to cheerfulness. It is neither ’farewell’ alone, nor ’rejoice’
alone" (Lightfoot).
(^1180) Bengel:"Summa Epistolae: Gaudeo, gaudete." Farrar (II. 423): "If any one compare the spirit of the best-known classic
writers in their adversity with that which was habitual to the far deeper wrongs and far deadlier sufferings of St. Paul—if he will
compare the Epistle to the Philippians with the ’Tristia’ of Ovid, the letters of Cicero from exile, or the treatise which Seneca
dedicated to Polybius from his banishment in Corsica—he may see, if he will, the difference which Christianity has made in the
happiness of man."
(^1181) The kenosis controversy between the Lutherans of Giessen and Tübingen in the early part of the seventeenth century, and
the more extensive kenosis literature in the nineteenth century (Thomasius, Liebner, Gess, Godet, etc.).
(^1182) Dr. Braune, in Lange’s Com., p. 4.
(^1183) The arguments of Baur and Swegler have been set aside by Lünemann (1847), Brückner (1848), Resch (1850), Hilgenfeld
(1871), and Reuss (1875); those of Holsten (1875 and 1876) by P. W. Schmidt, Neutestam, Hyperkritik, 1880. Comp. Holzmann
in Hilgenfeld's "Zeitschrift für wiss. Theol.," 1881, 98 sqq.
A.D. 1-100.