2:1-4

I have just written of the struggle we have together in our Gospel partnership, but I also want to write you about the encouragement and comfort that helps us in our partnership.

As Paul continues his exhortation to the kind of life that will make their partnership in Gospel ministry all the more effective, he reminds them of the Gospel blessings they enjoy in Christ.

In the overall structure of Romans and Ephesians, after the blessings of the Gospel are explained, they become the basis for Paul's exhortation to Christian living. The same pattern is apparent within these few verses. Since there is such encouragement, comfort, fellowship, affection, and compassion for us in the Gospel, therefore we are urged to live a life of unity, love, and humility. With a profound understanding of the Gospel, with the humility that flows from that understanding, and with the fellowship of the Spirit we can truly live in loving unity!

2:1 If⁷⁵ therefore there is any encouragement in Christ, if any comfort in love, if any fellowship⁷⁶ of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion,

There are certainly too many Christians who do not recognize the rich encouragement we have in knowing Christ, who take their comfort from other sources besides the love of God, and who prefer their fellowship outside of what the Spirit produces, but they are not the kind of Christians that make highly effective partners in Gospel ministry.

2:2 complete my joy: be of one mind,⁷⁷ having the same love, united in spirit,⁷⁸ having the same concern,⁷⁹

Paul asks them to complete my joy by living in unity, love, and humility. He uses joy and rejoice in two complementary ways in this letter. First, we should rejoice in who the Lord is and in all that He has done for us, that is, we should find our joy (1:25; 3:1; and 4:4) and our boasting (1:26 and 3:3) in the Lord and in the Gospel. Second, that joy (1:18; 2:2, 17-18; and 4:1) and our boasting (2:16 and 4:1) become complete as our partners in Gospel work live their lives in harmony with the implications of the Gospel. We should remember that Paul's letter to the Philippian congregation is not primarily about joy, it is about the Gospel Partnership he has with them, and about making that partnership more effective. So as that partnership prospers there is great joy to be found in the Gospel, and there is a “completed” joy to be found when one's Gospel partners are united in spirit. It should be clear that without joy in the Lord and in the Gospel, any joy in ministry would be without a sufficient foundation, and in danger of collapse.

The basic command to be of one mind is further elaborated upon in the rest of verse 2 and verses 3-4.

2:3 never with selfish ambition or vainglory, but in humility of mind considering one another more important than oneself.

The unity called for in the previous verse, the unity that would make Paul's joy complete, is so easily destroyed whenever we consider ourselves more important than the people we interact with. Ambition to promote ourselves, however well approved it may be in our culture, is nevertheless destructive. Vainglory,⁸⁰ the pursuit of honor from men, does not build healthy lives. We really grow as we simply decide that others around us are more important than ourselves. This is of course the great irony of the Christian life. As the Lord taught us in Mark 9:35, “If anyone wants to be first, he must be last of all, and servant of all.” Paul has already supported this exhortation with the negative example of those that preach out of self-interest (1:15-16), and the positive example of himself (1:12-26). He is about to support that exhortation with the positive examples of the Lord Jesus Christ (2:6-11) and Timothy (2:19-24).

2:4 Do not be watching out for your own interests, but each also watching out for the interests of others.

This verse explains what it means to “consider one another more important than oneself.” Doing this is much more difficult than understanding what it means. Our opportunities for applying this verse are endless, and our excuses for not applying it are abundant. This radical call to service and humility is only slightly toned down by the single word also. In using that word Paul acknowledges that we have a basic responsibility to take care of ourselves,⁸¹ but the balance of the verse indicates that we will look out for ourselves sufficiently, without any encouragement from him to do so. When the Lord said “Love your neighbor as yourself,” He told us that we already love ourselves with sufficient diligence, and simply do not need any encouragement from Him in that direction!⁸²

2:5-11

In fact, the ultimate example of humility, suffering, and then exaltation is Christ. Follow that example.

Paul's command to not be looking out for our own interests, to not be selfish, is certainly not a concept foreign to our faith. It lies at the very core of our faith, at the cross. Paul insists that all who have believed in Christ, who have been saved by His work on the cross, should likewise adopt the attitude that took Him to the cross. We should do this, not to be saved, or to prove we are saved, but in gratitude, because we are saved, thus becoming more effective partners in Gospel ministry for others.

Because of their style and content, verses 6-11 are sometimes presented as poetry or as a hymn. Unlike for instance in Ephesians 5:14, where Paul writes, “Therefore it is said: 'Awake, O sleeper, get up from among the dead, and Christ will shine on you,'” here there are no clues for us in the text as to whether this was an early Christian hymn or poem, well known to the congregation, which Paul then quotes, or something that he himself wrote particularly for this letter. However, if these words were written by someone else and then adopted by Paul, he must have done so because he approved of how they expressed what needed to be said. Verses 6-11, whatever their source, help us understand what our Savior did, so that we can more fully adopt the attitude of selflessness we need to have.

The parallels between Philippians 2:6-11 and the “Servant Songs” of Isaiah 43:13–53:12 are striking. Both speak so powerfully of humiliation all the way to death, and of the exaltation that results from that humiliation. This relationship between these two passages is strengthened by the fact that Philippians 2:10-11 clearly draws from Isaiah 45:23. The substitutionary atonement so obvious in Isaiah 53 is not mentioned in Philippians 2:6-11, but that might simply be because the atonement is outside our humble service, so it would be inappropriate for Paul to write that we should follow Christ's example in that.⁸³

2:5 For you should let this same attitude⁸⁴ be in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,

The distilled theological truths that follow are abused if their use is limited to building our understanding of the incarnation, death and exaltation of Christ Jesus. These truths are written here as a guide to the attitude of selflessness that we are called upon to have in 2:1-4.

The word order of the following translation of verses 6-11 may seem somewhat stilted in English because some of the Greek word order is preserved, carrying over some of the poetic feel of the original.

2:6 Who in the form of God existing,

did not regard being equal with God

as something to be grasped,⁸⁵

This verse assumes that Christ was and is the eternal God. Who else could have been existing in the glorious and shining form or outward appearance of God?⁸⁶

The passage is saying that even though Christ had all the glory of divinity up to the time of the incarnation, He was willing to exchange that for the form of a slave. Thus this is the perfect illustration for the kind of selflessness we are called upon to manifest. We need to imitate the attitude of the glorious Lord of Lords, who was willing to somehow shed all that glory and take on the outward form of a slave, for us.

He did not think that such glory, that outward form of God, was something precious that had to be clung to even at the cost of disobeying “the One who sent Him,” to use the expression so common in the Gospel of John. He was willing to let go of that outward glory for the task set before Him by the Father.

2:7 but Himself He emptied,

the form⁸⁷ of a slave taking on,

in the likeness of men coming.⁸⁸

The question of precisely what Christ emptied Himself of has occupied theologians for many centuries. The most straightforward answer might simply be that He emptied Himself of the “form of God” mentioned in the previous verse. That is, He somehow let go of the outward manifestation of the glory of God, and took on the outward form of a slave, the least glorious human status.⁸⁹

In His incarnation He took on the likeness of men. This expression emphasizes the similarity He had with all men, but does not require a complete match with all mankind. This may be to allow for the fact the Jesus Christ, although He became truly human, was not exactly like everybody else in that He never sinned.

The expression taking on contrasts sharply with existing in verse 6.⁹⁰ While He eternally exists as God, at one point in time He took on His humanity.

2:8 And in appearance being found as man,

He humbled Himself,

becoming obedient to death,

even death on a cross.

Here the word appearance⁹¹ refers simply to the outward visible appearance. What people saw was a man.

The expression “humility of mind” in verse 3 and the expression He humbled Himself here use the same root word. He did this out of obedience, likewise we need to obey this calling to unity, humility, and love.

When we read verses 1-4 we are likely to ask, “Yes, but to what extent are we to look out for others rather than ourselves? Should not we be looking out for ourselves to some extent?” However, in the example set before us, the example that we are to follow, He was obedient to death, even death on a cross. He was sent to take upon Himself the form of the lowest status of humanity, a slave. He also was sent to the most cruel and shameful form of death known in the Roman Empire, death on a cross.

2:9 Therefore also God Him exalted,⁹²

and gave to Him a Name which is above every name,

The connecting word used, therefore, should not be overlooked here. Jesus Christ obeyed the Father, and because of that obedience, God exalted Him. Likewise we read in passages like Matthew 23:12; James 4:10; and 1 Peter 5:6⁹³ that we will be exalted if we humble ourselves. Here too, the Lord Jesus is our example.

God exalted Christ in several stages. The first stage was the resurrection (Romans 1:4). At some time prior to His ascension He received “all authority in heaven and on earth” (Matthew 28:18). He was certainly exalted in the ascension (Ephesians 4:8-10). Finally, as the reference to Isaiah 45:23 in 2:10-11 shows, this exaltation will continue until the Second Coming and the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God (Daniel 7:9-27; Matthew 24:29-31; 1 Corinthians 15:22-28; and Revelation 19).⁹⁴

Before He was obedient to death, He received the name “Jesus,” so that is probably not the name intended in this passage, even though it is mentioned in the next verse. Verse 11 suggests that the name given here is “Lord,” or the related Hebrew name of God in the Old Testament, and Paul would understand that as the most exalted name. This text seems to be saying that despite the equality of the Son with the Father, the Son did not possess the name “Lord” prior to the cross. At any rate, in the Bible and the cultures around the New and Old Testaments, the term name could carry with it the idea of position, dignity, or office, as in 2 Samuel 7:13; Ephesians 1:21 and Hebrews 1:4. Also, in Jewish culture, the term “The Name” was commonly used as a reference to God, as in Acts 5:41 and 3 John 7⁹⁵.

2:10 so that at the name of Jesus

every knee should bow,

in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

The exaltation of verse 9 has already happened, but universal worship in acknowledgment of that exaltation awaits the end of the age.⁹⁶ Some of those knees will bow with ready thankfulness, and others only by force,⁹⁷ but all will bow.

2:11 and every tongue should confess that

Jesus Christ is Lord,

to the glory of God the Father.

This worship is related to Isaiah 45:23, in which God says, “…every knee will bow to Me, every tongue will swear by Me.” This aspect of Christ's exaltation clearly takes place in an age in which everyone will worship the true God. It awaits the end of the age for fulfillment.

It is to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ be glorified. There is no competition between the Son and the Father. This should remind us of our calling to consider one another more important than ourselves.

2:12-18

I am explaining this theology to you now so that you will be Light and Life to the world around you. I will boast and we will rejoice together – are we not partners in Gospel work?

The teaching of how Christ exchanged His glory for the humility of a human being, how He obediently died on a cross, and further, about how He was “super-exalted,” was all given as an example for us to follow. Focusing on that word “obedience,” Paul urges the congregation to more consistent and deeper obedience.

2:12 Therefore my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now all the more in my absence, with fear and trembling accomplish⁹⁸ your own deliverance.⁹⁹

This encouragement to ever more consistent obedience is rooted in the rich theological truths Paul has just written to them. He might have said, “Therefore, since what I have just written is true, don't just obey me, don't just follow this preacher when he is with you, but follow Christ in the great example He has given of putting the interests of others ahead of our own.” While he wants to encourage their Gospel partnership, he also wants to discourage dependence upon him.

So, as the congregation imitates the humility of Christ, they can accomplish their own deliverance in the midst of the trouble and persecution they are experiencing. This is certainly not about eternal salvation.¹⁰⁰ It is about some sort of deliverance that they can accomplish through the suffering brought on by those that oppose them. The specific kind of deliverance Paul is writing of is already clear from the other passages in which he has written of deliverance in this letter, that is, 1:19-20 concerning himself and 1:27-30 concerning them. As Gospel partners, Paul and the congregation need to be accomplishing a deliverance from dishonoring Christ, whether in life or in death.

The nature of this task can be seen more clearly from the context of this command. In 2:5 Paul called upon the congregation to “let this same attitude be in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,” then he wrote about the humble obedience of the Lord that led to the suffering of the cross, and then about the exaltation that Christ earned by His humble obedience. After all that, he gives them this command which begins with the word therefore. If because of His humble obedience, God delivered Him to exaltation, you also should be humbly obedient into suffering, and God working in you will deliver you from dishonoring Him and on into an exaltation.

This will only happen with fear and trembling. They need to fear¹⁰¹ God and shudder at the very idea of dishonoring God.

2:13 For it is God who works in you both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

In stark contrast to the fact that they will have to be obedient to produce their own deliverance from dishonoring God, Paul encourages them by reminding them that God is working in them so that they have the will and the strength to do His good pleasure.

2:14 Do everything without grumbling or arguing,

Most of our grumbling and arguing happens when we put our own interests ahead of the interests of others. Whether concealed grumbling or unconcealed arguing, such disunity is forbidden.

2:15 so that you might be blameless and pure,¹⁰² children of God unblemished in the midst of a crooked and perverted generation, among whom you shine like stars in the sky,¹⁰³

They are children of God. If they will cease their grumbling and arguing, they will be blameless and pure children of God! Of course positionally they are already blameless and pure, but Paul would like to see their heavenly position work its way down to their earthly practice!

Paul wants them to be blameless, pure, and unblemished on the day when we will receive what is due us for what we have “done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Corinthians 5:10).

The beautiful image of the congregation as stars shining in a black sky is reminiscent of Daniel 12:3 which reads, “But the wise will shine like the brightness of the heavenly expanse. And those who bring many to righteousness will be like the stars forever and ever.”¹⁰⁴ Some have suggested that this figure of speech refers to evangelistic activity, in that the stars are shining Gospel light upon a dark world. However, Paul speaks of the unblemished congregation (like stars) being in the midst of the crooked generation (like the night sky). The stars do not illumine the night sky. They do just the opposite, showing how dark it is. Just as stars stand in contrast to the dark sky, so the unblemished congregation is to be in stark contrast to the perverted generation. This is not particularly about evangelism, it is about being utterly different from the sinful society around us. Part of the difference we have with the world is the Gospel we proclaim, but that is not the emphasis of this image.

2:16 being intent upon¹⁰⁵ the word of life, which means¹⁰⁶ a boast¹⁰⁷ for me in the Day of Christ, that I neither ran in vain nor labored in vain.

The verb translated being intent upon has about eleven definitions listed for it in the Greek lexicon.¹⁰⁸ Among them all, the two that might fit this context are “to hold out, present, offer”¹⁰⁹ and “to direct one's mind to a thing, to attend, to be intent upon.”¹¹⁰ Basically this phrase here either means “holding forth the Word” or “holding fast to the Word,” so it is either about doing evangelism or being steadfastly faithful to the Word of God. Because the verb itself could easily have either meaning, the near and more distant contexts must be considered to decide which of these meanings is meant here.

The near context speaks of not grumbling, of being blameless, and of shining like stars in contrast to a dark night sky. That certainly fits well with the idea of being intent upon the word of life. If this phrase were to be translated “holding forth the word of life,” it would be introducing a new concept. It is not likely that Paul would introduce a new concept with a verb that is so ambiguous.

The more distant context is the entire letter to the Philippians. In it there are many calls to serious discipleship entailing obedience, but in the whole letter 1:27 is the closest thing to an actual command that the congregation be preaching the Gospel, and it only says, “that you are standing firm in one spirit, struggling together as one for the faith of the Gospel," or perhaps, “that you are standing firm in one spirit, struggling together in Gospel faith.”

So, given the context of the passage and the context of the entire letter, it seems best to translate this passage being intent upon the word of life.¹¹¹

As Paul draws near the end of these exhortations to his Gospel partners, he reflects personally on the impact their obedience will have on him. Their obedience will be his boast in the Day of Christ. The success of this Gospel partnership will bring God-glorifying boasting in the Day of Christ.

If the Greek war heroes of Homer’s Iliad were devoted to battle and contest to collect the war trophies with which they were honored by men and in which they boasted, the Jewish apostle Paul was devoted to serve in such a way that on that Day he would be honored by the one Man whose approval he sought, the One who had died and obtained perfect righteousness for Paul, for the Philippians, and for every believer in Christ.

So Paul was motivated by the anticipation of the Day of Christ. He clearly wants to have his boasts ready for that day. He writes a great deal about that Day in his letters. 1 Corinthians 3:12-15; 9:24-27; Colossians 2:18; 2 Timothy 2:3-6, 11-13; and also 4:8 are all about how motivated he is because of that expectation, or how he motivates others by reminding them of that coming Day when believers' actions will be assessed, not to demonstrate that they are really believers, but so that rewards for fruitful labor are properly allocated by the King.

In Philippians 1:6 he wrote, “the One who began among you a good work will bring it to completion all the way until the Day of Christ Jesus.” Perhaps rewards for them and for him is the completion of the “good work” that Paul mentioned in 1:6.

There is also a hint of a negative side here. Paul implies that if they grumble and argue, if they are not blameless, pure, and unblemished when their works are evaluated in the Day of Christ, then sadly he will have run in vain and labored in vain. Paul feels that he would be bringing an empty boast to that Day, if all his running and laboring in Philippi only produced a grumbling and arguing congregation. As he wrote in 1 Corinthians 3:12-13, he hopes for himself and for the congregations that the “fire” of that Day will reveal “gold, silver,” and “precious stones” rather than “wood, hay, or straw.” What a joy that will be!

Paul was motivated in his life and ministry by the prospect of having his Lord and Savior rewarding him for his faithful ministry on that Day. However, that motivation would be one of several motivations which would all be secondary to the motivation of thankfulness for the grace of God which qualified him to even be present on that Day. Paul never said, “The Gospel has completed the joy that I have because you are living for the Lord.” What he did write in 2:2 was “make my joy complete by being like-minded....” This would seem to indicate that joy in effective ministry should be secondary or supplemental to our joy in the Gospel.

Furthermore, serving to gain a reward from the Lord would be quite different from serving to gain salvation, or even to gain God's love. This can be illustrated easily enough if we think about a child and his parents. A child that grows up feeling that he must perform well to earn his parents' love grows up with a painful burden that may never be lifted. However, in a healthy family parents love their children simply because they are their children, not because they perform well. The children know this and they perform well, not to earn their parents' love, but because their parents love them. Their parents reward them in their successes, and discipline them when they do wrong, but always out of a heart full of love. That rewarded or disciplined child never doubts his or her place in the family, and the effects of reward or discipline are heightened by the love the child senses. He or she will say, “My daddy loves me and he was happy that I did that!” When disciplined, he or she may say, “My daddy loves me and he doesn't want me to do that anymore, so I won't ever do that again….”

Likewise in our relationship with our heavenly Father, if we feel that we must work harder to experience God's love, we place ourselves under a burden that can never be satisfied, because our hard work does not bring God's love. However, if we delight in God's love as expressed in the Gospel, if we rejoice in the Lord, then the power of His discipline and His reward is heightened by the love we enjoy.

2:17 But if I am being poured out as a drink offering¹¹² upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I rejoice and I rejoice together with you all.¹¹³

As the Day of Christ and Paul's boasts on that Day come to his mind, he considers his own death. He uses a wonderful figure of speech to tell his readers how he views that prospect. He looks at himself as a drink offering which is poured out. The figure of speech is extended: this drink offering is being poured out upon the sacrifice and service of your faith. This might also be translated upon the sacrifice even¹¹⁴ the service of your faith. As he builds them up in their faith, that is, as he works towards drawing them to a more mature faith, his life is like a drink offering that infuses into a grain offering and disappears there. In this way he and they are living according to the model of Christ that is explained in 2:5-8.

This for Paul is a joy not a burden or a loss, and he wants to rejoice together with all of them. Here Paul restates what he wrote in 1:21, “For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.”¹¹⁵

2:18 Have that same joy, and rejoice together with me.¹¹⁶

His view of death is so different from the normal human way of viewing death. For Paul the idea of being utterly “poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrifice and service” of their faith is a cause for rejoicing, and he is calling his Gospel partners into that same joy. He wants his rejoicing to be mirrored with their rejoicing. He wants to draw them into this celebration of their partnership in the Gospel and the end times boasting it should entail.

2:19-24

Yes, it is true that I may soon die, so I think of my protégé, Timothy, who serves the Lord selflessly. I want to send him to you, to strengthen our partnership. He will assure me of how you all are doing. But right now, in my situation, I just cannot spare this man until I know how it will go with my imprisonment.

2:19 I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, so that I myself might be encouraged knowing your situation.

Paul has been writing quite a bit about himself, and he seem to realize that it has been too long since he heard an accurate assessment of how the Philippian congregation is doing. He writes as if he is sure the report will be encouraging, but we are left to wonder if he himself is just being optimistic, or whether he himself might have some doubt the report will be positive. At any rate, Timothy would be the right man to go and assess the situation.¹¹⁷

2:20 For I have no one of like heart and mind,¹¹⁸ who will genuinely be concerned¹¹⁹ for your situation,

Timothy really stood out among the disciples who were on Paul's team. Perhaps there were others of similarly good heart and mind, but for whatever reason they were not available. Perhaps they had been sent out on other tasks.

2:21 for they all¹²⁰ seek after their own interests,¹²¹ not those of Christ Jesus.¹²²

Paul, who spoke so positively of how the Gospel was advancing even though he was in chains, was not just putting a “positive spin” on everything so that the Philippians would not feel bad about him being under arrest again. He was no blind optimist. It must have deeply grieved him to write this verse. Although he knew that Timothy had a deep understanding of and commitment to “the things that really matter,” Paul could not say that the other believers around him had that commitment. Although capable of being Paul's emissary to Philippi, we can almost imagine that one brother felt he really should stay in Rome to help with the family business, another could not leave because he was preoccupied with romance, another thought Philippi too distant from home, and yet another thought he could not live in the primitive environment of a colony. Another, though he was very diligent in getting the Gospel to his own people in Rome, was not interested in getting that same benefit to “those people off in the colony.” They were all seeking after their own interests, not those of Christ Jesus. They did not have that understanding of “the things that really matter.” May we all understand the things that really matter, and may these excuses never be heard in our congregations when we are challenged to follow Paul’s footsteps as missionaries.

2:22 Now you know his proven character,¹²³ how as a child with his father he has served¹²⁴ with me in the Gospel.

Timothy is brought on to Paul's missionary team in Acts 16 during Paul's second journey, and he is mentioned by name in every subsequent chapter of Acts except the very last chapter, in all six times. Paul also mentions Timothy by name eighteen times in his own letters, including the two that he wrote directly to Timothy.

As he opened this letter, Paul wrote of himself and Timothy as “slaves of Jesus Christ.” Going into more detail here, he tells us they have something like a father-son relationship.¹²⁵ The Philippian congregation already knew Timothy and his relationship with Paul from the times they had been together in Philippi, but Paul reminds them, perhaps so that they will be even more open to his ministry, despite his lesser status and younger age.

2:23 So on the one hand he is the one I hope to send as soon as I see how my situation turns out.¹²⁶

As Paul summarizes his plans about sending Timothy, the delicate issue of his situation in chains has to come up. As he writes, he cannot imagine being without the help of his protégé, and despite the assurances he has already given and gives in the next verse, it is hard to be absolutely sure about what the authorities will do with his case.

2:24 On the other hand, I am convinced in the Lord that even I myself will come quickly.

Though not complete, this is the same assurance Paul expressed in 1:19, 24, and 25.¹²⁷

2:25-30

But I have to send back to you Epaphroditus, your missionary to me. Although I appreciate his willingness to serve, even to die, he is just too worried about you all. Honor him.

In striking contrast, Paul now tells them of one of their own number whom he is sending back to them because he is hard to have around.

2:25 Now I think it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, fellow worker, and fellow soldier – your missionary¹²⁸ and minister¹²⁹ of my need,

For reasons that he will make clear, Paul has deemed it necessary to send back to them one whom they had sent to serve Paul's needs. This man is only mentioned in Philippians (in this verse and in 4:18), so we do not know for certain that the Philippian congregation sent him to take care of Paul because Paul was under house arrest, but that would have been a reasonable thing for them to do. He probably had not been with Paul for too long, because his coming and the gifts he brought seem to be what Paul was referring to in 4:10 when he wrote, “Now I rejoice greatly in the Lord that now at last you have renewed your concern for me.”

Paul certainly does not speak ill of Epaphroditus. He refers to him as his brother, fellow worker, and fellow soldier. He is also called minister of my need. It is possible that the congregation found a suitable young man and sent him simply to see to it that Paul was well fed while he was under house arrest. There is no evidence to support the idea that Epaphroditus was an elder or pastor in Philippi, and the man's unacceptable worrying seems to indicate something of a lack of spiritual depth.

2:26 because he is longing for you all and troubled, because you heard that he was ill.

Here Paul gives the problem, but only in the next two verses do we learn why his past illness, his longing, and his being troubled are the reasons Paul actually has to send him back to his sending church.

2:27 For indeed he was ill, he was¹³⁰ near death. However, God had mercy on him – not only on him but also on me, so that I might not have grief upon grief.

Paul confirms what they had already heard, their missionary was ill, in fact he was near death. Then he immediately relieves their concern by telling them that God had mercy on him.

He does not say what grief he is already experiencing. Perhaps he is indirectly reminding them that it is already hard enough to be under house arrest and facing a capital trial in Rome. However, since in the very next verse he says he will be “more free of grief” when Epaphroditus is gone, it may be that the grief he has was brought on by Epaphroditus’s worry. In other words, he has enough grief with Epaphroditus’s worry, but the Lord spared him the further grief he would have endured had Epaphroditus died.

2:28 Therefore with more earnestness¹³¹ I send him, so that seeing him again you might be glad, and I might be more free of grief.¹³²

Epaphroditus worried that the church at Philippi was continually worrying about him. Epaphroditus’ worrying was excessive and inappropriate for that situation, and Paul wanted to quickly return him to his sending church. Paul saw that Epaphroditus just would not entrust the Philippian congregation to the Lord's care. That servant was fretting too much about their worries over him, so Paul graciously but firmly sent him home. If, as some suppose, the reason Paul sent him back was simply so that they could see that he was no longer ill, Paul could have simply told them that Epaphroditus had recovered, and they would have believed him. No, Paul sent him back so that he might be more free of the grief or pain of mind Paul experienced having Epaphroditus around.

2:29 Therefore receive him in the Lord with all joy, and hold such as him in honor,

Although Epaphroditus was too troubled for Paul to have on his team, he is nevertheless very clear that Epaphroditus should be honored by the congregation, and he expects them to welcome him joyfully.

There are honorable men that are just not qualified for high stress cross-cultural Gospel work, and Paul was not afraid to say so.

2:30 because on account of the work of Christ he came near to death, having no concern for his own life¹³³ so that he might fulfill what was lacking in your service to me.

Paul speaks highly of this man, never questioning his devotion or willingness to suffer. The man just had a serious problem with worry, so serious a problem that it brought too much trouble on Paul and he had to send him home.

Nevertheless, the Philippians – of all people – should give their missionary a warm and honorable welcome. After all, he was just fulfilling what was lacking in their service to Paul. The details behind this reminder to the congregation are now enigmatic. Philippians 4:15-16 indicates that the Philippian congregation had been financially generous to Paul in the past, so it does not seem likely that what was lacking in your service to me refers to lack of financial support. Since the same word for lacking¹³⁴ was used in 1 Corinthians 16:17 concerning the “lack” that was made up for by the arrival of three men from Corinth,¹³⁵ it seems like the “lack” that Paul refers to here was the lack of their ability to care for him while under house arrest.

There is an interesting comparison between these men on Paul’s team. Paul simply could not spare Timothy, but he quickly sent back worrying Epaphroditus, with an honorable discharge. To think in modern terms, one wonders what Paul might have put in these two men's personnel files.

---

⁷⁵ It is sometimes said that the word used here for these four “if's” (ει/ei) could also be translated “since.” However, the grammar here means that if the first part (“if there is any encouragement in Christ”) is true, then so is the second part (you should “complete my joy”). See James L. Boyer’s article, “First Class Conditions: What Do They Mean?” in Grace Theological Journal, 2:1, pp. 75-114. The other first class conditions in Philippians are in 1:22; 2:17; 3:4, 11, 15; and 4:8.

⁷⁶ This is the word κοινωνια/koinōnia. This and similar words are usually translated “partner” or “partnership” in this letter. See endnotes 28 and 224.

⁷⁷ Literally, “take the same attitude.” See the explanation of this verb, φρονεω/phroneō, in endnote 84.

⁷⁸ The actual Greek term here, συμψυχοι/sumpsuchoi, might literally be translated “with-souls,” and seems to say that their souls are bound together in the same purpose.

⁷⁹ This word (φρονεω/phroneō) is also translated mind in this verse.

⁸⁰ This word (κενοδοξια/kenodoxia), which literally means “empty glory,” refers to “a vain or exaggerated self-evaluation” or “empty conceit” (BDAG ad loc).

⁸¹ 1 Tim. 5:8 is a clear reminder of this responsibility.

⁸² That verse, quoted from Mt. 22:39, is sometimes interpreted as a command to love oneself, but that is simply an abuse of the verse. The command is in fact to love others with the same diligence that we already have for loving ourselves.

⁸³ Feinberg, Trinity Journal of Theology 1:1, Spring 1980, pp. 36-40.

⁸⁴ This verb, φρονεω/phroneō, is used ten times in the four chapters of this epistle. It usually refers to taking an attitude of mind, a point of view, or a mindset, but it can also mean “concentrating on” or “being concerned with.”

⁸⁵ This noun, ἁρπαγμος/harpagmos, has been the subject of much debate. Some say it means “the act of grabbing” so that Paul is saying Christ did not think He had to grab anything to gain equality with God, but it was enough for Him to give away all He had, and thus He gained equality with God. Another view is that it means “something to be grabbed,” again as if Jesus did not already have equality with God. A better interpretation is “something to be held onto,” or grasped. Christ was able to release the outward glory of God, and humble Himself. (See Feinberg's discussion of this noun in Trinity Journal of Theology 1:1, Spring 1980, pp. 30-36.)

⁸⁶ While it is true that the NIV, RSV, and NEB all imply in their translations that μορφη θεου/morphē theou means “outward form that corresponds to the inner reality of God," so that in those translations this phrase explicitly affirms the divinity of the Lord Jesus, they are relying too heavily upon a technical definition of μορφη/morphē which Plato used, and then Aristotle developed, and ignoring the use of μορφη/morphē in the LXX and other texts outside of Classical Greek philosophy. While it is certainly completely true that up to the point of the incarnation (and upon being exalted) the Lord Jesus was and is God in outer form and in inner reality, in order to claim that this Greek phrase says that you have to say that here Paul was more influenced by Aristotle's terms than the Greek Old Testament's use of terms (Feinberg, Trinity Journal of Theology 1:1, Spring 1980, p. 30).

⁸⁷ The use of μορφη/morphē here again in this verse confirms the fact that it refers simply to outward form, and does not require that the outward form correspond to an inner reality. That is very clear here in this verse, because while we agree that the Lord Jesus had the outward form of a slave, it would be hard to say that that outward form corresponds to the inner reality of a slave. He was not born as a slave, He was born the free son of a carpenter, although one might say He was figuratively a slave just as Paul was figuratively a slave. It would be better to say that He had the outward form of God, but exchanged that for the outward form of a slave, all the while never abdicating the inner reality of being God. In fact the definition of μορφη/morphē outside of Plato and Aristotle seems to be simply form. The fact that the Lord Jesus was and is fully divine is better proved from the expression “equality with God” in verse 6. Even though μορφη/morphē does not really have the full Aristotelian meaning of “outward form that corresponds to the inner reality,” verse 6 strongly implies Christ was fully God because He had all the outward form of God, that is, the glory of God, which nothing and no one in all creation would ever come close to having.

⁸⁸ The term coming is literally “becoming.”

⁸⁹ Scholars debate whether the emptying was merely metaphorical (that is, He made Himself of no reputation), or actually literal (that is, He somehow actually divested Himself of glory). However, since this passage speaks of an actual incarnation, where the God of Glory becomes a man that in outward appearance is just like any other man, it is hard to limit the idea to a metaphor.

⁹⁰ “Imitating the Incarnation,” David J. MacLeod, Biblioteca Sacra 158:631 (July 2001), p. 322.

⁹¹ Two millennia before Mark Twain's The Prince and the Pauper, this word, σχημα/schēma, is used in an ancient text that mentions “a king who exchanges his kingly robes for sackcloth and takes on a σχημα ταπεινον/schēma tapeinon,” that is, “a humble appearance” (BDAG ad loc.). That king (and Mark Twain’s prince) did not become a peasant in fact, but only in appearance. The Lord Jesus became a man in appearance and in fact.

⁹² Without the preposition ὑπερ/huper attached, this word (ὑψοω/hupsoō) means “to physically lift up” or “to honor.” With the preposition, ὑπερυψοω/huperupsoō means “to lift up over” or “to raise to a high point of honor” (BDAG ad loc).

⁹³ Each of these passages use the related Greek word ὑψοω/hupsoō.

⁹⁴ Feinberg, Trinity Journal of Theology 1:1, Spring 1980, p. 44.

⁹⁵ EBC ad loc.

⁹⁶ See Rev. 5:13.

⁹⁷ In 2 Sam. 22:40 all of David's adversaries bow at his feet.

⁹⁸ This word, κατεργαζομαι/katergazomai, means “to produce or accomplish a state or condition” (BDAG ad loc.), or “to commit.” It is fairly common, being used 22 times in the NT. In this passage the KJV, the ASV, the NASB, the NIV, and the NET all translate it “work out.” However, that translation of this word is not found in the BDAG lexicon and is not supported by NT usage. This text is calling for the Philippian congregation to “achieve,” “produce,” or accomplish their own σωτηρια/sōtēria. If they are being called upon to produce their own eternal salvation, then Paul has radically altered the kind of Gospel he is preaching! No, in fact σωτηρια/sōtēria here has a different, although quite common, meaning.

⁹⁹ Although this noun, σωτηρια/sōtēria, and the related verb certainly can refer to eternal salvation (as in Eph. 2:8), they very often refer to physical deliverance in the NT. Mt. 8:25; 9:21; 14:30; 27:40; John 11:12; 12:27; Acts 4:9; 27:20; 1 Tim. 2:15; 4:16; Heb. 11:7; Jms. 1:21; 2:14; and 5:19-20 is a partial list of verses in which this noun or the related verb have this physical sense of deliverance.

¹⁰⁰ Zane Hodges, The Gospel Under Siege, pp. 96-100, and Robert Wilkin, “Working Out Your Salvation: Philippians 2:12,” The Grace Evangelical Society News, May-June 1993, pp. 2-3.

¹⁰¹ This word, φοβος/phobos, really does mean fear, and not merely “reverence.” The Scriptures call upon us to both love and fear God.

¹⁰² This word, ακεραιος/akeraios, literally means “unmixed” but has a figurative sense here.

¹⁰³ The standard lexicon gives sky, as one of the philosophical meanings of κοσμος/kosmos (BDAG ad loc).

¹⁰⁴ Daniel wrote chapter 12 in Hebrew, but when it was translated into Greek in the LXX, the word “brightness” was translated with the word φωστηρ/phōstēr, which is the word translated star in Phil. 2:15. It literally means “light giving body” (BDAG ad loc.)

¹⁰⁵ The verb here is επεχω/epechō.

¹⁰⁶ The expression which means is used to translate εις/eis, which literally means “into,” or “to.”

¹⁰⁷ See the comments about this word, καυχημα/kauchēma, in the discussion about 1:26.

¹⁰⁸ Liddell and Scott, ad loc.

¹⁰⁹ This meaning is not present in the NT, but is common enough in ancient Greek literature outside the NT.

¹¹⁰ Four out of the five times this verb is used in the NT, it has this meaning. Note especially 1 Tim. 4:16, which reads, “Watch your life and doctrine closely…,” but see also Luke 14:7; and Acts 3:5. In Acts 19:22 it means “stay” or “remain.”

¹¹¹ That would be against the KJV, the NEB, and the NIV, but with the RSV, the ESV, the NASB, and the NET translations. Swift (p. 245) agrees.

¹¹² This entire phrase, being poured out as a drink offering, translates the verb σπενδω/spendō. This verb occurs 19 times in the LXX, describing proper drink offerings to the Lord God of Israel, as well as pagan libations to the gods of the surrounding nations. Drink offerings were also common as acts of worship among the Greeks. The only other place this verb is found in the NT is in 2 Tim. 4:6-8, where Paul also anticipates his death and the reward for his service.

¹¹³ Literally translated, this last clause reads, “rejoice and I with-rejoice with all of you.”

¹¹⁴ Και/kai normally means and but it can sometimes be translated “even,” when what follows the και/kai is equivalent to what precedes it.

¹¹⁵ See comments on boasting and rejoicing in the discussion of 2:2.

¹¹⁶ Literally translated, this verse likewise reads, “The same also rejoice and with-rejoice with me.”

¹¹⁷ Paul sent Timothy on a similar mission to the Thessalonian congregation, as he mentions in 1 Thes. 3:1-6. See comments under 1:1 concerning Timothy.

¹¹⁸ The word ισοψυχος/isopsuchos is literally “equal soul,” and is translated here like heart and mind.

¹¹⁹ This verb, μεριμναω/merimnaō, is used 19 times in the NT, only by Jesus and Paul. Jesus uses it 12 times, always reminding the disciples not to worry, as in Mt. 6:25, 27, 28, 31, and 34. Paul uses it 7 times (especially in 1 Cor. 7:32, 33, and 34), sometimes of worry (as in Phil. 4:6), and sometimes of concern (as here in Phil. 2:20).

¹²⁰ It would seem that the brothers that fearlessly preach Christ out of goodwill (1:14-15) and the brothers that send their greetings with Paul's to Philippi (4:21) would be exceptions to this criticism.

¹²¹ The word interests is not there in the original, but it is supplied for clarity in English.

¹²² The majority of manuscripts of this passage read Christ Jesus, but some older ones read “Jesus Christ.” This is the reverse of the situation of 1:8.

¹²³ This word, δοκιμη/dokimē, which here is translated proven character, emphasizes not just character, but the testing process that proves character.

¹²⁴ This verb, δουλευω/douleuō, is the verb “to slave,” and is a part of the same word family as the word “slaves,” which Paul used to describe himself and Timothy in 1:1.

¹²⁵ In 1 Cor. 4:17 Paul even refers to Timothy as “his beloved child.”

¹²⁶ The expression how my situation turns out is literally “the things concerning me.”

¹²⁷ See comments on 1:25 about Paul's travels after this imprisonment.

¹²⁸ This is the word αποστολος/apostolos. Although it was used of the original Twelve Missionaries whom the Lord sent out, it could also be used of missionaries sent out by the churches, including Epaphroditus. Although translated “representatives” in the NIV, this very word is used in 2 Cor. 8:23 to speak of the “missionaries of the churches.” In Heb. 3:1 Christ Himself is referred to as an αποστολος/apostolos, because He was sent as a missionary by God to this world.

¹²⁹ Paul uses this word, λειτουργος/leitourgos, of himself in Rom. 15:16 and of government officials in Rom. 13:6. It is used of angels in Heb. 1:7 and of Christ in Heb. 8:2. It refers to people that serve for others' benefit. Here it seems to simply mean that Epaphroditus was sent to be Paul's “aide.”

¹³⁰ The words he was are supplied because of the needs of English grammar.

¹³¹ This word, σπουδαιοτερως/spoudaioterōs, might also mean “with more haste.”

¹³² This key word, αλυποτερος/alupoteros, seems to be Paul's clearest expression of the reason he is returning Epaphroditus to the church in Philippi. The word is composed of three parts. The root is λυπη/lupē, which means “pain of mind or spirit, grief, sorrow” (BDAG ad loc.) That very word is used twice in the previous verse. The suffix is -τερος/-teros, which generally adds the element “more.” Finally, the prefix is α-/a-, meaning “without,” or “free of.” When all three parts are then “reassembled,” the meaning is clear: Paul is sending Epaphroditus back so that he can be relieved of the pain of mind or grief that he has while Epaphroditus is there! This does sound harsh to our ears, but it has to be taken in the context of the generosity of Paul's other comments about the man. Neither Paul's negative nor his positive comments should be softened.

¹³³ Most of manuscripts read παραβουλευσαμενος/parabouleusamenos, meaning having no concern for, but several of the older manuscripts read παραβολευσαμενος/paraboleusamenos. Not only are these two readings very close in spelling, they are also very close in meaning. The majority reading means having no concern for, while the older and uncommon reading has the almost identical meaning of “risking.” It is very easy to see how the original could have been with or without that first υ/u, and the issue simply has very little practical significance.

¹³⁴ The Greek word is ὑστερημα/husterēma.

¹³⁵ EBC ad loc.

4:1-7

So of course you should stand firm in unity, joy, and prayer.

Having developed this mindset of rejoicing in the Lord and having warned the congregation about the kinds of people that will pull them away from that mindset, Paul now summarizes and brings some specific application for the Philippian congregation.

4:1 So, my brothers, loved and very much missed,¹⁹⁴ my joy and my crown,¹⁹⁵ in this way stand firm in the Lord, loved ones.¹⁹⁶

Three things stand out very clearly in this verse. First, Paul is very warm, encouraging, and winsome towards his partners in Gospel ministry as he turns his attention specifically to them. Second, he is not just urging them to stand firm in the Lord. Rather, he is claiming that, in the preceding discussion, he has given them the proper approach to standing firm in the Lord. This is not simply a warm encouragement to try as hard as they can to be firm in their faith. It is rather a warm encouragement to take all the preceding discussion to heart and live it.

Second, Paul referred to them as his joy and crown. There and then in their partnership relationship they were a great joy to him. When that great Day would come, Paul was assured that the Lord would give him a reward for the Philippian part of his Gospel work, so he uses a figure of speech to refer to them as his crown.¹⁹⁷

Third, they are to stand firm in the Lord in this way. Paul stresses that this is the way we should be doing what we all know we should be doing. Joy in the Lord should propel us to stand firm in the Lord.

4:2 To Euodia I appeal¹⁹⁸ and to Syntyche I appeal to agree¹⁹⁹ in the Lord.

Although he has said almost exactly the same thing in the first half of 2:2, Paul repeats himself specifically to Euodia and to Syntyche. We do not have any other information about these two women. Their conflict was serious enough that Paul decided to intervene through this letter.

4:3 Yes, I ask you, loyal Syzygos,²⁰⁰ to help them, who have struggled together²⁰¹ in the Gospel with me and Clement and my other coworkers, whose names are in the Book of Life.

Paul calls upon a loyal servant in the congregation to work to reestablish unity between these two women, reminding him that the two women have been an effective part of a partnership in Gospel ministry in the past. We simply do not know any more about the situation there, but it is a good guess that Paul thought the situation was serious enough to ask for this man's intervention.

Although there was a Clement in Rome who was identified as the third bishop of Rome in later tradition, it is not clear that these two were the same man.

These people's names are in the Book of Life. As is clear from Revelation 20:15, this is another way of saying they are born again individuals.²⁰²

4:4 Rejoice in the Lord always. Again I will say, rejoice!

Paul understood, probably more than they did, about trials in ministry, both from outside the congregation and from within, as in the conflict between Euodia and Syntyche, but he does not shy away from calling them to consistently rejoice in the Lord. He knows that if they can do that, as he has been describing for them in chapter 3, they will have the spiritual resources to work through problems from the outside and problems from within as well.

4:5 Let your gentleness²⁰³ be known to everyone. The Lord is near.

A heart rejoicing in the Lord will be gentle, and that should be evident to everyone. It is not stated here, but we may suppose that sooner or later a heart rejoicing in performance and the maintenance of religious standards will be unyielding, ungentle, unkind, discourteous, and intolerant.

In James 5:8 we see a similar connection between our heart attitudes and the anticipation of the Lord's soon return.

4:6 Do not worry²⁰⁴ about anything, but in all things by prayer²⁰⁵ and petition²⁰⁶ make your requests²⁰⁷ known to God with thankfulness,

As we rejoice in the Lord, we should easily be free of worry and full of prayer and thankfulness. However, without the mindset of the Lord as our pride and our joy, instead of being easy this seems unattainable, appearing to be a habit only saints and monks can maintain. However, we can imitate Paul in this, rejoicing in the Lord, so that, free of worry, we are ready with thankful prayer.

4:7 and the peace of God that excels all intellect²⁰⁸ will guard your hearts and your minds²⁰⁹ in Christ Jesus.

Because of what Christ has done, because of the Gospel, we are at peace with God, but if Christ is not our joy, and if we therefore cannot thankfully bring all our concerns to Him, we will not be experiencing that peace of God. This is a promise of one of the rich benefits of letting Christ be our joy and our boast, and of the prayer life that follows: the peace of God.

4:8-9

Yes, if you live like that you will experience the peace of God – furthermore, if you will fill your minds with true and good things and follow my example, the God of Peace will be with you!

4:8 Finally,²¹⁰ brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable,²¹¹ whatever is righteous, whatever is pure,²¹² whatever is amiable,²¹³ whatever is commendable, if something is excellent²¹⁴ and if something is praiseworthy,²¹⁵ let your minds dwell on²¹⁶ these things.

Our thought life is of the highest importance in our spiritual development. A great deal of this letter to Paul's partners in Gospel ministry is taken up with teaching and exhortation concerning the mindset and attitude that they should have, so that they can be the best possible partners with him. This and the next verse make up Paul's final exhortation to them. Empowered by having Christ as our joy and our boast, the devotion and discipline these two verses require will be available.

4:9 And the things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things; and the God of peace will be with you.

Paul himself has embodied the things he spoke of in the previous verse, so he can now boldly tell them to imitate the model he has lived in front of them. Although there may be a great deal of hypocrisy in Christian ministry, Paul is claiming here that he was no hypocrite. Before them he did not say one thing and do another. This was not accomplished out of sheer self-discipline, however. It must be understood in light of the source of this devotion, which was no longer an attempt to meet the inward and outward moral standards of his religion. The source of his devotion was his personal delight in Jesus Christ and the Gospel, as he described in chapter three.

As his partners in Gospel ministry model what they saw in Paul, they will experience what he experienced: not only will the peace of God guard their hearts, but they will enjoy the presence of the God of peace.

Here Paul could have closed his letter with the personal greetings that are found in verses 21-23. He almost seems ready to do that. However, he appends just one more topic: money!

4:10-20

Before closing this letter, I want to be quite specific about the financial aspects of our partnership in missions, our Gospel fellowship.

Paul began this letter, in 1:3-11, by expressing his gratitude for their long-standing and ongoing partnership in Gospel work, and then he worked hard teaching them various things they need to understand about their Savior and themselves so that they can be the best Gospel partners they can be. Now Paul uses that same vocabulary to explicitly refocus on that subject, their Gospel partnership, explaining in more detail how finances fit in. Just as he opened this topic with thankfulness in 1:3, he reopens it with thankfulness here in 4:10.

4:10 Now I rejoice greatly in the Lord that now at last you have renewed your concern²¹⁷ for me, for whom you were concerned, but you lacked opportunity.

Now that Paul has finished exhorting them to root their lives, their joy, and their boasting in Christ, he can return to the theme of his response to their partnership in ministry and the Philippians' gift. Because they are renewing their partnership with him in the Gospel, Paul rejoices.²¹⁸

These verses, 4:10-20, match the opening verses, 1:3-10. Paul was concerned about them in 1:7, they are concerned about him in 4:10, with the same verb.²¹⁹ Also, the words for partnership occur twice in 1:3-10 and twice in 4:10-20. In this way the whole letter is enclosed within these “bookends.”²²⁰

They had sent him at least four gifts in the past²²¹ and in this letter he is thanking them for their fifth in thirteen years. This was a serious Gospel partnership.

Note carefully that in apostolic gentleness Paul does not rebuke them for failing to consistently support him through the years. He does not rebuke them for failing to search him out, to make their own opportunity. Although it may be common enough in our age's fundraising environment, such a self-serving attitude was far from Paul's heart. He is very understanding about this gap in their attention, and simply rejoiced greatly in the Lord that they renewed their concern for him. He does not even allow for the idea that they stopped thinking about him, but comments that they did not have a fit opportunity²²² to express that ongoing concern. Given the difficulty of keeping track of people in an age far before telecommunications, this little congregation in Macedonia may not have known at all where Paul was. In that case they simply could not send him any gifts or help because they could not find him.

If such is the attitude of the one often considered the second greatest missionary of all the ages towards a little church that he himself founded, how much more humble and gentle should present day missionaries be towards their supporting churches, even in their complete assurance that God Himself has called them to a highly significant ministry?

Any missionary today that receives a gift from a church or a family that used to support him, with whom he then had lost contact, should very much empathize with Paul as he writes these lines. Because of their participation – not because of the cash in his hands – he will be encouraged that “they really do care about getting the Gospel out to the such-and-such people group.”

4:11 Not that I am saying this out of need, for I have learned to be content in whatever situation I am in.

In this verse and the next two verses Paul tells them that the joy he expresses is not about having some more money, because he is content with any financial situation.

4:12 I know how to be humbled, I know also how to abound. In any and in all situations I have learned the secret,²²³ whether satisfied or hungry, abounding or lacking.

Although we know that at least by shipwreck and imprisonment Paul experienced humble circumstances, we have little specific information about what bountiful circumstances he experienced. However, we do know the secret that he refers to here. Paul himself told us the secret in chapter three. When we find our joy and our boasting in Christ, it is a simple matter to be content in humble and in bountiful settings.

4:13 I can do all things through Christ²²⁴ who strengthens me.

Paul wants his readers to understand that he is dependent upon the Lord, rather than their gifts, as valuable as they may be. So he tells us the secret again. It is Christ.

We should look closely at the idea of all things here. This statement is given right in the middle of a passage on how Paul is content in poverty and in abundance, and how he is certainly not clamoring after more donations from them. What he tells us is that with the power of the One who strengthens him, he can accomplish every single thing the Lord is calling him to do in life and ministry.

4:14 However, you did well partnering²²⁵ with me in my trouble.²²⁶

By using this word, partnering, here, as well as the related word in the next verse, Paul brings us back to his early comments in 1:5-7. The contentment that Paul possessed was not to be taken as a refusal to partner with them, even financially. In fact their participation with him was commendable.

4:15 And as you Philippians also know, at the beginning of my Gospel ministry,²²⁷ when I went out from Macedonia, not one church partnered with me in the matter of giving and receiving except you only.

In this verse and the next verse Paul continues to commend them, by reminding them of how far back their Gospel partnership goes. It was about thirteen years back that they sent him that first gift.²²⁸ There were other churches that could have entered into that Gospel partnership with the then obscure missionary named Paul, but none of those others did.

Here finally, with only nine verses left in the letter, Paul directly connects the idea of “sharing” or “partnering” or “participating” (all various possible translations for the same family of words that Paul has been using in this letter)²²⁹ with the matter of giving and receiving. It is important to understand that when in various translations we read of a “partnership” or “participation” in the Gospel in 1:5; a sharing or being partners in God’s grace in 1:7; a sharing in Paul’s trouble in 4:14, and a sharing in the matter of giving and receiving in 4:15, Paul is consistently using words from the same root word, and all his readers would understand that in all four of these key passages Paul is developing the idea of their partnership with him in Gospel ministry, and that some of that partnership has to do with the matter of giving and receiving.

If someone in upper-class Greek or Roman society received a gift, that brought him into a moral obligation to reciprocate. He might do this with another gift, or by showing proper gratitude.²³⁰ By using the expression giving and receiving Paul acknowledges that societal concept of reciprocity. Since the root idea of the word translated partnered is “hold something in common,” Paul seems to be saying that both the congregation and he too did some giving and some receiving in their relationship. He implies that he gave something to the Philippians, even though he was certainly not able to reciprocate financially. They seem to have sent a sizable cash gift and the services of Epaphroditus, but all Paul could offer was direction, encouragement, and insight into who Christ is, what He has done for us, and how Gospel ministry works, gifts which later led up to the letter which we are now studying! It may be that in the matter of giving in their partnership Paul also contributed to them a sense of satisfaction that they could be a part of something eternal that was taking place there in Rome. In 2:17-18 he certainly urged them to share with him in his joy. While some of the congregation may have thought it rather quaint that the missionary would claim parity in the matter of giving and receiving, we might hope that others in the congregation saw that the gifts Paul gave them were of immeasurably greater value than the cash and services they sent to Paul!

The missionary whom the Philippian congregation supported so many years ago was, among other things, a Bible teacher. He used his spiritual gifts on the field and with his supporters. Whatever spiritual gifts he might have, may every missionary today be as careful and diligent in his missions partnerships as Paul was to enrich the lives of his supporters.

4:16 Also in Thessalonica²³¹ more than once²³² you sent something because of my need.

The gifts Paul mentions here could not have been too substantial, because in 1 Thessalonians 2:9 and 2 Thessalonians 3:8-9 Paul reminds them how hard he worked so that they did not have to support him. It would appear that he did work hard to support himself in Thessalonica, and the Philippians supplemented that income, but the Thessalonians did not. While it was good for the congregation in Philippi to send gifts while he worked for his physical needs and served the Thessalonians' spiritual needs, he apparently did not want to receive gifts from the Thessalonians, lest that young congregation interpret his willingness to be supported as an example of an undisciplined life.

4:17 Not that I am hoping for a gift, but I am hoping for the increasing profit²³³ into your account.²³⁴

Now shifting back to his own attitudes, Paul clarifies his own motive, which is selfless. Although there may be many that would say these sorts of things to manipulate people into giving more, Paul would have none of that. He is only seeking their good.

Whether or not believers have obtained eternal deliverance from damnation is already determined, because we have eternal forgiveness based not on our activity but on the work of Jesus Christ upon the cross. However, even as permanently redeemed believers we each still do have an account with the Lord Jesus. Furthermore, according to this verse what we do or do not do influences the increasing profit into our accounts. While this is merely a passing reference to these accounts of ours, their existence is undeniable, and they matter! Clearly, the people of a church that is active in healthy Gospel partnerships with missionaries will have increasing profit into their accounts.

We read in the parable of the Minas in Luke 19 that at the end of the age those servants' Master will return and settle accounts with them. If He is pleased with a man's account, He will say something like, “Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a small thing, take charge of ten cities.” If He is displeased with one of His servants' accounts, then He will rebuke him. However it is His enemies, not His lazy servants, whom He destroys (compare Luke 19:20-26 with 19:27).

In short, Paul is saying that he wants his Gospel partners to be effective in their partnership so that they will receive a rich reward from the hand of the Lord Jesus at the end of the age. He has already alluded to various aspects of these rewards in 2:16; 3:11, 14; and 4:1.

4:18 But I have been paid all in full, and I have plenty; I have been filled up, receiving from Epaphroditus the gifts²³⁵ from you, a soothing aroma,²³⁶ an acceptable sacrifice,²³⁷ pleasing to God.

Paul emphatically dispels any notion that he is manipulating them so they will give more. Not only has he learned how to be content in poverty and in abundance, but he is also well supplied now because of their recent gifts. He goes on to praise their gifts, using terminology unmistakably reminiscent of Old Testament sacrifices. Their giving, a part of their Gospel partnership with Paul, is given the high status of being equated to the physical sacrifices that the nation of Israel made at the temple of God in Jerusalem. For Paul those gifts were acts of worship of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

As with all things spiritual, we must decide whether we believe this, or consider it merely to be some insincere public relations material from a missionary to a supporting church. Whether we agree or not, Paul elevates their giving to that high level.

4:19 And my God will provide for²³⁸ your every need on the basis of²³⁹ His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.

While some mistakenly say that the Lord will give great riches to any that donate generously to their ministry, this text says that as they give generously God will provide for their every need on the basis of His riches. This text should not be distorted to say that someone with a need for transportation will be given a new Mercedes Benz as long as that person gives generously to Christian ministry. Paul says their every need will be wonderfully fulfilled, not their every desire. Our God who has infinite riches in glory will wonderfully fulfill all the needs of generous donors like the Philippians, who gave with good motive, out of His riches in glory, but the text cannot be pressed to say that His gifts to us are commensurate to His riches in glory.

4:20 To God our Father be glory forever and ever,²⁴⁰ amen.

While this brief doxology might close the comments above about the perfect provision of God for those involved in Gospel partnership like the Philippians, it more likely closes the entire epistle that revolves around that Gospel partnership. What is clear is that God should receive praise because of His glory through all the ages.

To summarize 4:10-20, in this Gospel ministry partnership,

- the missionary is thankful (vs. 10)

- but not dependent or grasping (vv. 11-13)

- the church does well to help the missionary in trouble (vs. 14)

- this fellowship relationship goes back to the early days (vv. 15-16)

- the missionary is not materialistic about it, but seeks the spiritual good of the church (vs. 17)

- the church's gifts are like a sweet smelling sacrifice to God (vs. 18)

- the missionary assures them that God will meet their needs (vs. 19)

- the missionary praises God (vs. 20)

4:21-23

The brothers here greet you and I bless you with God's grace.

4:21 Greet all the holy ones²⁴¹ in Christ Jesus. The brothers with me greet you.

As was his custom, Paul sent his and his coworkers' greetings to the entire congregation. It is not clear whether any of these particular brothers were imprisoned with Paul. Perhaps they simply had access to visit him, like Epaphroditus and Timothy. To Paul these interpersonal relationships were important matters. Even in these closing greetings Paul is building up the interconnectivity of the Body of Christ.

4:22 All the holy ones greet you, particularly those of the household of Caesar.

The expression the household of Caesar refers to people that are engaged in imperial service.²⁴² There is no indication in this text why the holy ones of the household of Caesar would be singled out in sending greetings to the congregation in Philippi, but such was the case.

4:23 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.²⁴³ Amen.²⁴⁴

It is so fitting that Paul would close this letter with a benediction of grace, given how central grace has been to the message he has been giving the Philippians, that they will be the best partners in Gospel ministry they can be as they make Christ and His grace their boast and their joy in life.

---

¹⁹⁴ While it is sometimes translated “longed for” or “desired,” this Greek term, επιποθητος/epipothētos, is here translated very much missed, because “longed for” and “desired” may carry inappropriate connotations in today’s English.

¹⁹⁵ Literally translated this is “joy and my crown,” but it was changed to my joy and my crown to make a better English sentence.

¹⁹⁶ Paul uses αγαπητος/agapētos (“beloved”) twice here, at the beginning and at the very end of this sentence.

¹⁹⁷ See the discussion of the term “prize” under 3:14.

¹⁹⁸ Although this verb, παρακαλεω/parakaleō, is better known in contexts where it means “to comfort” or “to encourage” here it has its common meaning of to appeal, “to urge,” or even “to implore.”

¹⁹⁹ Literally Paul writes, “to think the same” or “to have the same point of view.” See the explanation of this verb, φρονεω/phroneō, in endnote 84.

²⁰⁰ With this word, συζυγος/suzugos, Paul is either calling on the help of a loyal friend named Syzygos, or the help of an individual he is calling “loyal yokefellow.” Although the name Syzygos has not turned up in other ancient Greek documents, it seems preferable to consider Syzygos a man's name. If it was not a person's name or nickname in the congregation, it might have been an overly subtle expression. Did Paul not have more than one person in Philippi he could refer to as his “loyal yokefellow”? If it was a person's name, then this is a wordplay, just as in Philem. 10 and 11.

²⁰¹ See the comments about this verb, συναθλεω/sunathleō, in endnote 67 under 1:27.

²⁰² A Roman city would have a scroll listing the names of its citizens, and a freed slave that was granted citizenship would have his name added to that scroll. In the same way, this Book of Life is a list of all those that have citizenship in the Kingdom of God. In Revelation 3:5, there is no possibility of someone's name being removed from this book. The Lord is saying, “Far from removing your name, I will indeed confess your name before the Father....” In the OT we read about a different scroll in Exodus 32:32-33 and in Psalm 69:29. That scroll appears to simply be the listing of all the names of living people. When people of any sort die, their names are removed from that list.

²⁰³ In 1 Tim. 3:3 this word, επιεικης/epieikēs, is the opposite of “violent.” BDAG gives the meaning, “not insisting on every right of letter of law or custom, yielding, gentle, kind, courteous, tolerant.”

²⁰⁴ See endnote 119 under 2:20 about this verb, μεριμναω/merimnaō.

²⁰⁵ This word, προσευχη/proseuchē, is used 36 times in the NT, always of prayer to God.

²⁰⁶ This word, δεησις/deēsis, is used 18 times in the NT, always of prayer to God. The two words, προσευχη/proseuchē and δεησις/deēsis, are used together four times in the NT. It is difficult to make distinctions between them.

²⁰⁷ This word, αιτημα/aitēma, is only used three times in the NT, twice of requests to God, and once of a request to Pilate. It is closely related to the usual word for “ask,” αιτεω/aiteō.

²⁰⁸ This word, νους/nous, is used 24 times in the NT, and usually refers to one's intellect or “mind,” but can sometimes refer to the result of our mind's work, that is, our “understanding,” “thoughts,” or “opinion.”

²⁰⁹ This word, νοημα/noēma, is only used six times in the NT. It can refer to one's “intellect” or mind, or to “understanding,” “thoughts,” or “opinion.” Paired here with hearts, it seems to refer to minds rather than “thoughts.”

²¹⁰ See endnote 136 about this expression, το λοιπον/to loipon, under 3:1. Here it does have the meaning finally.

²¹¹ According to BDAG, this term, σεμνος/semnos, can refer to people, gods, or characteristics that are honorable, “worthy of respect,” “noble,” or “dignified.” In the NT, deacons (1 Tim. 3:8), their wives or deaconesses (1 Tim. 3:11), and older men (Tit. 2:2) are to be characterized as σεμνος/semnos.

²¹² This term, ἁγνος/hagnos, is related to the normal Greek word for holy (ἁγιος/hagios). It was used of the Greek deities and their temples. In the NT it means pure and uncontaminated by sin. God's servants and young women are specifically encouraged to be ἁγνος/hagnos in the NT. God's wisdom is ἁγνος/hagnos in Jms. 3:17, and God Himself is ἁγνος/hagnos in 1 Jn. 3:3.

²¹³ This word, προσφιλης/prosphilēs, is only used here in the NT. According to BDAG it can mean amiable, “pleasing,” “agreeable,” or “lovely.”

²¹⁴ Αρετη/aretē is used five times in the NT, and refers to “moral excellence.” In 2 Pet. 1:5 it is used twice, with a meaning similar to our passage. It is used of God in 1 Pet. 2:9 and 2 Pet. 1:3.

²¹⁵ Επαινος/epainos is the normal word for “praise.” It is found eleven times in the NT, but only here does it have the meaning praiseworthy.

²¹⁶ BDAG gives three definitions for this verb, λογιζομαι/logizomai, 1) “to determine by mathematical process,” “to calculate,” 2) “to give careful thought to a matter,” “to ponder,” “to let one's mind dwell on a matter,” or 3) “to hold a view about something.” The second of those meanings is appropriate here. We are to “ponder” on these things.

²¹⁷ The verb φρονεω/phroneō, which is discussed in endnote 84 on 2:5, is translated concern and concerned in this verse.

²¹⁸ See the discussion of 2:2 concerning the two kinds of joy that Paul has.

²¹⁹ φρονεω/phroneō

²²⁰ Swift, p. 248.

²²¹ See the comments about this under “Paul and Philippi” in the Background discussion.

²²² The verb Paul uses here, ακαιρεομαι/akaireomai, literally would be “lacking a καιρος/kairos moment.” That term, καιρος/kairos, refers to a “time” or a “period,” “frequently with implications of being especially fit for something” (BDAG ad loc), thus the expression some Christians today use, “a καιρος/kairos moment.” Paul seems to be saying they did not have a “fit opportunity.”

²²³ In the Greek mystery religions this verb, μυεω/mueō, referred to being initiated into the secret mysteries of the cult, so this can also be translated “I have been initiated.” Here this verb is translated I have learned the secret.

²²⁴ The vast majority of ancient Greek manuscripts include the words through Christ (Χριστῷ/Christō) here, while it is missing from the three most prominent uncials, that is, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and the original writing of Sinaiticus, although a later scribe added it into that manuscript. Without the words through Christ, the reader must understand that it is Christ or God that strengthens Paul, so again, even if the words through Christ are rejected as a later addition, they would be understood as an ancient explanation of the Apostle's intent.

²²⁵ See the discussion of κοινωνια/koinōnia (“partnership”) in endnote 28 as well as the discussion of συγκοινωνος/sugkoinōnos (“with-partner”) under 1:7. The literal translation of this word, συγκοινωνεω/sugkoinōneō, would be “with-partnering.” Again, this is about the now renewed Gospel partnership Paul and the Philippians have, and it is the central theme of this letter.

²²⁶ This word, θλιψις/thlipsis, is used 45 times in the NT, often of the tribulation at the end of the age. The NIV translations for this term include trouble, “distress,” “persecution,” “suffering,” “anguish,” “hardship,” and “affliction.”

²²⁷ Literally this phrase is “at the beginning of the Gospel,” which is then clarified in the very next phrase. This expression is paired with “the first day until now” in 1:5 (Swift, p. 248).

²²⁸ That gift might be the same gift that Paul mentions to the Corinthians in 2 Cor. 11:9.

²²⁹ That is, κοινωνια/koinōnia (1:5; 2:1; and 3:10), συγκοινωνος/sugkoinōnos (1:7), συγκοινωνεω/sugkoinōneō (4:14), and κοινωνεω/koinōneō (4:15).

²³⁰ See Stephen Charles Mott, “The Power of Giving and Receiving: Reciprocity in Hellenistic Benevolence,” Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation (ed. G. F. Hawthorne, Eerdmans, 1975) pp. 60-72.

²³¹ Thessalonica is a Macedonian city about 100 miles (160 kilometers) away by road from Philippi.

²³² This expression, και ἁπαξ και δις/kai hapax kai dis, is not easy to translate. Literally it means “and once and twice” but according to O'Brien (p. 535) it seems to mean more than once, a meaning that fits well here and in 1 Thes. 2:18.

²³³ Here the word “fruit” (καρπος/karpos) is better translated with its figurative meaning, profit. See also endnote 57 under 1:22.

²³⁴ This word, (λογος/logos), is used 330 times in the NT, and has several meanings. Its most common meaning is “word” or “message,” and it also frequently means “matter” (as in “the matter of” in Phil. 4:15). However, it refers to financial accounts that have to be settled in Mt. 18:23 and 25:19. In Mt. 12:36 and 1 Pet. 4:5 it refers to accounts which people in general will have to settle with the Lord at the end of the ages, and in Rom. 14:12; Heb. 4:13; and Heb. 13:17 it refers to our accounts which we as redeemed believers will have to settle with Him at the end of the age, precisely what it means here in Phil. 4:17.

²³⁵ The word gifts is implied in the Greek and supplied in the translation.

²³⁶ This expression, οσμη ευωδιας/osmē euōdias, is used about 50 times in the LXX, almost always of physical sacrifices pleasing to the Lord God.

²³⁷ Both these terms, θυσια/thusia and δεκτος/dektos, appear in the same verse together about 9 times in the LXX in the context of sacrifices to God.

²³⁸ This verb, πληροω/plēroō, also used in verse 18, literally means “to fill.”

²³⁹ While this preposition, κατα/kata, usually means “according to,” it can mean “because of,” “as a result of,” or on the basis of as in verse 11 above (BDAG ad loc).

²⁴⁰ This expression, εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων/eis tous aiōnas tōn aiōnōn, literally means “into the ages of ages.”

²⁴¹ See endnote 13 under 1:1 concerning this term, ἁγιος/hagios.

²⁴² EBC ad loc.

²⁴³ The vast majority of the Greek manuscripts read be with you all, but several of the very oldest manuscripts read “be with your spirit.”

²⁴⁴ Even though this amen is in an impressive list of very ancient manuscripts (a papyrus from about 200 ad, manuscripts from the fourth, fifth, sixth, eight, and tenth centuries, as well as almost all the later manuscripts and various ancient translations), its omission from only three manuscripts of the fourth, ninth, and tenth centuries as well as about three later manuscripts has been sufficient to cause most modern textual critics to reject it as an addition “in accord with liturgical practices” (Metzger, ad loc). However, that reasoning is subjective. One might also say that the deletion of this amen in some manuscripts was in accord with the liturgical practices of churches that did not like to say amen. We really do not know that much about how often second and third century Christians said amen.

It is important to begin with a discussion of authorship, in light of the christological controversy which permeates the three Johannine letters. It makes a significant difference if the author (particularly of 1 John) was in fact an eyewitness to the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ (as he appears to claim in 1 John 1:1-4) and if he stands along with other apostolic eyewitnesses against the innovative christology of the secessionist opponents mentioned in 1 John 2:18-19.

It should be noted that the problem of determining the author of 1 John is a somewhat different one from the determination of the authorship of 2 and 3 John, because in the case of 1 John the letter is anonymous – no author is specified within the work itself. The only other New Testament letter which makes no reference to the author’s name is the Epistle to the Hebrews. The second and third letters, however, designate the author as “the Elder,” and it has been long debated whether this individual is or is not to be identified with the author of the first letter and/or the Apostle John.

It is also important to remember that the exegesis of 1 John would not be greatly affected by our conclusions concerning who wrote it. Yet our understanding of its relationship to the other Johannine material in the New Testament would be greatly aided if we could arrive at some determination of who wrote it consistent with both the external (i.e., historical) evidence and internal evidence (contained in the letter itself). This is particularly true in terms of the relationship between 1 John and the Gospel of John, where many similarities of style and wording have long been noted.

Historical Evidence concerning the Author of 1 John

Early allusions to the Johannine letters

Some scholars have suggested allusions to 1 John and/or 2 and 3 John in a number of non-canonical Christian works dating mostly from the second century a.d. These possible allusions have been grouped into categories according to the probability that they actually reflect some knowledge of the Johannine Epistles.

Unlikely allusions: These are works which some have suggested may contain allusions to the Johannine Epistles, but which probably show similarities only because they come from the same general background of early Christian thought. These works include the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (ca. a.d. 96), the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians (ca. a.d. 110-115), and the Didache (now dated by most as late first century a.d.).

Possible allusions: These are works which may indeed contain allusions or indirect references to 1 John and/or 2 and 3 John. They include the Epistle of Barnabas (ca. a.d. 130), the Shepherd of Hermas (before a.d. 150), the Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (ca. a.d. 150), both the Apologies and the Dialogue with Trypho of Justin Martyr (ca. a.d. 150), and another early apologetic work of uncertain authorship, the Epistle to Diognetus (probably best dated in the late second century a.d., assuming the recipient referred to was Claudius Diogenes, procurator of Alexandria at the end of the second /beginning of the third century a.d. This identification of the recipient is not universally accepted, however).

Probable allusions: These are the earliest works which in the opinion of many New Testament scholars probably do reflect some degree of knowledge of one or more of the Johannine Epistles. The first of these is Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians (before a.d. 140), where Epist. to the Phil. 7 is compared to 1 John 4:2.3 The second probable allusion is found in the testimony of Papias (a contemporary of Polycarp), which survives only in quotation by Eusebius. According to Eusebius, Papias “uses testimonies from the first [or former] Epistle of John.”4 This statement should not be taken to mean that Papias knew of more than one of the Johannine letters, however, since it may only reflect Eusebius’ knowledge of other Johannine letters in his own time (fourth century a.d.). In general when ancient authors cited earlier works, it was common to “update” such references to then-current standards.

Early direct quotations from the Johannine letters

These works contain the first clear and generally undisputed direct quotations from the Johannine letters. They are:

(1) Irenaeus’ Adversus haereses (“Against Heresies,” ca. a.d. 180), which includes in three passages direct citations of 1 and 2 John. Adv. haer. 1.16.3 is a quotation of 2 John 11 in which Irenaeus adds that the Epistle was written by the Lord’s disciple John, who was also the author of the Fourth Gospel. Adv. haer. 3.16.5 is a quotation of 1 John 2:18-19 and 21-22, and 3.16.8 is quoted from 2 John 7-8 which also appears in 1 John 4:1-2 and 5:1. All of these are part of Irenaeus’ arguments against the Gnostics.

(2) The Muratorian Canon (sometimes referred to as the Muratorian Fragment, ca. a.d. 200, a fragment of an early Latin list of books which were considered canonical), thought to be associated with the church of Rome, is somewhat convoluted in its account of the Letters of John. The Muratorian Canon tells of John writing the Fourth Gospel and then refers to his “letters,” although the number of letters mentioned is disputed. Later the work adds, “Certainly the Epistle of Jude and two of the previously mentioned John are accepted in the catholic church,” although the meaning of this statement is disputed. R. Brown takes this as a reference to 1 and 2 John.5 It has also been argued that the Muratorian Canon would have placed 1 John with the Gospel and thus the two letters mentioned must refer not to 1 and 2 John, but to 2 and 3 John. P. Katz wanted to see a reference to all three letters by taking “catholic” to refer not to the church but to the “catholic epistle” of John, namely 1 John.6 My own suspicion (however difficult to prove) is somewhat different than either of these suggestions, namely, that 2 John may have been considered part of 1 John in the West. Irenaeus quotes 2 John 7-8 in Adv. haer. 3.16.8 as coming from the epistle he has already quoted, which has to be 1 John, quoted in 3.16.5. If so, the Muratorian Canon may well be referring to 1 and 2 John combined, plus 3 John as a separate letter. But this is far from certain, given the sparse evidence available.

(3) Tertullian (died a.d. 215) quotes 1 John numerous times, referring to it as the work of John the Apostle.7

(4) Clement of Alexandria (died ca. a.d. 220) not only quotes 1 John a number of times8 but attributes this to John the Apostle and speaks of it as “the greater epistle,”9 which indicates he knew at least one more of the Johannine letters (2 or 3 John) and considered them to come from the same author. It appears that the other Johannine letter Clement knew was 2 John, since his Hypotyposes apparently contained a commentary on 2 John.10

(5) Origen (died a.d. 253) quoted frequently from 1 John and referred to it as by John the Apostle. Eusebius claimed Origen knew of both 2 and 3 John, although he was aware that the latter two letters were not regarded as genuine by everyone.11 But Origen never actually quotes 2 or 3 John in any of his surviving works; the only firsthand evidence that he knew more than one Johannine letter rests on the use of a plural in the Latin translation (the Greek original is no longer extant) of his Homilies on Joshua (7.1) where he refers to the “epistles” of John. This is somewhat questionable because later in the same work (7.4) he speaks in the singular of “his epistle.”

(6) According to Eusebius, Dionysius of Alexandria (died a.d. 265), who studied under Origen, regarded 1 John to be written by the same author as the Fourth Gospel, although he distinguished both 1 John and the Fourth Gospel in style from Revelation, which he therefore attributed to a different author.12

Conclusions

It can be seen from the external (historical) evidence we have examined above that 1 John, at least, was being quoted without question as to its authenticity or authority well before the end of the second century in both the West and the East. It also appears that the author was accepted to be John the Apostle, who was understood to be the author of the Fourth Gospel as well.

Internal Evidence concerning the Author of 1 John

Only 1 John and Hebrews among the letters of the New Testament mention no one by name as the author. This does not mean, however, that 1 John contains no information whatsoever about its author.

(1) The author as eyewitness to Christ:

The introduction or prologue to the letter, 1 John 1:1-4, repeatedly emphasizes the eyewitness nature of the testimony the letter contains. 1 John 1:1, in particular, places special emphasis on what the writer himself has heard, seen, gazed upon, and touched. It is sometimes pointed out that the use of the first person plural in the introduction does not conclusively prove the author to be an eyewitness participant in the events to which he alludes, since first person plurals occur later in the letter with reference to the common experience of all Christians (e.g., 1 John 4:13). But if all the writer is doing in the prologue is alluding to general Christian experience (i.e., knowledge of the incarnation) it is hard to see how this could serve as any authentication of his message, which seems to be the point of the prologue. Another approach has been to claim that the statements in 1:1-4 which appear to claim eyewitness testimony are nothing more than a rhetorical device intended to boost the credibility of what follows in the letter. In response to this it is worth noting, however, that if the eyewitness claims are merely rhetorical, and yet are being put forward by the author of 1 John in the face of a serious christological schism brought on by the departure of the opponents (1 John 2:18-19), it would be obvious both to the recipients of the letter and to the opponents that the author’s claims to eyewitness testimony were merely rhetorical and those claims would carry no weight in the debate with the opponents for this reason.

It appears, rather, that the author intends by his statements in the prologue to indicate that he was one of the original eyewitnesses of the life and ministry of Jesus on earth, and that he intends to associate himself with the other original eyewitnesses.13 It should be noted that this is completely consistent with the traditional ascription of the letter to John the Apostle, as reflected in the external evidence we have already examined.

(2) The authoritative tone of the letter:

In addition to the specific eyewitness claim of the prologue to 1 John, the remainder of the letter appears to be written with an attitude of assumed authority. Obedience to what the author has written is clearly assumed (1 John 4:6). There is to be no compromise with the error of the adversaries, which is condemned outright (2:18-19, 4:1-3). The tone set by the epistle as a whole is certainly one of apostolic authority, and this would be consistent with the assignment of authorship to John the Apostle.

(3) The assumed familiarity with the readers:

It is clear from the author’s repeated use of terms of endearment like tekniva (teknia, “little children”) to refer to his readers (2:1, 12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21) that he is well known to them, and this may well explain the omission of the author’s name: he was so well known to the readers that no introduction was necessary.

(4) The relationship of 1 John to the Fourth Gospel:

The relationship between 1 John and the Fourth Gospel will be discussed at greater length elsewhere. Here it should simply be noted that there are significant similarities in style, vocabulary, theological emphases, and perhaps even structure between the two works. The point of introducing this into a discussion of authorship is to serve as a reminder that to some extent discussions of authorship of 1 John are inextricably linked to discussions of authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

Conclusions:

Although the author’s name is not specifically mentioned in 1 John, the indications within the letter (eyewitness of the life of Jesus, apostolic authority, someone well-known to the readers, and similarities to the Fourth Gospel) are certainly consistent with the traditional ascription of authorship to John the Apostle.

Alternative Proposals for Authorship of 1 John

As we have just seen, there is good evidence, both historical and internal, which supports the traditional ascription of authorship of 1 John to John the Apostle. This has not, of course, met with universal approval, and in light of the lack of specific mention of the author in the letter itself we should look at several of the more prominent alternatives proposed.

(1) John the Elder:

Clearly the most widespread alternative to authorship of 1 John by John the Apostle is authorship by a second person whose name is John, usually designated John the Elder (or Presbyter, from the Greek word). Support for this is found in 2 and 3 John, which both introduce their author as “the elder” although no name is mentioned in connection with either. Support is also claimed from a much-debated passage attributed to Papias and quoted in Eusebius which may possibly refer to a person distinct from the Apostle John.

Papias is quoted by Eusebius as saying:

And again, if anyone came who had been a follower of the elders, I used to enquire about the sayings of the elders – what Andrew, or Peter, or Philip, or Thomas, or James, or John, or Matthew, or any other of the Lord’s disciples said (eijpen, eipen [aorist]) and what Aristion and the elder John, the disciples of the Lord, say (legousin, legousin [present]). For I did not think that I could get so much profit from the contents of books as from the utterances of a living and abiding voice.14

The problem, quite simply stated, is the interpretation of Papias’ words. Who are the “elders”? Are they to be identified with the “disciples” also named, or are they a separate group? C. K. Barrett was convinced the “sayings of the elders” consisted of reports of what the named disciples (i.e. apostles) had already said, and Papias only heard these second hand. There would be no question of Papias being a hearer of the apostle John and companion of Polycarp. Thus Papias would be referring to three groups: the apostles (Disciples), their followers the elders, and the other disciples.15

If, however, Papias is describing the apostles as elders, then there are only two groups (apostles and disciples), and Papias used to enquire directly from the followers of the apostles what the apostles had said. His testimony is therefore closer to that of Irenaeus. But if Papias is describing the apostles as ‘elders,’ then it is possible that the “elder John” is also the Apostle John mentioned earlier. In this case, Papias is distinguishing between what John said in the past and what he was still saying at the time of Papias’ enquiry.

At the same time, the possibility that there may have been two men with the name John cannot be ruled out. It is supported by Eusebius’ interpretation of Papias’ words. (But since Eusebius wished to attribute the Book of Revelation to a different John than the author of the gospel, his interpretation may not have been impartial.)16

In any case, the only other evidence for the existance for an ‘elder’ John appears to be the introduction to 2 and 3 John, where the author calls himself by this title. But even if there was a second John, the ‘elder’, Papias gives no location and no hint of any writings. He merely happens to possess a name which is identical to the person to which the Fourth Gospel is traditionally ascribed, and this makes the ‘confusion’ theory possible.

But if the later Church mixed up apostles and elders in this way, might not Papias have done so himself? And after all, it is still possible that he was originally referring to only one person himself, and Papias’ words were confused by Eusebius. The ambiguity of Papias’ testimony as Eusebius records it makes it impossible to draw any firm conclusions based on that testimony.

(2) A disciple of John the Apostle:

Those who hold the view that a disciple of John the Apostle wrote the Johannine letters usually link it to their theory of authorship of the Fourth Gospel, because of the evidently close relationship between the Fourth Gospel and 1 John (mentioned briefly above). In moderately critical circles it is becoming common to ascribe authorship of the Gospel to a follower of the Apostle John (or the Beloved Disciple), which allows one to say that the witness behind the Fourth Gospel was apostolic or near-apostolic, while the actual author who recorded the testimony was not. Some would go on to see this individual as the same one who then wrote either 1 John or all three of the Johannine letters.17

(3) A Christian leader in the Johannine community:

Many today think the author of 1 John (and possibly 2 and 3 John as well) was a Christian leader who was neither a personal acquaintance of John the Apostle nor the author of the Fourth Gospel. This is currently the leading theory in Johannine scholarship, expressed (for example) by R. Brown and S. Smalley.18 It is based primarily on the assumptions that (1) after the essential composition of the Gospel, development has taken place in the situation to which the letters are addressed, and (2) there are sufficient differences in emphasis, theology, style, etc. to warrant the conclusion that the same individual was not the author of both the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine letters. Both Brown and Smalley hold, however, that the same author wrote 1, 2, and 3 John, although Smalley is less certain on common authorship for 1 John.

Another recent proposal by J. Kügler is that 1 John reflects both a real author and an implied author (as well as real readers and implied readers). Having made this distinction, he holds that the implied author of 1 John is an eyewitness, but the real author is not – in other words, the real author employs a fictional device (taking the stance of an eyewitness) to gain a hearing from the real readers who otherwise would not pay attention to him.19 While Kügler’s approach does not dismiss the force of the eyewitness language in the prologue to 1 John, it is still questionable whether such a literary technique was in use in the ancient world. Reluctance to accept pseudepigraphal writings as canonical by early Christians would seem to mitigate against a view like Kügler’s. In addition, since 1 John assumes throughout that the author is well known to the readers, it is difficult to see how the pretense of being an eyewitness (when the real readers knew very well that the real author was not an eyewitness) would carry any polemical or persuasive weight against the opponents, who apparently claimed the authority of the Spirit for their innovative revelation about who Jesus was.

Conclusions:

In response to all of the above suggestions we may refer to the historical and internal evidence cited above which points to John the Apostle as the author of 1, 2, and 3 John (as well as the Fourth Gospel, although this is something of a separate issue). We refer to the statement regarding the three epistles and the Gospel of John by B. H. Streeter, with which we agree:

We are forced to conclude that all four documents are by the same hand. And few people, I would add, with any feeling for literary style or for the finer nuance of character and feeling, would hesitate to affirm this, but for the implications which seem to be involved.20

There is nothing in the evidence put forward by Brown or Smalley which demands authorship by a person other than the Apostle John. It is certainly possible to agree that development has taken place in the situation within the Johannine community between the composition of the Gospel and 1 John while still holding to apostolic authorship for both Gospel and letters. Such a conclusion appears to me to best explain all the available evidence.

Additional Bibliography: Authorship, Date, Relationship to the Fourth Gospel

Bauer, Walter. “Johannesevangelium und Johannesbriefe.” Theologische Rundschau n.s. 1 (1929): 135-60.

Brown, Raymond E. The Community of the Beloved Disciple: The Life, Loves, and Hates of an Individual Church in New Testament Times. New York: Paulist Press, 1979.

Dodd, C. H. “The First Epistle of John and the Fourth Gospel.” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 21 (1937): 129-56.

Feuillet, A. “The Structure of First John: Comparison with the 4^th Gospel.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 3 (1973): 194-216.

Holtzmann, H. J. “Das Problem des ersten johanneischen Briefes in seinem Verhältniss zum Evangelium.” Jahrbuch für protestantische Theologie 7 (1881): 690-712; 8 (1882): 128-52, 316-42, 460-85.

Howard, W. F. “The Common Authorship of the Johannine Gospel and Epistles.” Journal of Theological Studies 48 (1947): 12-25.

Katz, P. “The Johannine Epistles in the Muratorian Canon.” Journal of Theological Studies 8 (1957): 273-74.

Kügler, Joachim. “Die Belehrung der Unbelehrbaren: Zur Funktion des Traditionsarguments in 1 Joh.” BZ 32 (1988): 249-54.

Manson, T. W. “Additional Note: The Johannine Epistles and the Canon of the New Testament.” Attached to “Entry into the Membership of the Early Church.” Journal of Theological Studies 48 (1947): 32-33.

O’Neill, J. C. The Puzzle of 1 John: A New Examination of Origins. London: SPCK, 1966.

Soltau, Wilhelm. “Die Verwandtschaft zwischen Evangelium Johannis und dem 1. Johannesbrief.” Theologische Studien und Kritiken 89 (1916): 229-33.

Strecker, Georg. “Die Anfänge der johanneischen Schule.” New Testament Studies 32 (1986): 31-47.

Wilson, W. G. “An Examination of the Linguistic Evidence Adduced against the Unity of Authorship of the First Epistle of John and the Fourth Gospel.” Journal of Theological Studies 49 (1948): 147-56.

---

3 A. E. Brooke also considers 1 John 3:8; 2:18, 22; and 2 John 7 to be partial parallels (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles [ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912] liii).

4 Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.16-17. In recent translations of Eusebius’ Historia Ecclesia the Greek phrase ajpoV th' =Iwannou' protevra ejpistolh' is almost always translated as “the first epistle.”

5 Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John (Anchor Bible 30; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1982) 10. Brown’s view on the number and identification of the Johannine letters mentioned in the the Muratorian Canon is the most widely accepted one.

6 P. Katz, “The Johannine Epistles in the Muratorian Canon,” JTS 8 (1957): 273-74. Katz thought it unlikely that 2 John and 3 John would be thus separated, and so wanted to emend the Muratorian Canon to read “two in addition to the catholic [one],” with “catholic” being a reference to the “catholic epistle” of 1 John.

7 See especially Adversus Marcionem 5.16; Adversus Praxeam 15, 28; Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiace 12.

8 Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 2.15.66; 3.4.32; 3.5.42, 44 and 3.6.45 (which quotes 1 John 2:4, 18-19); 4.16.100; Quis dives salvetur 37.6 (which quotes 1 John 3:15).

9 Stromata 2.15.66.

10 This work survives only in fragments. Part of the Hypotyposes (no longer extant in Greek) appears to be included in the Adumbrationes, a Latin version from sometime in the sixth century a.d.

11 Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.25.10.

12 Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 7.25.6–7.25.11. It is important to note, however, that Dionysius’ arguments about differing style were based on his own (third century a.d.) observations, not on earlier historical evidence.

13 I.e., the apostles (and possibly others) mentioned by Paul in 1 Cor 15:5-7.

14 Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.4. The same fragment of Papias is quoted by Jerome, Lives of Illustrious Men 13, who like Eusebius felt that the appearance of the name “John” twice in Papias’ list indicated the existence of an “Elder John” who was distinct from John the Apostle. How much or to what extent Jerome depended on Eusebius for this opinion is uncertain.

15 C. K. Barrett, The Gospel according to John, 2^nd ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978) 106-109.

16 Eusebius, an anti-chiliast (i.e., anti-millennialist), wanted to attribute the book of Revelation to a non-apostolic author (since he did not approve of its teaching of a millennium in chap. 20). Thus he read Papias’ words in such a way as to find another individual named John who was not an apostle and not the author of the Fourth Gospel to be the author of Revelation. The point is, Eusebius can hardly be considered to be neutral when it comes to the interpretation of Papias’ testimony.

17 Schnackenburg, for example, suggests that the author of 1 John (if not an eyewitness himself) was a pupil of the fourth evangelist or a member of the close circle of believers gathered around him (The Johannine Epistles: Introduction and Commentary [trans. R. and I. Fuller; New York: Crossroad, 1992], 38, 41)

18 Brown, The Epistles of John, 69-71; Stephen S. Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, WBC 51 (Waco: Word, 1984) xxii.

19 Joachim Kügler, “Die Belehrung der Unbelehrbaren: Zur Funktion des Traditionsarguments in 1 Joh,” BZ 32 (1988): 249-54.

20 B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels, rev. ed. (London: Macmillan, 1930) 460 [italics his].

Trying to diagnose the theological position of the author’s opponents in 1 John is a little like trying to reconstruct a telephone conversation by listening only to the party at one end. There are several important factors to consider before attempting an analysis of the views of the adversaries:

(1) The presentation of the opponent’s views by the author of 1 John can hardly be a sympathetic one, and it is not common for people to feel that their views have been accurately represented by an adversary intent on an unfavorable presentation. Thus we cannot be absolutely sure that the opponents would agree with the way their positions were being portrayed. (This has nothing to do with whether the author of 1 John was accurate in his portrayal; it only concerns whether the opponents would have agreed with his portrayal of them.)

(2) It is also difficult to tell when the quotations of the opponents’ views are direct (i.e., verbatim) and when they are being paraphrased or placed in the idiom of the author of 1 John for his own purposes in the debate, or perhaps to bring out implications of the opposing view that the opponents themselves might not have realized.

(3) When the opponents’ views are being quoted directly, it is without the benefit of context, so that we are completely dependent on the author of 1 John for clues as to how the opponents’ claims should be understood.

(4) Furthermore, it may be asked whether we are correct in assuming that in areas not mentioned by the author of 1 John he would be in general agreement with his adversaries. This is probably the case, but it is difficult to prove.

With all these qualifications and warnings in mind one may wonder about the possibility of success in constructing any portrait of the opponents and their teaching as addressed by 1 John. But it is necessary to keep in mind the difficulties in reconstructing the opponents’ views lest we become overly dogmatic about the accuracy of our exegesis in regard to their positions.

Passages in the Johannine Epistles Which Describe the Opponents’ Teaching

It will be helpful in discussing the views of the opponents in 1 John if we start with a list of passages in the Johannine Epistles which appear to describe the opponents and their teachings.

Note: English verse quotations from the NET Bible are given here in order to make analysis of this summary easier for the reader. The relevant portions of the text are highlighted in italics.

Their attitude toward Jesus

(1) [1 John] 2:18 Children, it is the last hour, and just as you heard that Antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. We know from this that it is the last hour. 2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us, because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us.

(2) [1 John] 2:22 Who is the liar but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This one is the Antichrist: the person who denies the Father and the Son. 2:23 Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. The person who confesses the Son has the Father also.

(3) [1 John] 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 4:2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, 4:3 but every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the Antichrist, that you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

(4) [1 John] 4:6 We are from God; the person who knows God listens to us, but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.

(5) [1 John] 5:5 Now who is the person who has conquered the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? 5:6 Jesus Christ is the one who came by water and blood—not by the water only, but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

(6) [1 John] 5:10 (The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has testified concerning his Son.)

(7) [2 John] 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh. This person is the Deceiver and the Antichrist!

(8) [2 John] 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not remain in the teaching about Christ does not have God. The one who remains in this teaching has both the Father and the Son.

Their attitude toward the world

(1) [1 John] 2:15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; 2:16 because all that is in the world (the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the arrogance produced by material possessions) is not from the Father, but is from the world.

(2) [1 John] 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

(3) [1 John] 4:5 They are from the world; therefore they speak from the world’s perspective and the world listens to them.

(4) [2 John] 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh. This person is the Deceiver and the Antichrist!

Their attitude toward sin

(1) [1 John] 1:6 If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking in the darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth.

(2) [1 John] 1:8 If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

(3) [1 John] 1:10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.

(4) [1 John] 2:4 The one who says “I have come to know God” and yet does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.

(5) [1 John] 2:6 The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked.

(6) [1 John] 3:3 And everyone who has this hope focused on him purifies himself, just as Jesus is pure). 3:4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; indeed, sin is lawlessness. 3:5 And you know that Jesus was revealed to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 3:6 Everyone who resides in him does not sin; everyone who sins has neither seen him nor known him.

(7) [1 John] 3:7 Little children, let no one deceive you: the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as Jesus is righteous. 3:8 The one who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was revealed: to destroy the works of the devil.

(8) [1 John] 3:9 Everyone who is fathered by God does not practice sin, because God’s seed resides in him, and thus he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God. 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are revealed: everyone who does not practice righteousness—the one who does not love his fellow Christian—is not of God.

(9) [1 John] 5:18 We know that everyone fathered by God does not sin, but God protects the one he has fathered and the evil one cannot touch him.

(10) [3 John] 11 Dear friends, do not imitate what is bad but what is good. The one who does good is of God; the one who does what is bad has not seen God.

Their attitude toward the brothers and sisters

(1) [1 John] 2:9 The one who says he is in the light but still hates his fellow Christian is still in the darkness.

(2) [1 John] 3:10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are revealed: everyone who does not practice righteousness—the one who does not love his fellow Christian—is not of God.

(3) [1 John] 3:11 For this is the gospel message that you have heard from the beginning: that we should love one another, 3:12 not like Cain who was of the evil one and brutally murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his deeds were evil, but his brother’s were righteous.

(4) [1 John] 3:14 We know that we have crossed over from death to life because we love our fellow Christians. The one who does not love remains in death. 3:15 Everyone who hates his fellow Christian is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

(5) [1 John] 3:17 But whoever has the world’s possessions and sees his fellow Christian in need and shuts off his compassion against him, how can the love of God reside in such a person? 3:18 Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue but in deed and truth.

(6) [1 John] 4:8 The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

(7) [1 John] 4:20 If anyone says “I love God” and yet hates his fellow Christian, he is a liar, because the one who does not love his fellow Christian whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. 4:21 And the commandment we have from him is this: that the one who loves God should love his fellow Christian too.

An Emerging Picture of the Opponents in 1 John

As we attempt to draw a picture of the opponents based on the statements above, several key factors and observations emerge, as follows:

(1) A case of charismatic Christian prophecy run amok?

It has been suggested (among other things) that the author of 1 John was faced with an outbreak of charismatic Christian prophecy run amok, with some similarities to 1 Cor 12-14. True, there are references to putting the Spirits to the test and to false prophets (1 John 4:1), but I can find no indication of ecstatic or uncontrolled behavior like the spiritual enthusiasts at Corinth appear to have exhibited. The false prophets are challenged on their Christological views (what they assert or fail to assert about Jesus, 1 John 4:2-3) rather than on their ecstatic practices, and their statements do not seem to be spontaneous, but rather a settled and perhaps organized doctrine which contradicts the doctrine of the author.

(2) A denial of apostolic authority

The author accuses the opponents of failing to listen to him (1 John 4:6), and if we are correct in our conclusion that the author was the Apostle John, this would amount to a denial of apostolic authority (note especially in this regard the prologue, 1:1-4, which appears to assume not only an authoritative tone, but eyewitness testimony about who Jesus is).

(3) Secessionists

The opponents appear to have withdrawn themselves from fellowship with the author’s community, since they are constantly referred to as “having gone out from among us” (1 John 2:18-19, 4:1, 2 John 7). This withdrawal appears to be voluntary on their part, since no mention is made of their being forced to leave the community. For the author of 1 John, the withdrawal of the opponents demonstrates conclusively that they had never really belonged in the first place (1 John 2:19).

(4) Proselytizing efforts

The secessionist opponents still constitute a threat to the author’s community, however, because they appear to be sending out teachers (1 John 2:27, 2 John 9, 10, 11) to try and win over more of the author’s followers (resisting this missionary effort by the opponents constitutes a major purpose of 2 and 3 John). Such attempts by the opponents to proselytize others suggest an organized effort on the part of the adversaries. There is good reason for thinking that a split has taken place (1 John 2:19), and the author’s opponents now constitute a community of their own, just as thoroughly committed as the author’s to spreading their understanding of who Jesus is.

(5) More numerous and prosperous?

Although it is difficult to be certain, there are hints in the text of 1 John that the opponents’ community may be at least as numerous as the author’s (1 John 2:18 [“many”]; 4:5 [hints at the success of the secessionists, cf. John 12:19; also note negative connotations in John 8:23]) and possibly more well-to-do (1 John 2:15-16; 3:17-18).25

(6) Multiple groups of opponents?

We have divided the statements in the Johannine Epistles pertaining to the opponents into four major categories, listed above: (1) Their attitude toward Jesus; (2) Their attitude toward the world; (3) Their attitude toward sin; and (4) Their attitude toward the brothers and sisters. We may now ask: do these attitudes reflect a single group of adversaries, or multiple groups?26 Some have even suggested a variety of Christological heresies are being addressed, based on the statement in 1 John 2:18 that “many antichrists have appeared.” Others see no relationship between the Christological discussion in 1 John 4:1-6 and the ethical commands of 4:7-13 to love one’s fellow Christian, so that again more than one group of opponents is being addressed. It would seem preferable, however, to see only one group of adversaries, fairly well organized and perhaps as numerous as the author’s own community, if we can arrive at a plausible statement of their position which would explain both the Christological emphasis in 1 John and also the ethical stress on avoidance of sin and love for the brothers and sisters.27 To this we will now proceed.

(7) Sequence of John’s Gospel and Epistles

My own understanding of the sequence of the Gospel of John and the three epistles is that the Gospel of John was produced first, followed by the three epistles in the canonical order (1, 2, 3 John). In order for what follows to be plausible, however, it is not necessary for the Gospel of John to have been in written form, or written in its final form, at the time 1 John was written—only that there was a community of Christians (probably in Asia Minor in the vicinity of Ephesus) who generally subscribed to the theology (especially the christology) which has been handed down to us in the Gospel of John.28

(8) A Christology too far?

It seems likely that if the secessionist opponents went out from among the author’s community (1 John 2:19) they held the same “high” christology reflected in the Gospel of John. But the opponents had gone too far: they were putting so much stress on the preexistence of Christ that they were neglecting or downplaying the humanity (or the earthly career) of Jesus (1 John 4:2-3, 2 John 7).29 This would also explain the author’s charge that the opponents were ‘progressives’ who had not remained in the apostolic teaching but had “gone too far” (2 John 9).

(9) “That you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”

The purpose statement of the Gospel of John (20:31) is “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,” and this is repeatedly worked into the assertions of the author of 1 John (1:3, 2:22-23, 3:8, 3:23, 4:9, 4:15, 5:1, 5:10-12, 5:20). How could adversaries who held a higher christology than that of the Gospel of John or the author of 1 John have possibly objected to such a statement? It seems to me the opponents would have had problems not with the predicates (Christ and Son of God) but with the subject (Jesus). When the author of 1 John talks about Jesus, he is talking about Jesus come in the flesh (1 John 4:2-3, 2 John 7), that is, the importance of the earthly career of Jesus, including His sacrificial death (“the blood,” 1 John 5:5-6).

Note: Although the opponents have sometimes been identified with the Docetists against whom Ignatius of Antioch wrote, the stress of the author of 1 John does not seem to be on the reality of Jesus’ humanity (as if against the Docetist view) but on the importance of Jesus’ earthly career, especially His sacrificial death on the cross.

(10) Avoidance of moral error

How does all of this relate to the second major area of dispute between the author of 1 John and his opponents, that is, the insistence on ethical commandments and avoidance of moral error (points 2, 3, and 4 of the list above)? The author warns about walking in the darkness (1 John 1:6), not acknowledging sin (1:8, 1:10), not keeping the commandments (2:4), not following the example of Christ (2:6, 3:3-6), and committing sin (3:3-6, 3:7-8, 3:9-10).

(11) Neither libertines nor antinomians

We might draw the conclusion from the statements in the previous paragraph that the opponents were libertines or antinomians who were insisting on their right to live immoral lives while claiming to be Christians. It is interesting, though, that the author of 1 John never names any specific immoral behavior of his opponents. In fact we may infer that the opponents themselves were not consciously aware of living in an ungodly manner. They claimed to be in fellowship with God (1 John 1:6), to know God (2:4), to abide in God (2:6), to be born of God (3:9-10), and to love God (4:20).

(12) Moral indifferentists

This, combined with the lack of mention of any specific sins other than failure to show Christian love to the brothers and sisters (1 John 3:17-18), leads to the conclusion that the opponents were probably not libertines or antinomians but moral indifferentists, holding that one’s moral behavior has no importance whatsoever as far as the Christian life is concerned. The fault the author finds with his opponents is more with their theory than with their practice. At least at this point their theory has not been fully translated into practice in the moral realm. Perhaps the opponents themselves have not seen as clearly as the author of 1 John where their faulty christology will ultimately lead them. As moral indifferentists, the opponents may have been denying the need to confess post-conversion sins (1 John 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves…”, and 1 Jn 1:10, “If we say that we have not sinned…”).

(13) Downplaying Jesus’ death on the cross

An ethical theory of moral indifference (that what one does in terms of moral behavior as a Christian really does not matter) would be consistent with the christology of the opponents, which put so much stress on the preexistence of Christ and the incarnation as central to salvation that what Jesus did in His earthly existence (including even His death on the cross) contributed nothing to the salvation of Christians and thus did not matter. Denial of the significance of Jesus’ work on the cross is a serious matter, but this seems to be the point of the author’s dispute with his opponents in 1 John 5:5-6, where the opponents affirmed that the significance of Jesus Christ’s coming lay “with the water only” (referring either to physical birth or to baptism by John the Baptist), while the author insists that Jesus came “not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood,” which constitutes an allusion to John 19:34 where both blood and water flow from the wound in Jesus’ side, and thus constitute a reference to Jesus’ sacrificial work on the cross.

(14) Failing to love the brothers and sisters

Understanding the opponents as former members of the author’s community who have withdrawn from fellowship also helps to explain the author of 1 John’s emphasis on love for the brothers and sisters. By withdrawing (1 John 2:19) and splitting the community the opponents have shown that they do not love the brothers and sisters, in spite of the fact that they say they do. If they had really loved the brothers and sisters (i.e., those loyal to the author) they would not have gone out into the world, and would not be attempting even now to seduce those brothers and sisters loyal to the author with false teaching (1 John 2:27, 2 John 10-11).

Conclusions

Thus in conclusion I would say the opponents of the author of 1 John are schismatics from within the author’s own community who have put forward a christology which the author has judged unacceptable (4:1-3). The christology of the opponents appears to minimize the importance of the earthly career of Jesus (including His sacrificial death on the cross) in the plan of salvation, which has produced in the opponents (or in the judgment of the author of 1 John will inevitably produce in the opponents) a moral indifferentism in which the ethical value of one’s behavior and deeds as a Christian is minimized and sins committed after conversion do not need to be confessed. I suspect (though I cannot conclusively prove) that the opponents held a high christology which went beyond that reflected in the Gospel of John, to the point of saying that it was the act of incarnation itself (cf. John 1:14) which had redemptive value for Christians, not the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross. There are a lot of similarities between this portrait of the opponents and Christian forms of Gnosticism found later, in the mid- to late second century (more so than to Docetism, in my judgment).30 Although there are also some significant differences between the picture of the opponents we have been able to draw and the later Gnostic systems, I suspect this is where the schismatics (they would not have called themselves ‘heretics’ and to do so would be somewhat anachronistic before the later Church Councils which determined what ‘orthodox’ christology was) and their followers eventually ended up.

These schismatics, after putting forward their variant christology and meeting with resistance, have seceded from the Christian community represented by the author of 1 John (2:18-19). After their departure, however, they have continued their efforts to influence the author’s community (2:26) and have even sent out itinerant missionaries to influence outlying congregations (the situation as reflected in 2 John).

Additional Bibliography: The Opponents and Their Teaching

Bogart, John. Orthodox and Heretical Perfectionism in the Johannine Community as Evident in the First Epistle of John. SBLDS 33. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977.

Brown, Raymond E. “Origin of I and II John in a Struggle with Adversaries.” In The Epistles of John: Translated with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary, pp. 47-68. Vol. 30 of The Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1982.

Edwards, M. J. “Martyrdom and the First Epistle of John.” NovT 31 (1989): 164-71.

Klauck, H.-J. “Internal Opponents: The Treatment of the Secessionists in the First Epistle of John.” Concilium 200 (1988): 55-65.

Painter, J. “The ‘Opponents’ in 1 John.” New Testament Studies 32 (1986): 48-71.

Stagg, Frank. “Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy in the Johannine Epistles.” Review and Expositor 67 (1970): 423-32.

Vorster, W. S. “Heterodoxy in 1 John.” Neotestamentica 9 (1975): 87-97.

Weiss, Konrad. “Orthodoxie und Heterodoxie im 1. Johannesbrief.” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 58 (1967): 247-55.

Wengst, K. Hresie und Orthodoxie im Spiegel des ersten Johannesbriefes. Gütersloh: Mohn, 1976.

---

25 Based on these texts H.-J. Klauck has argued that the secessionist opponents were much better off financially than the remnant who stayed behind in the author’s community, possibly providing the church’s meeting places and hospitality for itinerant missionaries (“Internal Opponents: The Treatment of the Secessionists in the First Epistle of John,” Concilium 200 [1988]: 56-57).

26 S. Smalley proposed that there were three groups within the community of the author of 1 John: those who were holding to the apostolic teaching, those of Jewish background who had not yet acknowledged Jesus as Messiah, and those from pagan Hellenistic backgrounds who had been influenced by dualistic (i.e. Gnostic) ideas. When the tensions in the community became too great, some of these seceded from the community (1, 2, 3 John, xxiii-xxv). While Smalley cites Ignatius’ Epistle to the Magnesians 10:3 as evidence for a Jewish-Christian group in the community of 1 John, thus raising the possibility of a Jewish element in the opponents’ teaching, it should be noted that there is no real evidence for this in the text of 1 John.

27 See also J. Painter, “The ‘Opponents’ in 1 John,” NTS 32 (1986): 48-71, and H.-J. Klauck, “Internal Opponents,” 55-65. Schnackenburg felt there was general agreement that only one christological heresy was involved in 1 John: “The author is fighting on a single front. Even though there may be different groups among the many antichrists (2:18) or false prophets, they are united in their denial of the church’s christological confession (2:22; 4:2-3). “Antichrists” and “false prophets” are only different terms arising from particular perspectives, depending on whether it is eschatological (last hour, antichrist) or pneumatic (distinguishing of spirits)” (The Johannine Epistles, 17).

28 R. Brown argues more specifically that the split between the secessionists and the addressees of 1 John arose from different interpretations of the Gospel of John. The author of 1 John viewed the opponents as theological innovators (cf. 2 John 9) who had departed from the apostolic eyewitness testimony about who Jesus was, presumably claiming the teaching/revelatory ministry of the Holy Spirit within the Christian community in support of their views (The Epistles of John, 69-71).

29 According to R. Brown, the secessionist opponents did not deny the incarnation as such, but denied that Christ’s incarnation was salvific (The Epistles of John, 67-68, 505).

30 R. Schnackenburg points out that the christological views of the secessionist opponents in the Johannine letters “can no longer be described with certainty or precision” (The Johannine Epistles, 23). However, R. Brown also observes, “While the Johannine adversaries have some points in common with all the proposed candidates, differences militate against a precise identification with any of these groups. In any case, to have so identified the epistolary adversaries would not have been particularly enlightening; for granted the little we know about such groups, it would have been tantamount to explaining ignotum per ignotius. Yet it remains useful to know that the views attacked in I and II John were not without parallel in Asia Minor at the beginning of the second century” (The Epistles of John, 67-68).